Interviews.
Dr. Z.N. Patil
The English and Foreign Languages University
Hyderabad,
India
1. What are your teaching and research interests?
Well, I teach courses in English for specific purposes and teacher development. I’m interested in doing research in new varieties of English such as Indian, Vietnamese, Japanese, Arab and African varieties.
2. Where have you worked during your career, and what did you do?
I began my teaching career in 1974. I’ve taught language and literature at higher secondary, college and university levels in India. I worked in a college before I joined ‘The English and Foreign Languages University’ located in Hyderabad in the southern part of India where I headed the Center for Training and Development from June 2006 to June 2008.
I was the Chief Coordinator of three international training programs, which I organized during 2005-2006. I was responsible for training 120 participants from seventy countries. Majority of them were diplomats and government officials.
I served as the National Coordinator of the English Language Teaching Institutes Support Scheme of the Government of India in 2006-2007. I visited all the fifteen state and regional institutes located in different parts of India and helped them produce teaching materials and organize workshops, seminars and conferences.
I’ve been associated with several universities in India as a research supervisor and evaluator, member of boards of studies in English and material producer.
I taught at the Institute for International Relations in Hanoi, Vietnam. I was nominated by the government of India to develop the spoken English of pre-service diplomats from Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, and a few from central Asian countries. I worked there from 1999 to 2002.
I worked as Senior English Language Advisor in Japan. I was a teacher trainer and consultant from 2003 to 2006.
Moreover, I’ve delivered a few lectures in Thailand, Korea, Singapore and Britain.
3. What have been the three to four most important things you have discovered in your work with varieties of English around the world (or the teaching of these varieties)?
That’s a good probing question. My experience of teaching abroad made me aware of several issues as far as the teaching of English as a foreign language is concerned. One, varieties of English differ mainly in terms of accents. Two, they also differ in terms of speech functions such as complimenting, blessing, expressing gratitude, etc. Three, it’s counter-productive to impose native varieties on non-native learners. Four, we should aim at “comfortable intelligibility” rather than “absolute intelligibility”. Finally, the teacher of English to speakers of other languages must be patient.
4. How should we teachers balance Standard English and English varieties when we teach in class?
We should fix our priorities. For example, we need to concentrate on those features of new varieties of English, which cause unintelligibility. Why should we spend valuable time and energy and other resources on those features of the language that are insignificant from communication point of view?
5. How do you view the relative importance of "fluency" and "accuracy"? Should we set them as different goals of different stages in language learning?
In fact, the two goals are inseparable. It’s a matter of emphasis and focus. However, for the sake of convenience we can say that at an initial stage our objective is to develop fluency. Once our learners are comfortable with the language, we can concentrate on accuracy. It’s like asking someone “Can we separate the dance from the dancer?” The answer is no we can’t. So, our first job at the initial stage is to help our learners overcome inhibitions, shyness and nervousness.
6. Which do you think more important for English classes in Japan, to encourage students to learn 'standard' American (or British) English pronunciation, or to encourage them to speak up in English during the class even if it is broken English with a Japanese accent?
In my opinion, it’s more urgent to enable the Japanese learners to speak up in English during the class. Expecting them to speak standard American or British English from the word ‘go’ is a tall order. We must remember that Japanese culture values silence as Americans value American dream.
7. In your article, you argue that the adoption of English for literacy/writing is an instance of nativization. My questions are: Why only mention the writing system here instead of other three skills, listening, reading, and speaking?
Nativization manifests itself at the level of listening and speaking. For example, when people listen to a foreign speaker using a foreign language, they interpret messages within the framework of their own cultural norms. In other words, their interpretation is culture-bound. Similarly, when they speak in English, their speech displays features of non-native varieties of English at phonological, grammatical and even discourse levels. This happens at the level of reading and writing as well. For instance, the reading habits of Arab learners are characterized by what I call “reverse visualization”, which is an effect of the right-to-left writing system. By the same token, when an Arab learner begins to write, s/he tends to confuse “p” with “q” and “b” with “d”. This confusion leads to spelling mistakes.
