Journal of the National Council of Less Commonly Taught Languages

Vol. 11 Spring, 2012

Danko Šipka, Editor Antonia Schleicher, Managing Editor Charles Schleicher, Copy Editor Nyasha Gwaza, Production Editor Kevin Barry, Production Assistant

The development of the Journal of the National Council of Less Commonly Taught Languages is made possible in part through a grant from the U.S. Department of Education

Please address enquiries concerning advertising, subscriptions and issues to the NCOLCTL Secretariat at the following address: National African Language Resource Center 4231 Humanities Building, 455 N. Park St., Madison, WI 53706

Copyright © 2012, National Council of Less Commonly Taught Languages (NCOLCTL)

iii

The Journal of the National Council of Less Commonly Taught Languages, published annually by the Council, is dedicated to the issues and concerns related to the teaching and learning of Less Commonly Taught Languages. The Journal primarily seeks to address the interests of language teachers, administrators, and researchers. Arti- cles that describe innovative and successful teaching methods that are relevant to the concerns or problems of the profession, or that report educational research or experimentation in Less Commonly Taught Languages are welcome. Papers presented at the Council’s annual con- ference will be considered for publication, but additional manuscripts from members of the profession are also welcome.

Besides the Journal Editor, the process of selecting material for publication is overseen by the Advisory Editorial Board, which con- sists of the foremost scholars, advocates, and practitioners of LCTL pedagogy. The members of the Board represent diverse linguistic and geographical categories, as well as the academic, government, and business sectors.

JNCOLCTL Advisory Editorial Board

Elizabeth M. Bergman Miami University of Ohio, Arabic Richard Brecht University of Maryland and NFCL, Russian and Language Advocacy Stephane Charitos Columbia University, Language Technology, Greek Victor Friedman University of Chicago, Balkans and Caucasus Languages Michael Hillmann University of Texas-Austin, Farsi, Tajik Scott McGinnis Defense Language Institute, Washington DC, Chinese Rajandra Singh University de Montreal, South Asian languages, Theoretical Approaches

iv

The Journal of the National Council of Less Commonly Taught Lan- guages is a refereed publication. The editors invite submissions of ar- ticles, book reviews, and advertisements for future volumes. To be considered for publication, manuscripts should be typed, double spaced, with margins of at least one and one-half inches. Articles should include a 150-word abstract and should be about 20 typewrit- ten pages. All references and notes should follow the style of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association, 4th ed. (1994).

Manuscripts should be:

• A maximum of 20 pages (excluding references, charts, notes, etc.) and submitted electronically via word (1997- 2003)-document e-mail attachment. • Double-line spaced throughout, including notes, references, and tables, using 12-point Times New Roman font with a 1.5 inch left margin. (Please ensure that this specified formatting is followed). • Accompanied by a 150 word (or less) abstract and a cover sheet containing the manuscript title, name, address, office and home telephone numbers, fax number, email address, and full names and institutions of each author. (Because the ma- nuscript will be blind reviewed, identifying information should be on the cover sheet only, and not appear in the manuscript).

All Manuscripts should be electronically submitted via email to The Editor at: [email protected] and copied to the Secretariat at: se- [email protected].

Subscriptions and address changes to the journal should be sent to Dr. Antonia Schleicher, National African Language Resource Center, 4231 Humanities Building, 455 N. Park Street, Madison, WI 53706.

Subscription Rates: 1 Year Individual U.S. $30 1 Year Institutional U.S. $60

Journal of the National Council of Less Commonly Taught Languages

Volume 11 Spring 2012

Table of Contents

Editor’s Introduction ix Danko Šipka, Arizona State University

Prioritizing African Languages: Challenges to macro-level 1 planning for resourcing and capacity building Tristan M. Purvis, Christopher R. Green, & Gregory K. Iverson

Independence, Interaction, Interdependence and Interrela- 31 tion: Learner Autonomy in a Web-based Less Commonly Taught Language Classroom Marina V. Kostina

Second Language Writing System Word Recognition (with a 53 focus on Lao) Christine Elliott

Revisiting songs in Language Pedagogy 75 Rajaa Aquil

Arabic Heritage Language Learners: motivation, expecta- 97 tions, competence, and engagement in learning Arabic Ghassan Husseinali

The Impact of Standard Spoken Tamil in Singapore Tamil 111 Classrooms Seetha Lakshmi

vi

National Council of Less Commonly Taught Languages (NCOLCTL) NCOLCTL is an organization dedicated to the teaching and learning of Less Commonly Taught Languages. Membership is open to individuals and organizations that share this interest.

NCOLCTL Homepage http://www.ncolctl.org

NCOLCTL Officers President: Catherine Ingold, University of Maryland Vice-President: Alwiya S. Omar, Indiana University Immediate Past President: Hong Gang Jin, Hamilton College Secretary Treasurer: Susan Schmidt, University of Colorado Executive Director: Antonia Schleicher, University of Wisconsin-Madison At Large Board Members: Jacques du Plessis, UW - Milwau- kee, Muhammad S. Eissa, University of Chicago, and Audrey Mbeje, University of Pennsylvania

NCOLCTL Mission Statement NCOLCTL’s mission is to increase the number of Americans who choose to learn one or more of the less commonly taught lan- guages (LCTLs) as a means of enhancing cross-cultural communica- tion among citizens of the United States. NCOLCTL’s work focuses on the less commonly taught languages which are becoming increa- singly vital to the economic, social and political welfare of the United States. Furthermore, NCOLCTL seeks to improve the teaching and learning of these languages and to make them more generally availa- ble. We are the national voice for organizations and individuals who represent the teaching of these less commonly taught languages at both the collegiate and precollegiate level. NCOLCTL also promotes vii the use of technology, especially computers and the Internet, to ena- ble a new era in cross-cultural understanding, communication, and language education. NCOLCTL constitutes a national mechanism devoted to strengthening the less commonly taught language professions through enabling NCOLCTL members to work toward “shared solu- tions to common problems.” NCOLCTL principally directs its ef- forts toward building a national architecture for the LCTL field and in making the field’s resources easily accessible to language programs and individual learners around the United States.

