1.2.3 Advantages and disadvantages of ‘Standard English’ for ELT
Activity
Make a list of advantages and disadvantages of using ‘Standard English’ as the only model in ELT classrooms around the world (later we’ll look at the particular context(s) in which you operate or with which you are most familiar).
Feedback
Here are some advantages:
- There is a lot of existing infrastructure, resources, and training available for teaching 'Standard English'. Apart from government education departments, the big US- or UK-owned publishing houses, and agencies such as the British Council, BBC, and US State Department, all use and promote 'Standard English'.
- 'Standard English' is familiar (to most teachers and to some learners too) through broadcasting, public documents, the media, literature, etc.
- Accuracy in 'Standard English' is what most tests test; many learners learn English to take tests. It’s much easier to test knowledge of a single system of forms than to test how effectively learners can perform different communicative functions.
- 'Standard English' is expected for study and work in native-speaker cultural contexts (e.g. English for Academic Purposes in universities and colleges, or Business English in commercial settings).
- 'Standard English' is strongly associated with prestige and socio-economic power in the public mind and so is what many learners expect (their fee-paying parents too in the case of children).
- 'Standard English' is codified to a great extent (in dictionaries, grammar books, style and usage guides, etc.), thus constituting a uniform reference point for learning/teaching and testing.
Here are some disadvantages:
- 'Standard English' is actually unattainable for most learners (see Unit 3: Learning Englishes). This implies a deficit model of learning and testing, since achievement is, in part, inevitably measured negatively in terms of how short of 'Standard English' the learner falls, rather than positively, in terms of how much the learner can successfully communicate.
- 'Standard English' is inadequate and/or inappropriate for many local contexts and needs. For example, using idioms that are well-known in Australia or Ireland, like get your goat ('make you annoyed') and a piece of cake ('simple'), may not be very helpful at a Hong Kong business meeting conducted in English between Mexican native speakers of Spanish and Chinese speakers of Cantonese.
- The insistence on 'Standard English' can be very alienating for non-native speaking teachers (NNSTs), who may themselves have 'non-standard' accents and use local, 'non-standard' features of English. In the words of (Llurda, 2009), this has the effect of "reducing NNSs to perennial language learners and depriving them of recognition as legitimate language users […]" (p. 129).
- Most native-speaker teachers (NSTs) don't consistently use 'Standard English' either. Many have local accents and use local dialects inside and outside the classroom. They too can feel alienated by an insistence on a 'Standard English' which implicitly devalues their own ways of speaking (see Barrata and Halenko, 2022).
- And of course this is true for learners too. Increasingly, learners are exposed to different kinds of English outside the classroom, and often these forms are more familiar to them than those of 'Standard English', especially when this is taught through cultural contexts and practices with which they don't identify. So learners too can feel alienated by the foreignness of 'Standard English'—and especially in places where the international actions of US and UK governments (and their native English-speaking allies) do not necessarily enjoy popular local support.
- An insistence on 'Standard English'—one set of English forms among others—inevitably places a high value on forms, at the expense of the functions that these forms are used to achieve. Language has evolved not for its own sake, for the forms it takes, but because in the absence of telepathy, it's the only way we can get complex things done together in social contexts. In other words, it's evolved for the social functions it needs to serve.
A related point is that insisting on a single correct form of English prizes accuracy, but this often comes at the expense of fluency: users’ ability to express themselves effortlessly and quickly.
Reflection 1.1
In some ways, the norms of ‘Standard English’ are just the linguistic equivalent of a dress code or rules for table etiquette. Reflect on this comparison and share your thoughts in the discussion section at the bottom of the page.
Advantages:
1. Clear Communication: Learning Standard English gives a consistent way for people to communicate, making it easier to understand each other.
2. Global Connection: Knowing Standard English helps people talk with others from different places, which is useful for jobs and making friends around the world.
3. Access to Learning: Many educational materials and job opportunities are in Standard English, so learning it opens up more chances to learn and work.
4. Better Job Opportunities: Being good at Standard English can help people get better jobs and move up in their careers.
5. Cultural Insight: Learning Standard English also helps people understand the culture of English-speaking countries better.
