G OING B EYOND THE N ATIVE S PEAKER IN L ANGUAGE T EACHING Vivian Cook

K EY T ERMS Native Speakers L2 User vs L2 Learner Multi- Competence Both languages exist in ONE mind - the two cannot be separated from one another. Code-switching shows this link

U NATTAINABLE GOAL IN L2 CLASSROOMS Native speakers used as a model all the time Evidence: Textbooks = native speaker dialogue Indirect Evidence = which English do we use? Traditional Evaluation = failure or success

C ONSEQUENCE OF NATIVE SPEAKER PROMINENCE We have failed to recognize that L2 users are speakers in their own right NOT Just speakers who have failed to attain native like ability

C ONSEQUENCE OF NATIVE SPEAKER PROMINENCE Teaching Methodologies which do not take into account Multi-Competence The L1 affects the L2 AND the L2 affects how the L1 is understood. Language teaching should be concerned with developing an L2 in a mind that already contains an L1.

C OMPARISON BETWEEN NATIVE SPEAKER AND L2 USERS = DIFFERENCES NOT DEFICITS Groups defined by race, sex, class, or other features Most agree comparisons between two groups yield differences not deficits Language learning an exception? “L2 users are not monolingual native speakers and never will be; they are incapable of changes places as are most women and men” (Cook, p.195)

“C OMPARING THE CHARACTERISTICS OF NATIVE SPEAKERS AND OF L2 USERS IS LIKE COMPARING TOMATOES AND APPLES ” ( COOK, P. 195 )

L ANGUAGE GROUP = IDENTITY “To some people asking L2 learners to speak like native speakers is like saying that black children should learn to speak like white children” (Cook, p.195). Ebonics a failure compared to the English standard? L2 group IS an identity which cannot just conform to the standard norm L2 learners have to be looked at in their own right NOT as imitation or failed native speakers

Q UESTION ONE : IF THE ERROR IS ‘ GROUP ’ SPECIFIC AND THE TEACHER DOES NOT CORRECT IT, DOES THIS MAKE HIM / HER A BAD EDUCATOR ? E XAMPLE : AX OR ASK IN AAVE OR “ TREE ” INSTEAD OF “ THREE ” FOR FRANCOPHONE LEARNERS ? Ax or Ask

F RENCH VINEGROWER : “M Y E NGLISH IS N OT G OOD, BUT MY FRENCH ACCENT IS PERFECT !” (C OOK, P.196) Implication of Native Speaker Prominence = L2 learners’ Self-Criticism of ‘good’ or ‘bad’ language skills.

Q UESTION : W HY WOULD IT BE APPROPRIATE FOR A NATIVE SPEAKER TO HAVE AN ACCENT INDICATING WHERE THEY ARE FROM, YET IT IS CONSIDERED A FAILURE WHEN L2 USERS DO ?

C ONSEQUENCES FOR LANGUAGE TEACHING Logical Consequence = language teaching should place more emphasis on the student as a potential and actual L2 user and be less concerned with the monolingual native speaker. Abandoning native speaker model = unrealistic? Yet steps in the right direction can be taken....

S UGGESTION ONE : S ET A PPROPRIATE G OALS Syllabus – appropriate to students’ wishes Balance of ‘real world tasks’ with ‘pedagogical tasks’ Examples in class should be L2 users ‘International variety’ of English English from many parts of the world Good L2 users English The Straights Times from Malaysia: The Santiago Times from Chile:

S UGGESTION TWO : I NCLUDE L 2 USER SITUATIONS AND ROLES Situations involving low level L2 users may be relevant, provided that they do not fall into ‘stereotypical’ foreigner roles. Manuel – Fawlty Towers Non-native speaker teacher – presents a more achievable model.

S UGGESTION THREE : USE TEACHING METHODS THAT ACKNOWLEDGE THE STUDENTS ’ L 1 Use of L1 in the classroom to encourage the development of multi-competence Allow students to code switch when it is natural See the L1 as a positive factor in the class Introduce activities that involve both language See the student as an ‘intercultural speaker’ not an imitation L1 user

CONCLUSION L2 learners’ battle to become native speakers is lost before it has begun! L2 learners should be encouraged to recognize their unique status as standing between two worlds and two cultures. Changing the attitude towards L2 users and bringing the L1 into classrooms is beneficial for L2 learners to embrace their unique identity!!