Activities of NCOLCTL Since its establishment in 1990, NCOLCTL has carried out a variety of activities to raise awareness about the importance of less commonly taught languages. NCOLCTL achieves its goals through the following activities:  Annual Conference in conjunction with Delegate Assembly  Conducting research to promote and facilitate the learning and teaching of the LCTLs  Planning for and establishing a national policy for building the national capacity for the study of the LCTLs  Enhancing the capacity of existing LCTL national associa- tions, and organizing new ones  Establishing a system for networking and communication among member organizations, and facilitating their collective efforts to solve problems in the LCTL field  Developing language learning frameworks to guide teacher training, curriculum design, materials development, and seek ways to address problems of articulation among different le- vels of the American educational system  Working, on behalf of the members, with government agen- cies, foundations, and the general foreign language commun- ity on policy issues and to seek funding to establish effective standards for the less commonly taught language field  Fostering national and international linkages within and across the various language areas

viii

 Online Teaching Courses designed primarily for new instruc- tors of LCTLs at postsecondary level and a useful resource for experienced instructors.

Becoming a member of NCOLCTL Both individual and organizational Membership Application forms for the National Council of Less Commonly Taught Languag- es are available online at: http://www.ncolctl.org/be-a-member

Editor’s Introduction

Danko Šipka Arizona State University

The present volume features six papers from various linguistic and geographical areas. The opening paper discusses challenges to macro- level planning for African languages and initiates broader issues of language planning and policy for LCTLs. The remaining five papers discuss concrete classroom-driven problems. The second paper ad- dresses the issue of learner’s autonomy in a web-based LCTL class- room. The third contribution to this volume investigates the problem of second language writing system word recognition pertinent to nu- merous LCTLs. The next two papers come from Arabic language classrooms but they analyze two different problems. The role of songs is discussed in the fourth paper of this volume while the fifth contribution addresses the role of heritage speakers. Last but not least, the sixth and final paper in this volume gives this volume a broader global perspective by discussing the impact of standard spo- ken Tamil in Singapore classrooms.

Danko Sipka

Prioritizing African Languages: Challenges to macro-level planning for resourcing and capacity building

Tristan M. Purvis Christopher R. Green Gregory K. Iverson University of Maryland Center for Advanced Study of Language

Abstract This paper addresses key considerations and challenges involved in the process of prioritizing languages in an area of high linguistic di- versity like Africa alongside other world regions. The paper identifies general considerations that must be taken into account in this process and reviews the placement of African languages on priority lists over the years and across different agencies and organizations. An outline of factors is presented that is used when organizing resources and planning research on African languages that categorizes major or crit- ical languages within a framework that allows for broad coverage of the full linguistic diversity of the continent. Keywords: language prioritization, African languages, capacity building, language diversity, language documentation

When building language capacity on an individual or localized level, the question of which languages matter most is relatively less complicated than it is for those planning and providing for language capabilities at the macro level. An American anthropology student working with Sierra Leonean refugees in Forecariah, Guinea, for ex- ample, will likely know how to address and balance needs for lan- guage skills in French, Susu, Krio, and a set of other languages such as Temne and Mandinka. An education official or activist in Mwanza, Tanzania, will be concerned primarily with English, Swahili, and Su- kuma. An administrator of a grant program for Less Commonly Taught Languages, or LCTLs, or a newly appointed language authori- ty for the United States Department of Education, Department of Commerce, or U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM), on the other hand, may view the Ethnologue list of over 2,000 indigenous languages

2 Purvis, Green, & Iverson

spoken in Africa, wondering, in exasperation, “Where to begin?”1 In order to try to answer this daunting question, we explore in this pa- per several key considerations and challenges involved in prioritizing language resources and training needs for highly linguistically diverse areas, specifically, the several regions of Africa. We also explore po- tential approaches that aim to enhance the utilization of the extensive multilingualism found in such areas as it affects education, literacy, diplomacy, and defense. We begin by highlighting several aspects of the linguistic and geographic diversity of Africa and compare it to other traditionally defined world regions of focus and administration. Next, we review general considerations and issues involved in language priority set- ting, among them the factors that must be taken into account when assigning priority levels and the debate about which characteristics separate a language from a dialect. We then present the extent to which African languages have appeared in a select set of language priority lists made available from different United States and interna- tional administrative bodies. We close with a brief discussion of im- portant points of departure for those embarking on an effort of lan- guage prioritization for their organization that will facilitate adaptation to varying levels of interest and engagement in these lan- guages, including accommodations for broad coverage of linguistic diversity when organizing resources and planning research and train- ing on African languages.

Linguistic diversity of Africa compared to other regions of the world Presentations and scholarship focused on research and other work being carried out in Africa often highlight the challenges that have arisen in the face of the countless unique aspects of the vast geographic and demographic scope and complex linguistic diversity of the continent. While the fact that Africa is a large continent is per- haps self-apparent, the exact scope of its expanse is often overlooked

1 Ethnologue is a widely used online and print reference encyclopedia of the world’s languages (Lewis, 2009). Ethnologue aims to be the most up-to-date resource on the nearly 7,000 languages of the world spoken across all continents. In addition to the wide variety of language materials it contains, drawn largely from the worldwide network of SIL International, Ethnologue contains demographic, genetic, dialect, and bibliographic information for the world’s languages searchable by their unique three charac- ter ISO (International Organization for Standardization) code. Prioritizing African Languages 3

by the fact that, for one reason or another, the entire continent is of- ten anecdotally equated to a monolithic “country.” Furthermore, tra- ditional mapping conventions, such as the cylindrical Mercator pro- jection, present a distorted view of the continent. In reality, Africa’s land mass is roughly 11.7 million square miles, thus well over 3.5 times the size of the continental United States—or, as presented by Krause (see “Cartography,” 2010), Africa covers an area roughly the same size as the United States, China, India, Japan, and all of Europe combined. The continent comprises 54 sovereign nations, as of July 9, 2011, with the inclusion of newly independent South Sudan, and its total population is approaching one billion and growing rapidly. In terms of linguistic diversity, there are over 800 ethnic groups and approximately 2,100 unique languages spoken in Africa, taking into consideration that these most recent estimates often over- look important distinctions between dialects and other varieties of certain languages that may be only mutually intelligible to a marginal degree. Five major language families are represented by the indigen- ous languages of Africa, viz., Afroasiatic, Nilo-Saharan, Niger-Congo, Khoisan, and Austronesian, the last among these represented by Ma- lagasy, spoken on the island nation of Madagascar. There are also numerous language isolates, i.e., languages yet unclassified or thus far deemed to be unrelated to any of these major language families. Fur- thermore, there is substantial representation by Indo-European lan- guages owing to the lasting legacy of colonial languages, chiefly Eng- lish, French, Portuguese, as well as closely-related emerging language varieties like pidgins, creoles, and mixed languages that have been born out of long-term contact between Indo-European and indigen- ous African languages or between different indigenous languages (Mufwene, 2008; Thomason, 1997). A striking example of this lin- guistic diversity is exemplified in Figure 1, which displays the 2,099 language ISO codes documented in Ethnologue (Lewis, 2009), color- coded by language family. Even more striking, as seen in the zoomed-in portion of the map, is that in a particular African country, Nigeria (albeit the most extreme example), we encounter an equally daunting subset of languages. Nigeria alone is home to over 500 indi- genous languages from 3 major language families.