Disadvantages:
1. Cultural Dominance: Pushing Standard English as the main way to speak may make people from other cultures feel less valued.
2. Language Diversity: English has many different ways of speaking, but only focusing on Standard English ignores that diversity.
3. Authenticity Issues: Some people may find Standard English doesn’t fit their everyday life or the way they talk with friends and family.
4. Learning Challenges: For people whose first language is very different from Standard English, learning it can be hard and make it tougher to understand and speak.
5. Cultural Respect: Only teaching Standard English might not show respect for other cultures and how they use language.
In my work teaching English, I make sure to teach Standard English while also respecting other ways of speaking. I believe in embracing all the different kinds of English to create a welcoming and inclusive learning environment.
I could not agree more.
I agree on the other points you made except the one about learning challenges. If we take a Finnish learner as an example. We only have one s-sound in Finnish but there are several in English. If you want to be understood in English, you have to learn them fairly well if you want to be understood correctly (she vs. sea). It doesn’t really matter whether you are learning ‘standard English’ or some other version, it is still difficult but important to learn the correct pronunciation.
I agree completely! While Standard English is a great foundation for learning different English varieties, it’s important to remember everyone has their own accent and way of speaking. This personal touch, like a fingerprint, is what makes our English authentic. Just like Standard English, all languages are constantly evolving codes shaped by the people who use them, both native and non-native speakers, reflecting the social situations they’re used in.
“the linguistic equivalent of a dress code or rules for table etiquette” — Yes! I agree! Wholeheartedly!
And so I guess that’s why we have to teach some form of Standardised English to all those people who want to join us at the table. But it’s so damn boring. And is ultimately the very thing which excludes us all from that high table.
I once read that some linguists speak of Thames English to describe contemporary English as it is spoken in and around London (but I can’t find the reference). This conjures up images of oil slicks on dirty water, rusty shopping trolleys half submerged in mud flats, and drowned cats in hessian bags. It also epitomises the irreversible decline of a soggy little island which once ruled the world and today is left with just the tattered remnants of its dreams of a BREXIT-inspired renewal of its long-lost cultural hegemony. 🙂
I quite like the analogy between Standard English and dress code or table etiquette rules. There are different dress codes we use on different occasions and in different situations, and SE can have its place in language use, like a suit is used at certain times but not always. Also, thinking of table etiquette, there certainly isn’t just one etiquette everyone around the world follows. Different cultures have different expectations of table behaviour; while slurping one’s soup might be regarded as rude in western cultures, in eastern cultures it’s a sign of enjoyment of the meal. All this to say, language is the same, it’s not uniform and it takes the shape of the culture it lives in, and the individuals that it lives in.
I like one particular TED Talk in which intercultural communication expert Marianna Pascal says that “English is not an art to be mastered. It’s a tool to get results”. I completely agree, and we all use that tool differently.
By the way, Marianna Pascal has an interesting short Toastmasters speech on Local English & Standard English that can be found here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQmNIqdwVMw. I’m interested to hear some thoughts on it! I agree with some points she makes but not so much or not fully) with other ones.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtL-t_cxfLQ David Crystal speaks about about how standard English could be used if appropriate to a situation or context or a local English dialect if it is more appropriate especially if the situation changes. David suggests only 5% of people use ‘standard Englis’ due to regional variations both nationally and internationally. Language is about identity, culture and where is is used, by who and why. There is of course the different between spoken and written Englishes. More from https://www.davidcrystal.com/Files/BooksAndArticles/-4008.pdf
I really agree with the analogy that Standard English is like a dress code or table etiquette. On the one hand, it is about establishing the terms of communication. But, like these conventions, if you can demonstrate that you clearly ‘belong’, then you have much more leeway to depart from those rules without being told that you are doing it wrong or that, after all, you don’t belong.
I agree with the previous posts and the analogy. There is uniformity in learning the language because of Standard English, which could provide a good sample for both teachers and students. However, it also brings disadvantages because it emphasises the ‘system’, rather than the main function of language, ‘communication’. In real life, students may not be prepared to have more exposure to colloquial and informal languages. For being a non-native English teacher, the alienation and career competition are higher than for the native English teachers.