8. Do you think the English language will stay as an international language of communication, or will it continue to evolve into more and more localized varieties that will be hard for others in another country/location to comprehend (such as Tok Pisin)?
Yes, I do. I think the English language is going to stay with us for several years. Yes, we’ll have local varieties, but they will be mutually intelligible because every variety is trying to standardize itself so that it achieves what I call “comfortable intelligibility”. There are more similarities between varieties than there are differences.
9. How tied to technology (as opposed to economic power) do you think the spread of English is?
Initially, the spread of English was triggered by the spread of the English empire. Later, it was accelerated by the economic, diplomatic and political superiority of the United States and Britain. Recently, this global diffusion of English has been given an additional impetus by the use of technology in different walks of life.
10. In your article, "On the Nature and Role of English in Asia," you discuss the complexities of developing new pragmatics of the different varieties of English. What are the latest developments towards forming a pragmatics of Indian English?
The pragmatics of Indian English is still at the stage of infancy. Some scholars have written stray articles on the need for variety specific pragmatics. Personally, I have started working on a book called “pragmatics of Indian English”. I suppose, eventually the topic will grow into a tangible discipline.
11. What do you see as the future for Asian English? Do you think nonnative/local varieties will be accepted?
I think the future of English in Asia is quite bright. As you know, Asia is emerging as n economic power. Indian English, Malaysian English and Philippine English have already been accepted as varieties. I’m sure the increasing importance of Asian countries will further legitimize the new varieties. In the past the onus of understanding native varieties was on the non –native speakers. Now, the onus of understanding non-native varieties is on native speakers.
Additional Questions:
12. When foreign students do a course in “English for Academic Purposes” at America universities, their composition patterns deviate from native patterns of composition. In order for them to succeed in their new academic environment, how do we equip them with necessary writing skills?
We can tackle this problem in two ways.
One, the native teachers need to be made aware of the differences between the discourse patterns and rhetorical patterns foreign students bring with them. These teachers need to bear in mind the fact that their students come with lots of cultural baggage, which includes linguistic baggage. I think teachers of English to speakers of other languages can do their job more effectively when they’re aware of the differences between American patterns of composition and African and Asian patterns of composition. For example, in some cultures people tend to begin with a generalization and end with illustrations; in other cultures, they begin with illustrations and end with a generalization. Performance analyses of students’ written assignments can offer insights into the varying patterns. These patterns may not be as easily perceptible as external behavioral patterns. For example, individualism is a feature of American behavioral pattern; collectivism is a feature of Japanese behavioral pattern. That’s why, in an American class, the person who knows the answer will immediately raise his/her hand to show willingness to answer. On the other hand, in a Japanese class where silence is golden and public display of willingness to answer is considered a crack in the solid structure of collective silence, students are annoyingly inarticulate. A native English speaker teacher who expects Japanese learners to be as articulate as American learners would experience nothing but frustration.
Two, teachers can help their foreign scholars to unlearn the language specific and culture specific patterns of thinking and composing and learn new patterns of thinking and composing required for academic success in an American university. However, it would be unwise to penalize foreign students for deviant patterns of composition. An important principle of teaching requires us to be sensitive to the cultural patterns of foreign students.
13. You say that unless we’re training air traffic controllers and pilots, we don’t need to emulate native English models. Could you throw more light on this proposition, please?
That’s a very practical question. You see there are varieties and varieties of English across the globe. I think it’s rather too ambitious to expect every speaker of English from every corner of the world to speak the way American or British newsreaders, professors, lawyers, politicians, and pilots speak English. It’s neither desirable nor necessary. However, air traffic controllers, navigators and pilots working at various airports and for various airlines across the world need to speak universally intelligible English. Several air accidents have taken place because of miscommunication. That’s why people working in aviation industry are required to do accent neutralization courses.