4 Purvis, Green, & Iverson

Figure 1. Linguistic diversity of Africa (source: GMI, n.d.). Although in the current paper we have chosen to highlight Africa, we point out that many of these same issues and indeed the solutions proposed here readily apply to other major world regions. For the ease of comparison, we will employ the United States State Department regional divisions in our discussion. In light of the U.S. State Department’s division of regional bureaus, in the case of Africa, we are looking specifically at sub-Saharan Africa. That is to say, North Africa is included as part of a separate region, namely the Near East. This comparison of U.S. State Department regional divisions serves as a preface to many of the challenges involved in language priority determination (as discussed in later sections), such as how to divide the world into regions, what counts as a language (as opposed to dialects of a single language), how to estimate speaker populations most reliably, and how to account for L2 (second language) vs. L1 (mother-tongue) speakers. As a means for comparison between the many languages spoken in different world regions, we limit ourselves and our discus- sion below to those languages with over three million speakers. Also, for the sake of consistency in this comparison, we base this compari- son only upon L1 speaker population (which therefore overlooks ma- jor African trade languages and lingua francas with low L1 popula- tions, e.g. Swahili and Lingala). We draw upon population figures Prioritizing African Languages 5 found in Ethnologue (Lewis, 2009) which, by their nature, come from disparate sources. To begin our discussion, let us consider Table 1 containing major languages with more than three million speakers as they are divided between six world regions, namely Sub-Saharan Africa, West- ern Hemisphere, Near East, Europe and Eurasia, East Asia and Pa- cific, and South and Central Asia. For each region, the number of countries, size in millions of square miles, total number of languages spoken, and number of languages with more than three million speakers are given. These languages are listed by region and sub- region where appropriate. Bracketed languages within a single region are considered to be closely related. Table 1. Linguistic, demographic, and geographic comparison of U.S. State Department regions. (Bracketed languages in a cell indicate closely related languages based upon Ethnologue’s classification.)

Sub-Saharan Afr Afrikaans, Akan, Amharic, [Arabic-Sudanese, Hassaniyya], ca Bemba, Dhuluo, Ewe, [Fula (Pulaar)], Ganda, Gikuyu, Hausa, Countries: 48 Igbo, Kamba, Kanuri-Central, Kimbundu, Kituba, Koongo, Size: 9.5 mil. sq. mLuba-Kasai, Makhuwa, Malagasy-Plateau, Mandingo, Moore, Total languages: Nyanja, [Oromo-Boran-Arsi-Guji, Oromo-Eastern, Oromo- 2033 West Central], [Rundi, Rwanda], Shona, Somali, [Sotho- Total over 3 mil- Northern, Sotho-Southern, Tswana], Sukuma, Tigrigna, Tson- lion: 42 ga, Umbundu, Wolof, [Xhosa, Zulu], Yoruba Major trade languages: Swahili, Lingala

Western Hemis-Haitian, Jamaican, Guarani-Paraguayan, Hunsrik, Quechua- phere South Bolivian Countries: 37 Area: 16.3 mil. sq.Major European languages: English, French, Portuguese, mi. Spanish Total languages: 794 Total over 3 mil- lion: 5 Near East Middle East (17): [Arabic-Gulf, Arabic-Hijazi, Arabic- Countries: 19 Mesopotamian, Arabic-Najdi, Arabic-North Levantine, Arabic- Area: 2.1 mil. sq. North Mesopotanian, Arabic-Sanaari, Arabic-South Levantine, mi. Arabic-Taizzi-Adeni], Azerbaijani-South, Domari, Farsi- Total languages: Western, [Gilaki, Mazanderani], Hebrew, [Kurdish-Central, 139 Kurdish-Southern] Total over 3 mil- North Africa (9): [Arabic-Algerian, Arabic-Egyptian, Arabic-

6 Purvis, Green, & Iverson

lion: 26 Libyan, Arabic-Moroccan, Arabic-Saidi, Arabic-Tunisian], [Kabyle, Tamazight-Central Atlas, Tachelhit]

Europe and EuraWest (28): Catalan-Valencian-Balear, Danish, [Dutch, Vlaams], sia English, Finnish, French, [German-Standard, German-Swiss, Countries: 50 Bavarian, Mainfränkish], Greek, Hungarian, [Italian, Napoleta- Area: 10.9 mil. sq.no-Calabrese, Sicilian], [Lombard, Piemontese, Venetian], mi. Norwegian, Polish, [Portuguese, Galician], Romanian, Spanish, Total languages: Swedish, Turkish, Kurdish-Northern 280 East (15): [Albanian-Gheg, Albanian-Tosk], Armenian, Azer- Total over 3 mil- baijani-North, Bulgarian, [Croatian, Serbian], Czech, Slovak, lion: 43 Georgian, Lithuanian, [Russian, Belarusan, Ukrainian], Tatar

East Asia and PaEast Asia (27): Burmese, [Chinese-Gan, Chinese-Hakka, Chi- cific nese-Huizhou, Chinese-Jinyu, Chinese-Mandarin, Chinese-Min Countries: 31 Bei, Chinese-Min Dong, Chinese-Min Nan, Chinese-Min Size: 9.6 mil. sq. mZhong, Chinese-Wu, Chinese-Xiang, Chinese-Yue], Hmong, Total languages: Japanese, Khmer-Central, Korean, Monogolian (Peripheral), 2633 Shan, [Thai, Thai-Northeastern, Thai-Northern, Thai-Southern, Total over 3 mil- Lao], Uyghur, Vietnamese, Zhuang lion: 43 Pacific (17): Aceh, Bali, Banjar, Bikol, Bugis, Cebuano, Filipi- no, Hiligaynan, Ilocano, Indonesian, Javanese, Madura, Malay, Minangkabau, Musi, Sunda, Tagalog