Despite of differences in accents, Standard English as what we know of today, has enabled non-native speakers and native speakers from around the world to communicate with each other more effectively.
Therefore, using ‘Standard English’ in the classrooms as well as in workplaces have proven to be highly beneficial for native speakers as well as for non-native speakers.
I agree. And teaching `Standard English´doesn’t mean you couldn’t include different variants of Englishes in your teaching. For many learners, it is a relief that there’s a standard to lean on. It makes learning a foreign language simpler. It is a good starting point, even though it is also crucial to widen the perspective of the learners. To make them realise there’s more than one way of using English. Whether using `Standard English´or not, language users make mistakes every now and then, both native and non-native speakers, which is why we need to emphasize the “getting your message through” part of using any language.
By approaching Standard English as a dress code, rather than as a clear-cut rule, we accommodate the multitude of Englishes our students may encounter in their everyday lives.
By virtue of being a global language, it is almost impossible to advocate for a uniform Standard English, without risking the reproduction of a colonial mindset where the only “proper” English, or indeed, the only standard form of English that is seen as neutral enough to be taught in a classroom, still carries with it problematic ideas, formed by classist, racist and misogynistic notions of class, race, ethnicity, and gender.
As a teacher of English I focus on teaching Standard English since I believe that there should be a kind of a unified code that all the learners of English could understand. Otherwise, communication might get very complicated. Standard English will not be achieved by many learners because of the influence of their mother tongues, so I think certain deviations are acceptable if the communication reaches its purpose – people will understand each other correctly.
Yes. Agreed. Dress the part. In Sweden there is a requirement on students to adapt to the situation, purpose and audience when speaking or writing in English. This does not fully concern this question but I see it in a similar fashion. Standard English is used in specific situations and requires the user to know how to adapt. If the dress code is formal the language used needs its level of formality.
Yes, absolutely. The use of standard English at this point is comparable to a dress code. When it is required, it is used in educational contexts or during formal situations. However, in my country, it could also be seen as an indicator of how ‘educated’ one is. If you are able to fluently use the standard English, you could be considered as you are from a higher social class. This could be due to the accent/usage of proper grammar/complex vocabulary, that make it so.
I agree particularly with your last comment “In my work teaching English, I make sure to teach Standard English while also respecting other ways of speaking. I believe in embracing all the different kinds of English to create a welcoming and inclusive learning environment.”
As I commented in the last section, my adult learners need to be exposed to speakers with many different accents and dialects, and I have always done this by using videos and podcasts, and the occasional classroom visitor. They are not taking an exam, so complete accuracy isn’t as important as fluency and confidence.
I agree with the idea of a dress code. In my lessons, I have a mix of students, some of whom want to sit international exams. Nevertheless, as a teacher, I have to prepare them for the real world, so I expose them to different Englishes. Sometimes, they get struck at some of those Englishes, but what we do is reflect on what is going on, identify the differences and work to see if communication is affected or not. In most cases, they feel comfortable with these detachments from Standard English and see no problems with it. In brief, as long as the communicative act is effective, they do not really mind difference and see it as natural.
Advantages:
1. Easier communication with people from several countries.
2. Easier for students to understand academic or scientific texts.
3. More opportunities to participate in industries such as fashion, gaming, politics, culture, etc.
4. More access to information coming from TV, radio, or the Internet.
Disadvantages:
1. Lack of acknowledgment of local or regional variations of the language.
2. Fewer opportunities to get close to folk culture or stories from regional variations.
3. Difficulty understanding locals in conversations or written interactions.
4. Views of colonization within language use become widespread.
Advantages:
Some dialect and accent
Easily communication with native speakers
Maybe self-confidence.
Disadvantages:
Difficulties in communication with outer English speakers.
Isolation from other way of learning.
Limited knowledge about other varieties.
I think that having a standard variant of English is a positive, it enables learners to have a base form of the language to lean on and it gives them a goal if they wish to reach that level of proficiency. I couldn’t imagine starting to learn a language only to be told that it is inconsistent and has no right or wrong variants.
