Critical Review of Selected Literature on Developments in the Teaching and Learning of Additional Languages since the end of
2.2 From grammar translation towards theoretically grounded approaches to the teaching of additional languages: Introduction
2.2.3 Changing perceptions of the role of culture in language teaching and learning
The word ‘culture’ has a number of different uses in different contexts. It is derived from the Latin word ‘cultura’ (to cultivate) and was associated in 18th and 19th
century Europe largely with what came to be known of as ‘high culture’ (see, for example, Arnold, 1869). The learning of classical languages was generally associated with the development of the type of knowledge and understanding that signalled membership of an élite social group. At the height of European colonization and American expansionism (the mid 1800s to the mid 1900s), this concept of culture was supplemented by one that emphasized shared values, beliefs and behaviour (at whatever ‘level’ of society). These cultural concepts were consistent with the philosophy underpinning attitudes towards ‘the Other’ that are evident in, for example, what Said (1979) has referred to as ‘Orientalism’. The teaching of the language of the politically dominant group (often English) had two main cultural aims. The first of these was to extend “membership of a select, educated middle-class group” (Graddol, 2006, p. 38). This was regarded as necessary for effective colonial administration. Thus “imperial strategy typically involved the identification of an existing social élite who would be offered a curriculum designed to cultivate not just language skills but also a taste for British - and more generally western – culture and values”. In such a context, a literary canon that focused on what came to be known as ‘high culture’ had an important role to play. The second cultural aim applied to the colonized more generally. The aim here was to ensure cultural commonality, to replace existing languages values, beliefs, and behaviour by those associated with the dominant group (p. 82). From this perspective, the teaching of dominant languages could be construed as a form of linguistic and cultural imperialism (see Phillipson, 1992).
In the context of the teaching of the languages of politically dominant groups, the two ways of viewing culture to which reference has been made are still often in evidence. However, they have been supplemented by a different approach for two main reasons. The first relates to the development in the 20th century within the
context of anthropology of a new approach to culture, one that focused on the different ways in which people from different societies classify and symbolize knowledge and experience - one that acknowledges that difference is not
synonymous with deficit. Particularly associated with this concept of culture is what is commonly known as ‘the Sapir/Wharf hypothesis’ or the ‘principle of linguistic relativity’, according to which language determines thought (the strong version) or influences thought and certain kinds of behaviour (the weak version) (see, for example, Kay & Kempton, 1984). The second reason for change, a more recent one, relates to the phenomenon of globalization and, with it, the emergence, and/or reinforcement of the notion of cultural hybridity (Hermans & Kempen, 1998). Associated with this has been a growing recognition of the need for cross- cultural or inter-cultural competence (see, for example, Lusting & Koester, 1993). Within the context of the Council of Europe, considerable emphasis is placed on what are referred to as ‘plurilingualism’ and ‘pluriculturalism’. It is noted, for example, in the Common European Framework of Languages (CoE, 2001, p. 4) that “. . . as an individual’s experience of language in its cultural context expands . . . he or she does not keep these languages and cultures in strictly separated mental compartments, but . . . builds up a communicative competence to which all knowledge and experience of language contributes and in which languages interrelate and interact”.
The impact of globalization on language teaching and, in particular, on the cultural component of language teaching, is complex and multi-faceted. Associated with globalization and the spread of the neo-liberal agenda (see Harvey, 2005) has been “a shift from an ideology of authentic nationhood to an ideology of commodification . . . [which] involves contradictions between language as a mark of authenticity and belonging or identity, and language as an acquirable technical skill and marketable commodity” (Heller, 2002, p. 47). The widespread use, for a range of practical purposes, of a few dominant languages by communities that may have little interest in, or involvement with the cultures of the countries with which these languages are primarily associated has led to a proliferation of ‘specific purposes’ language courses that often focus, so far as culture is concerned, on those aspects of behaviour that are associated with particular communities of practice (see Chaiklin & Lave (1993) for a discussion of communities of practice).
An approach that centers on communities of practice appears to be particularly prevalent in the case of genre-based approaches to the teaching of writing. Thus,
for example, Swales (1990) defines genre as "a class of communicative events, the members of which share the same communicative or rhetorical purpose" (p. 58) and notes that it is “shared communicative purpose rather than similarities of form” that is “the primary determinant of a genre” (p. 46). This is consistent with Miller’s (1984, p. 165) view that “genres can serve . . . as keys to understanding how to participate in the actions of the community” (see also Miller, 1994).
So far as the teaching of indigenous languages is concerned, the development of anthropological approaches to culture has been of critical significance. In connection with this, it is relevant to note that, for example, the Native American Languages Act 1990 makes it U.S. Government policy to promote, protect, and preserve the Indigenous languages, and cultures of the U.S.A.16 Of particular
relevance to the discussion here are clauses (1) and (3):
The Congress finds that:
(1) the status of the cultures and languages of Native Americans is unique and the United States has the responsibility to act together with Native Americans to ensure the survival of these unique cultures and languages;
(3) the traditional languages of Native Americans are an integral part of their cultures and identities and form the basic medium for the transmission, and thus survival, of Native American cultures, literatures, histories, religions, political institutions, and values.
Implied in this is the expectation that the teaching of native languages will be culturally-embedded. However, recognizing, respecting and incorporating culture into the teaching of indigenous languages involves more than simply including a cultural component. As Crombie and Nock (2009, p. 24) observe with particular reference to the teaching of te reo Māori, it also involves recognizing and respecting the “distinctive cultural, epistemological and metaphysical foundations” of a particular way of being. In this respect, the teaching of indigenous languages and
16 In 2010, the U.S. removed its initial objections to the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous
the teaching of languages that are widely used internationally as a lingua-franca by people from a wide range of linguistic and cultural backgrounds may be very differently focused. In the first case, the development of inter-cultural competence may be prioritized; in the second, priority may be given to the development of an understanding of the indigenous culture and also, in some cases, of hybrid cultural identity more generally.
Increasingly popular in the context of the teaching of international languages is what is commonly referred to as the development of ‘intercultural competence’, something that involves the ability to “grow out of the shell of [one’s] mother tongue and [one’s] own culture” (Kaikonnen, 2001, p. 64) so as “for instrumental reasons, to be successful in complex multilingual and multicultural societies” (Byram, 2006, p. 6) (emphasis added). In the context of the teaching of indigenous languages, however, it is affective rather than instrumental factors that are of primary importance. Contemporary learners of indigenous languages need to come to terms with the cultural assumptions associated with the target language and develop respect for different beliefs, values, and ways of behaving. This is something that needs to be embedded in the teaching of languages rather than something that is treated as being separate from, and additional to it.
2.2.4 Changing approaches to proficiency specification and testing and