South and Centr South Asia (49): [Assamese, Bengali, Chittagonian], [Awadhi, Asia Bagheli, Chhattisgarhi], Balochi-Southern, [Bhojpuri, Magahi, Countries: 13 Maithili], Deccan, Dogri, [Farsi-Eastern (Dari)], Gujarati, [Ha- Size: 2 mil. sq. mi.dothi, Malvi], Haryanvi, Hindi, Urdu, Kanauji, Kannada, Total languages: Kashmiri, [Konkani, Konkani-Goan], Lambadi, Malayalam, 603 Marathi, [Marwari, Merwari, Dhundari, Shekhawati, Godwari], Total over 3 mil- Mewati, Mina, Nepali, Oriya, [Panjabi-Eastern, Panjabi- lion: 53 Western, Seraiki], [Pashto-Central, Pashto-Northern], [Rangpu- ri, Sylheti,] Santali, Sindhi, Sinhala, Tamil, Telugu, Varhadi- Nagpuri Central Asia (4): Kazakh, Tajiki, Turkmen, Uzbek-Northern

The lists in Table 1 immediate highlight the fact that two world regions, in particular, boast the most linguistic diversity, name- ly Sub-Saharan Africa and the East Asia/Pacific regions, having 48 countries/2,033 languages and 31 countries, 2,633 languages, respec- tively. South and Central Asia, on the other hand, has far fewer coun- tries, but contains the highest number of languages with at least three million speakers. Prioritizing African Languages 7

From the perspective of addressing educational, administra- tive, development, management, national security, and other needs, professionals working in the United States may already have in mind ready comparisons between regions like the Americas and the Near East, or perhaps Europe. Most foreign language interactions con- ducted in the America’s, particularly at the level of administration and education, can be handled in English, Spanish, Portuguese, French, and perhaps a small number of related creole languages like Haitian and Jamaican. While there are some 800 or so different languages spoken in the Americas, most of them do not boast the vibrant num- bers of speakers found for other LCTLs spoken elsewhere in the world. Unfortunately, most are facing endangerment, i.e. dying off as their speakers (or descendants) and associated ethnic groups adopt other major languages as their primary means of communication. It should be clear from the presentation of Near East lan- guages in Table 1 that language planning in this region, although surely requiring more in the way of high level language training and support for language resource development, is somewhat less daunt- ing. Building capacity in a handful of languages, primary among them being Arabic, Farsi, and Hebrew (as well as English, French, and per- haps major Berber languages), has the potential to yield significant rewards in the approximately 19 countries found in that region. While expertise in numerous varieties of Arabic is clearly needed, depending on where one is working, it is nonetheless relatively easy to apply lan- guage skills gained for one variety of Arabic to learn other related varieties. The equivalent task of attaining high levels of proficiency in geographically proximal but genetically distant languages, such as is the case in many parts of sub-Saharan Africa, does not come with this benefit of linguistic transfer to the same extent as that found for closely related varieties of Arabic. The Europe and Eurasia region poses more of a challenge than one might think, given that this region covers roughly the same geographic area, has nearly the same number of countries, and ap- proximately the same number of languages with at least 3 million L1 speakers as Africa.2 Of course, a notable difference here is that both

2 Note that what is actually presented here is better considered to be Europe and New Independent States, given that Central Eurasian countries are included in the South and Central Asia region.

8 Purvis, Green, & Iverson

material and human resources for European languages are far better established and better studied compared to African languages. Fur- thermore, as with the Near East region, the number of languages with over 3 million L1 speakers diminishes when one takes into con- sideration related groups of languages, for example dialects of Ger- man or Italian, and the interesting case of Serbian and Croatian, which, linguistically speaking, constitute one mutually intelligible lan- guage with different ‘varieties’ defined by national boundaries. More closely paralleling the challenges for language capacity building in Africa are the regions of South and Central Asia and East Asia and Pacific. Although covering a much smaller geographic area and comprised of few countries, the densely populated South and Central Asia region has numerous language varieties boasting speech communities of well over three million L1 speakers. The East Asia and Pacific region, likewise, has a comparably large number of lan- guages with over three million speakers located in a region that cov- ers roughly the same geographic area and number of countries as Africa. It is possible, however, to compare the case of Chinese to that of the Arabic dialects discussed briefly above in the Near East region. Building capacity in a major variety of Chinese like Mandarin is likely to serve as a useful springboard into learning other related Chinese languages. Furthermore, the acquisition of reading and writing skills using Chinese characters (Hanzi) can often be applied to multiple literate language varieties in the East Asia region, for example Hanja characters in Korean and Kanji characters in Japanese. Having thus provided this brief introduction to the diversity, breadth, and expanse of the world’s linguistic architecture, we next turn more specifically to the task of language prioritization in Africa. As discussed below, a multitude of factors must enter into one’s con- sideration in taking this issue to task, not least among them being the longstanding question, “what is a language?”

General considerations and dilemmas for language prioritiztion

How are priorities set? In the preceding section, we offered a brief comparison of Africa to other world regions in order to frame its linguistic land- scape against similar problems and potential solutions to be found Prioritizing African Languages 9

for languages across the globe. While we have alluded to the types of considerations and challenges that go into setting priorities for lan- guage capacity building, in this section, we shall focus more specifi- cally on these challenges as they pertain to African language prioriti- zation and steps taken thus far to address these issues. In 1979, Michigan State University hosted a conference titled African Language Instruction in the U.S.: Directions and Priorities for the 1980’s. Three broad factors were ultimately agreed upon and defined that aimed to assist a diverse audience in the selection of the highest priority languages from among the hundreds of languages of Africa (Dwyer, 1986; Wiley & Dwyer, 1980; Wiley, 2004). In a later update to African language prioritization stemming from this conference, Wiley (2004) added a fourth criterion. The four criteria are as follows: (i) Number of speakers, (ii) Political, cultural, and social importance (i.e. its status as an official, national language, or lingua franca, impor- tance for education, literacy, etc., (iii) Importance for U.S. national interests, and (iv) Importance for scholars working in archives (Wiley, 2004). We explore the first three of these criteria in detail below. In many cases, a high ranking for one of these criteria pre- dictably goes hand in hand with a high ranking for one or more of the others; however, one can identify instances in which languages like Wolof and Tigrinya, having 4 million and 5.8 million speakers, respectively, typically rank higher on priority lists than a language like Kikuyu, having 7 million speakers, due to their status as a national language or other socio-political criteria. Similarly, Somali (13.8 mil- lion speakers) generally ranks somewhat higher than Igbo (18 million speakers) when taking into consideration geopolitics, security inter- ests, and the status of Somali as one of three official languages of Somalia (along with English and Arabic). It should be clear that a complex methodology of cross comparison and the weighting of many factors must be brought to bear on the outcome of prioritiza- tion as a result of these competing concerns. There are also additional considerations and dilemmas behind each of these component crite- ria themselves, as addressed in the subsections that follow.