Advantages:
Easier Communication: Standard English provides a lineal way for speakers which makes easier understanding.
Learning resources: Students have the opportunity to access a great diversity of learning material and resources.
Job opportunities: Standard English offers job opportunities in various fields, such as the arts, communication, engineering, manufacturing and technology.
International connection: Standard English allows people to talk to other people around the world without language barriers, as well as to find information from the Internet, news, academic articles that may be useful to our interests.
Disadvantages:
Cultural aspects: it leads to a lack of knowledge of regional variations of the language as well as Standard English prevents access to popular conversations and local interactions.
Identity Conflict: For learners who speak a variety of English at home, learning Standard English can lead to an identity conflict, where they feel pressure to abandon their linguistic roots to conform to an external standard.
Language evolution: As we have discussed throughout the previous units, languages are constantly changing due to the interactions of diverse cultures and regional variations. Therefore, standard English may not always reflect contemporary slang and usage, making it less relevant for learners seeking to engage with current media and conversations.
On the other hand, I consider “standard English” as a dress code or table etiquette rules to be a great analogy, as it represents how this variation can establish a specific communication code for particular contexts, for instance, academic, scientific or work environments. However, it shouldn’t be interpreted as the proper or universal communication code because, after all, we have many dress codes for every circumstance and it occurs with standard English. Therefore, it does not embody the cultural practices that individuals live according to their environment.
I strongly agree with the approach of treating English as like a dress code. Whilst teachers should teach ESL learners using only standard forms of English, by doing so we are ensuring what they learn, they are more likely to go out and apply this in the real world more professionally and sound more like a native! The less that they are exposed to non-standard English, or colloquial English the more likely they are to use more professional, natural forms of English.
At the same time, we should remember that everyone has their own standard form of English, their own accent, vocabulary and dialect, therefore we should be open-minded when it comes to different variaties of standard and non-standard Englishes.
Advantages:
– Easier to interact with people worldwide.
– Easier access to academic papers.
– More job opportunities.
Disadvantages:
– Fewer opportunities to learn about different cultures.
– Lack of interaction with people with diverse variations of the language.
I agree with the theory that Standard English can be viewed as being a list of rules that language learners and speakers of English must follow if they want to speak ‘good’ and ‘proper’ English.
This however is generally not the case in everyday English, for example because of regional accents and dialects, there has been a huge increase in that way that people have found different ways of self expression and identity, and through having a set, standard way of talking, this freedom is removed from all possibility, in which I would further argue to say that it would limit a person’s range of language ( their repository).
Furthermore, attaining this high standard of English is almost impossible, as even the English that is taught and intitutionalised, can have variants of the teacher’s own language learning experiences and other influencing factors which would influence the learner’s English, straying away from the desire and the taught ways in which we are taught to speak and learn what is referred to as ‘Standard English’.
Advantages: standardised curriculum, prepares learners for the rules of ‘polite’ or academic conversation.
Disadvantages: promotes the concept of ‘correct’ language which could cause insecurity in learners, less likely to be used in casual conversation therefore less applicable to everyday life.
I would agree that Standard English is similar to an etiquette. It is expected to be used in very specific situations, but ultimately is not how most people live their lives. It is useful to know the basics of such things as it can be (unfortunately) necessary for social mobility.
i completely agree that standard English is more of a dress code, this is similar to the RP accent. They are both seen as something someone with a higher education or higher class would be more likely to have, therefore it is many people use standard english when perhaps trying to be more polite or even get a job that is seen a proffesional.
The way people dress for dinner or behave themselves at the table does not have any direct impact (well, unless we go into extremes) on the process of food consumption. You can wear jeans, eat with your fingers and leave the table full at the end of the meal. However, everything matters. Food on the table is definitely more important than the black tie, but once we are done with the basics we start craving for more (greetings from Maslow). The same is valid for language. As we become more and more proficient at a foreign language and our basic communication needs are satisfied, other things come into play, and this when people start concentrating not only on “what”, but also on “how”. It becomes important how you get the message across, not just the message itself.