Number of speakers. One of the clearest challenges sur- rounding the justification to use speaker population as a factor in pri- oritization concerns the longstanding issue of ensuring that accurate,

10 Purvis, Green, & Iverson reliable, and up-to-date estimates of speaker populations are available. Ethnologue (Lewis, 2009) serves as a convenient resource in terms of its comprehensiveness and accessibility, as it often contains demo- graphic information for both L1 and L2 speaker populations. The issue that arises, however, is that these figures come from disparate sources ranging from the 1980s to present. Take, for example, the different types of data contained in the relatively current 2006 popu- lation estimates for Wolof, as shown in Table 2, compared to those given for Lingala (2000 and 1999), and for Yoruba (1993). Further- more, the Wolof data, as well as that for the L1 speakers reported for Congo, ostensibly comes from SIL survey work as is typically implied by the unmarked source dates; whereas the figure for Nigeria comes from a separate missionary publication (Johnstone, 1993) and the L2 estimates for Lingala and Bangala is from the 1999 World Almanac and Book of Facts (Wiesenfeld, 1999). Table 2. Examples of population estimates in Ethnologue (Lewis, 2009) Lingala: Population: 2,040,000 (2000) in Democratic Republic of the Congo L2 speakers together with Bangala: 7,000,000 (1999 WA) in Democratic Republic of the Congo Population total all countries: 2,141,300 Wolof: Population: 3,930,000 (2006) in Senegal Population total all countries: 3,975,500 Yoruba: Population: 18,900,000 (Johnstone 1993) in Nigeria L2 speakers: 2,000,000 Population total all countries: 19,380,800 An alternative resource like the World Factbook is perhaps more consistent, as overall population figures, based on U.S. Census Bureau estimations and projections, are updated regularly. An addi- tional complicating factor, however, is the fact that, for the majority of African countries with diverse ethnic populations, only major eth- nic groups and languages are reported, and even then, only estimates for L1 speakers are provided at best. Furthermore, these percentages do not appear to be updated regularly, and the sources for these fig- ures are not clearly indicated. Consider, for example, the case of Se- negal in Table 3, where only the top 6 of 37 ethnic groups are docu- mented in the World Factbook. Specific language populations are not documented. In general, one must question if it is possible and, moreover, if it is advisable to base estimates for speaker population upon estimates of ethnic population? Doing so would present us with a puzzling situation where the World Factbook reports 5.3 million eth- Prioritizing African Languages 11

nic Wolof in Senegal in 2010 (or 43.3 percent of the total popula- tion), while Ethnologue reports approximately 4 million speakers of the Wolof language in 2006.3 Table 3. Examples of population estimates in the World Factbook Senegal: Last updated July 05, 2011

Population 12,643,799 (July 2011 est.) Ethnic Wolof 43.3%, Pular 23.8%, Serer 14.7%, Jola 3.7%, Mandinka 3%, groups Soninke 1.1%, European and Lebanese 1%, other 9.4% Languages French (official), Wolof, Pulaar, Jola, Mandinka

This issue is a complicated one. Can one assume that all eth- nic Wolof report speaking the Wolof language? How many of the 4 million speakers of Wolof reported by Ethnologue are L2 speakers? Moreover, are L2 speakers accounted for in some other way that is not reported? It is equally plausible, given the sprawl of French in Senegalese urban areas, that an ethnic Wolof speaks French as his or her L1 and perhaps Wolof only as an L2. Indeed, this situation arises in many African urban centers where, for example, an ethnic Fulani in Mali who was born and raised in Bamako may be a native speaker of Bambara, an L2 speaker of French, but have only elementary ca- pabilities in the Fulani language. These reports, thus, require a high degree of scrutiny and investigation when used for prioritization.

Political, cultural, and social importance. Although in- formation on political, cultural, and social criteria are not as difficult to collect as demographic information on speaker population, these data are nonetheless prone to change and can be questionable in terms of their practical relevance for measuring language prioritiza- tion. One must take into consideration shifts in official or national

3 For a more chronologically comparable figure, the 2006 World Factbook estimate was 5.2 million, or 43.3% of 11,987,121 (11 July 2006 update). Interestingly, the World Factbook population estimate for Senegal had risen as high as 14,086,103 for their initial July 2010 estimate (according to www archives). The dramatic drop back to 12,323,252 for a revised “July 2010” estimate in the first half of 2011 was possibly influenced by the U.N. World Population Division’s 2010 revision (12,434,000), barely up from the 2006 revision figure of 12,379,000. The U.N. 2010 revision more than likely reflects an opinion that the previous figures had been overestimated, as Senegal did not experience an increased mortality rate or dramatic emigration events that would lead to such as drastic drop in population. Whatever the reason for the adjustment, this just serves to underline the challenges of assuring and ascertaining the reliability or accuracy of population estimates. As of July 2011, Wikipedia still cites the World Factbook’s population estimate of 13,711,597, and this figure has most likely been perpetuated in other sources as the “current” population of Senegal.

12 Purvis, Green, & Iverson status, for example in Mauritania, where the official language of state has flipped between French and Arabic. This raises the question of how to account for the de facto “national” language(s) in such cases and how to document such criteria accurately and consistently in in- stances where formal documentation on the subject does not exist. Similarly, in terms of criteria such as language use in educa- tion, literacy development, and the extent of a literate tradition, one must be cognizant of the fact that official records do not necessarily reflect actual practices. A notable example can be taken from the case of Oromo in Ethiopia. In the 1980s, the Derg government tried to produce written materials for Oromo using the Ge’ez or Ethiopic script; however, these failed to be adopted by the Oromo people. Among the reason for this failure was the practical concern that the script was not the most suitable vehicle for this language. Further- more, the Oromo considered the Ge’ez script to be a symbol of Am- haric dominance and thus chose not to support its use (Bulcha, 1994). In later years, as part of grassroots movement for regional in- dependence, Oromo literacy using a Latin-based script was more widely accepted and adopted by the Oromo population. Issues such as this can be found for practically any language or nation where the complexities of politics, tribal, ethnic, and religious affiliations, and unfortunately corruption play a role in language in both official and national capacities.

Importance for U.S. national interests. For those institu- tions who have a vested interest in language prioritization for the purposes of national security, diplomacy, and intelligence, it is a diffi- cult task to maintain priority lists that are up-to-date with the most current trends. This is particularly true when taking into considera- tion the need to forecast new and/or waning priorities and to ensure that resources are available or in development to fit these changing needs. In the current world environment, one expects that most eyes are turned to newsworthy areas like Somalia where instability of gov- ernment, piracy, and the threat of terrorism are worldwide concerns. One must also watch the climate in Sudan closely, where the world awaits the impending success or failure of the newly formed Republic of South Sudan, not to mention the ongoing crisis in the Darfur re- gion. Nations like Guinea-Conakry, Côte d’Ivoire, and Nigeria have Prioritizing African Languages 13

long been in the international consciousness given the propensity for civil and/or governmental strife to flare up at a moment’s notice. The so-called Arab Spring beginning in 2011 also raised the level of un- certainty for eventual peace on the continent. The factors discussed above highlight the wide range of con- cerns that must be entertained in language prioritization. While the three factors mentioned thus far focus upon the very practical con- cerns of demographics, the role of language in the sociocultural cli- mate of a nation or region, and the sociopolitical and strategic impor- tance of a given language or group of languages for U.S. interests, there are even more fundamental questions that must be addressed. One of the most important among these is the question of defining what constitutes a unique language or a world region. These concerns are discussed in the sections below.

What is a language? The deceptively simple task of defining the basic characteris- tics of a language becomes incredibly complicated when developing a methodology for language prioritization. The unfortunate reality is that there is no single set of criteria that can be applied to the gamut of situations in order to determine whether or not two or more lan- guages are similar enough to be considered varieties of a single lan- guage or if they are best considered separately. Every situation is unique. As the oft-cited maxim goes: a language is “a dialect with an army and a navy” (Max Weinreich)—or as Browne (2002) later put it: with “an airline ..., a seat in the United Nations, and a soccer team with the national colors.” Well-known examples can be found where- in two or more languages sharing a high degree of mutual intelligibili- ty have come to be considered separate languages owing solely to the presence of political boundaries or different religious affiliations shared by the majority of individuals in a country. At the opposite end of the spectrum, cases can be found where languages that share little intelligibility but co-exist peacefully are sometimes mislabeled or misperceived as being a single language by some circles. Let us ex- plore how this situation has played out in an applied way in language training. In certain sectors of the government and military, personnel are eligible to receive handsome salary bonuses for maintaining profi-

14 Purvis, Green, & Iverson

ciency in one or more foreign languages. How might the situation be evaluated in an organization employing an Arabist who maintains proficiency in multiple varieties of Arabic that are by no means mu- tually intelligible, e.g. Modern Standard Arabic, Iraqi Arabic, and Su- danese Arabic? Linguistically speaking, these varieties of Arabic are not considered by most to constitute a single language when judging by contemporary standards of language classification. Indeed, the lat- est Ethnologue identifies 35 varieties of Arabic that have received unique ISO codes (assigned for unique identification of all known languages). They are, however, all called ‘Arabic.’ How would this situation compare, then, to that of a colleague who is trained in Per- sian (Iranian Farsi) where it would require minimal effort to test at an equivalent level of proficiency for the mutually intelligible languages like Dari (spoken in Afghanistan) and Tajiki (spoken in Tajikistan)? There are the other well-known cases of Hindi vs. Urdu and Serbian vs. Croatian, where the pairs of languages may well be considered to be dialects of the same language, but are merely divided by sociopo- litical boundaries, with their affinities being further masked by the use of different orthographic conventions. The ambiguity of the word “Arabic” has the potential to result in an unfair disadvantage to the Arabist. These issues also abound in the African context. An individu- al who is proficient in multiple Berber languages, most of which are not mutually intelligible, or one proficient in Congolese Swahili, Zan- zibari Swahili, and Kenyan Swahili, (grouped together under the heading of Swahili but mutually intelligible only to some degree), will only be credited with skills in one language. An individual proficient in both Xhosa and Zulu, however, would typically be credited with proficiency in two distinct critical languages that some linguists classi- fy as mutually intelligible varieties of a single language. The data in (1) exemplify the linguistic similarity of Xhosa, Zulu, and two other closely related Nguni languages, namely Ndebele and Siswati. Prioritizing African Languages 15

(1) Exemplification of the linguistic affinity of Nguni languages (source: “Nguni,” n.d.) Xhosa: Ndi-qonda ka-ncinci nje isi-Ngesi Zulu: Ngi-qonda ka-ncane nje isi-Ngisi Ndebele: Ngi-zwisisa ka-ncani nje isi-Ngisi Siswati: Ngi-condza ka-ncane nje si-Ngisi English gloss: I speak a little of English ‘I speak a little English.’

Many of these same questions that center upon language prioritiza- tion as it relates to language proficiency and training can be extended to concerns about resource allocation for the development of literacy and educational materials, as well as for the development of assess- ment tests. A key component compounding these concerns is the question of “prioritization for whom”? It is to this subject that we turn next.

African languages priorities in other resources: U.S. federal agencies lists In an effort to address the varying needs for language capaci- ty building in different United States government entities, all U.S. federal agencies are tasked to document worldwide priority languages for their interests and operations. It should be clear from the compo- nents of Table 4 that only the United States Department of Educa- tion’s list of critical languages (as used in part to facilitate evaluation for support by Title VI funding) contains a fairly comprehensive set of African languages that are considered to be high priority. Indeed, 16 of the 78 languages on the list (including Arabic) are indigenous to Africa. Table 4. Priority of African languages by U.S. Government agency (including Arabic) Department of Education: Akan, Amharic, Arabic (all di- alects), Bamanakan (Bamana, Bambara, Mandikan, Mandingo, Maninka, Dyula), Berber (all languages), Dinka, Hausa, Igbo, Oromo, Somali, Swahili, Tigrigna, Wolof, Xhosa, Yoruba, Zulu Department of Defense: Arabic, Hausa, Igbo, Swahili, Somali, and Yoruba

16 Purvis, Green, & Iverson

Department of State: Super critical – Arabic (MSA, Egyptian, Iraqi); Critical – Arabic (others) Department of Agriculture: Arabic Department of Commerce: Arabic (North Africa/Middle East) Department of Health and Human Services: Arabic Department of Housing and Urban Development: no rec- ommendations Department of Interior: Arabic (North Africa/Middle East), French (sub-Saharan Africa) Department of Labor: Arabic Department of Treasury: Arabic (North Africa/Middle East), Chinese, Spanish Department of Veterans Affairs: no recommendations

Besides the Department of Education, the Department of Defense has a relatively impressive list for high priority African lan- guages, with 6 out of the 12 languages on their list (including Arabic) being spoken on the African continent. What might be surprising to some readers is that, for the remaining agencies, the only reference to Africa (if any) is in association with French and Arabic. This state of affairs is startling if one considers the increasingly important role that Africa has come to play in global concerns on many levels. In terms of geopolitical strategizing, potential markets for goods, public health concerns, terrorism, and global population growth, Africa should be on everyone’s radar. The continent experiences population growth in the ballpark of five percent annually, is home to numerous humanita- rian crises, widespread HIV/AIDS concerns, political corruption and unrest, and growing threats of piracy and terrorist activity by Al- Shabaab and Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM).

What is a region? A question intimately related to “priority for whom” con- cerns the definition of the relative priority status for a language in a given world region. A complicating factor is that this definition may depend in large part on how a particular unit or organization defines their identified region or regions on interest. Consider the four dis- plays below in Figures 2 through 5 that map the world into distinct Prioritizing African Languages 17

regions according to the United States State Department (2), United States Department of Defense Unified Combatant Commands (3), the United Nations Geoscheme (4), and the World Health Organiza- tion (5).

Figure 2. United States Department of State regions (Source: “Maps,” n.d.). In Table 1, above, we briefly introduced the world region di- visions offered by the United States Department of State. The visual representation of these regions presented here in Figure 2 illustrates a somewhat prototypical division common to many other organiza- tions. Important to our concerns in this paper, the African continent is divided into two portions, as is typical, between North Africa and Sub-Saharan Africa. Perhaps less familiar to the reader is the comba- tant command regions of the United States Department of Defense shown in Figure 3, which, by and large, follow a similar division as the Department of State. The exception to this generalization is the continent of Africa, which falls almost entirely under the purview of the U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM). Although North African nations are predominantly Muslim and Arabic-speaking, Egypt is the only one among them to be grouped with other Arabic-speaking na- tions of the Middle East.

18 Purvis, Green, & Iverson

Figure 3. Unified Combatant Commands (U.S. Department of De- fense) (source: “Unified,” n.d.).

The UN classification of regions in Figure 4 is arguably a more ideal perspective. While many might presume that a pan- African ethos exists throughout most of sub-Saharan Africa, this is not entirely true, particularly in terms of political and economic ties and shared history. In this respect, it makes far more sense to avoid seeing “Africa” as a monolith and rather to focus on distinct sub- regions of Africa, if not individual countries. Unfortunately, it is not always possible to have the resources for such a fine-tuned focus of interests. Regardless of how one divides a given area, certain languag- es will naturally and undoubtedly take on relative prominence when it comes to prioritization for language capacity building. Importantly, a given organization must keep these inevitabilities and their implica- tions and potential shortcomings in mind as they proceed in making their policy and training decisions. Prioritizing African Languages 19

Figure 4. United Nations geoscheme (source: “United Nations,” n.d.). The division of African regions according to the World Health Organization in Figure 5 is perhaps the most striking and un- clear, presumably a consequence of bureaucratic gerrymandering within the administration of this organization. What is most unusual about this division is the split of the North Africa nations between the Middle East and the rest of sub-Saharan Africa. The question that must be asked concerns the exclusion of the large predominantly Muslim nations of Algeria and Mauritania from the Middle East re- gion, while Morocco remains included in the group. Compounding this apparent conundrum is the fact that Somalia is included in the Middle East region, although it is almost always considered part of sub-Saharan Africa in other arenas.

20 Purvis, Green, & Iverson

Figure 5. World Health Organization regional offices (source: “WHO regional offices,” n.d.) In order to gain further perspective on the inherent difficul- ties of language prioritization in the Africa context, we turn next to a comparison of three different priority language lists developed in 1979, 2004, and 2010. These lists highlight the fact that language priorities are subject to change at the whims of current world events, policy changes, funding shortfalls (or surpluses), among other factors.

Comparison and changes in African language prioritization Thus far, we have explored a variety of factors that come into play when devising a schema for language prioritization. These many factors are brought to the fore when one considers high priority lan- guage lists developed at three distinct points in time, namely 1979, 2004, and 2010. A comparison of these lists highlights issues related to the inconsistencies regarding “what is a language,” as discussed earlier. These lists also illustrate changes in prioritization due to flare- ups and declines in sociocultural and geopolitical hot spots on the African continent. In Table 5, the list from Dwyer (1986) resulted from the 1979 Michigan State University conference on African Language Instruction in the U.S.: Directions and Priorities for the 1980’s. The second list from Wi- ley (2004) provides an update to the 1979 priority list. The third list, Prioritizing African Languages 21 containing the 2010 Title IV priorities from the United States De- partment of Education (DOE), is provided for comparison. Lan- guages, as they are provided on these lists (in alphabetical order), are labeled here by letter for ease of comparison.

Table 5. Comparison of major priority lists for African languages

Dwyer 1986 Wiley 2004 U.S. DOE – Title VI a. (listed as priority B, combined Acholi with Luo and Lango) b. (listed as priority C) Afrikaans c. Akan Akan/Twi Akan (Twi-Fante) (Twi/Asante/Akuapem/Fa nte) d. Amharic Amharic Amharic e. Arabic Arabic Arabic (all dialects) f. (listed as priority B) (listed as priority B) Berber (all varieties) g. Chewa/Nyanja Nyanja/Chewa h. (listed as priority C) (listed as priority C) Dinka i. Fulfulde (Fu- Fufulde/Pulaar/Fula/ la/Peulh/Fulani) Peul j. Hausa Hausa Hausa k. Igbo Igbo Igbo l. (listed as priority B) Kikuyu/Gikuyu m. Kongo Kongo n. (listed as priority C) Kpelle o. (not listed) Krio p. (listed as priority B) Luganda q. Malagasy Malagasy r. Mandingo (Bamba- Bamana/Bambara/ Bamanankan (Bamana, Bam- ra/Mandinka/Dyula) Mandingo/Mandekan/ bara, Mandikan, Mandingo, Maninka/Dyula Maninka, Dyula) s Ngala (Lingala) Lingala t. (listed as priority B) Mende/Bandi/Loko u. Oromo (Galla) Oromo Oromo v. Rwanda/Rundi (Kirwan- Rwanda/Rundi da/Kirundi) w. Sango (not listed)

22 Purvis, Green, & Iverson x. Shona Shona y. Somali Somali Somali z Sotho/Tswana (Ndebele) Sotho/ Tswana/Ndebele aa. Swahili Swahili Swahili bb (listed as priority C) Temne . cc. Tigrinya Tigrigna Tigrigna dd Umbundu Umbundu . ee. (not listed) West African Pidgin English ff. Wolof Wolof Wolof gg. Xhosa/Zulu/Swazi Xhosa, Zulu, Ndebele, Xhosa Swati hh Yoruba Yoruba Yoruba . ii. (grouped with Xhosa and Swa- (grouped with Xhosa, etc.) Zulu zi)

It should be clear from this list that the prioritization deci- sions for African languages across time have changed in noticeable ways. The first thing to note when comparing these resources is that they raise the question of where to set the bar for establishing the highest priority languages. The original Dwyer list included a relative- ly small number of top priority African languages, 23 in total, but still more than what is found in the U.S. DOE’s less comprehensive list of critical languages. The 2004 update from Wiley further broadened the category of “Priority A” languages. Only 11 languages are represented as top priority in all three lists, however even within some of these groupings, the languages or language varieties represented are quite different. Consider the case of Dwyer’s 1979 Xhosa/Zulu/Swazi, compared to Wiley’s 2004 list where Ndebele was added. Compare these, then, against the U.S. DOE list where only Xhosa and Zulu are represented, and in this case listed as sepa- rate languages. Languages like Sango were included in the 1979 list but are noticeably absent from the 2004 list at any level of priority, where nine additional language ‘groups’ were added, including pidgin and creole languages like West African Pidgin English and Krio. The U.S. DOE priority list from 2010 for Title VI contains still other lan- Prioritizing African Languages 23

guages, for example Berber and Dinka, that were listed at lower levels of priority in the earlier lists. Focus on these particular languages is a clear sign of the times, as the geopolitical importance of the Maghreb and Sudan continues to percolate. Still other languages that were represented in the 1979 and 2004 lists are absent from the U.S. DOE list, among them Malagasy, Lingala, Shona, and Umbundu. These and other priority lists are often used by individuals as a starting point to identify and establish the highest priority languages in Africa from a broad perspective and from multiple viewpoints. The languages contained on these lists are largely representative of what can be considered “Priority A” languages. Beyond these lan- guages, Priority B and C languages have also been identified; howev- er, they have been suggested by both Wiley and Dwyer to be “open” classes that are subject to change with world events and geopolitical trends. The appearance of numerous languages from Sierra Leone and Liberia on the updated 2004 list is clearly a sign of “current events” and the criteria of “national security interests,” i.e. they are remnants of headlines from roughly 2004 when the updated list was distributed. It is precisely these types of languages with perhaps fleet- ing importance that may be best considered for the Priority B/C lists. Similarly, the extraction of Acholi from the priority B grouping of Luo/Acholi/Lango and its subsequent placement on the Priority A list in 2004 was also a consequence of security interests and current events, though presumably the priority ranking of this language (or at least the Luo/Acholi/Lango group) will be more enduring than the relatively minor languages of Sierra Leone and Liberia. The language grouping of Luo/Acholi/Lango also exemplifies the question of whether one should set strict language priorities based on what we define as distinct languages or if we rather consider looking at clus- ters of related and largely mutually intelligible languages. It may ulti- mately be that this question is less consequential to actual language capacity building and more a question of documentation and perhaps relative ranking. A final consideration to weigh in the comparison of these priority lists concerns the question of whether or not one should fo- cus interest only upon indigenous languages of the region, as well as where one should set the peripheral boundaries of a given region. For example, should a priority list for Africa include Malagasy? This one

24 Purvis, Green, & Iverson

language spoken on the island nation of Madagascar is representative of an entire language family that is not technically indigenous to Afri- ca and shares no genetic commonalities with other African languages. Afrikaans, which, to some extent, may be defined as a historical va- riant of Dutch, is also in question. The language is a practical working language spoken in South Africa and Namibia; however, its origins are clearly in Europe despite the incorporation and adaptation of many loanwords from other surrounding indigenous African lan- guages. As a result of these decisions, how does one best address the many widely spoken pidgin, creole, and mixed languages that have grown out of necessity and contact between indigenous languages and colonial European languages? Such non-indigenous language va- rieties are deemed worthy and important by bodies like AFRICOM.

Summary and discussion: Methodology for prioritization With these many concerns, complications, and challenges in mind, one can embark on the task of developing and implementing an informed and appropriate methodology for prioritization of the world’s language in a framework that will accommodate varying le- vels of focus. In this section, we shall suggest components of this methodology that should be taken into consideration in planning and priority-setting for languages in the African context.

Assessment of current resources Of key importance is availability of resources and accurate information drawn from reliable sources. Depending on the require- ments, mission, or project at hand, it is important to weigh this in- formation and its implications carefully so as maximize the outcome of the prioritization process. In light of the challenges for acquiring accurate, reliable, and current information, resources like Ethnologue and the World Factbook present a convenient means to begin evaluat- ing languages in terms of level of priority. Such resources provide information on languages spoken in specific countries, cross- references to other countries in instances where a language group is split by national boundaries, and often, links to other closely related languages or easily confusable languages are included. Language maps are also provided for each country which can assist in familiarization of the proximity of languages to geographic areas of interest. This Prioritizing African Languages 25

information alongside what has been published in the lists cited above and that available from other organizations offers a strong starting point for prioritization planning. One must keep in mind, however, that these lists are limited in their scope in ways discussed in sections above. Depending upon the level of language skill that will be re- quired of individuals embarking on a particular project in the African context, it is important to bear in mind the type and availability of instructional and reference materials for a given language. While it is the case that many African languages have been documented to some degree, few comprehensive and readily available resources for these languages are commercially available. University libraries and even internet searches can often yield results containing contact informa- tion for African language experts, information on where major Afri- can languages are taught in universities or colleges, bibliographies containing valuable resources like grammars, dictionaries, and course books. Some of these materials for select languages may even be available online in open-source formats. Sample language data like word lists, grammar sketches, and even sound files for common phrases and greetings may also be available. Efforts for establishing, updating, and servicing priorities for African languages would greatly benefit from a central resource and/or better cross-referencing between major resources. The UC- LA Language Materials Project (http://www.lmp.ucla.edu/) provides both a convenient portal for finding learner resources for numerous less commonly taught languages and useful summary descriptions that can be used to evaluate this set of languages, which includes 26 major African languages, in terms of relative priority. Among the shortfalls of this resource, information is only provided for a select set of languages. For the most part, this reflects a comprehensive set of what most experts would judge as the top priority African lan- guages; however, there are some notable exclusions and inconsisten- cies. For example, there is no coverage for the major languages of the Great Lakes region, Kinyarwanda and Rundi. This is a striking gap given that languages which have much fewer speakers and relatively less geopolitical status, such as Mende in Sierra Leone or Ewe in Ghana and Togo, are included. Perhaps a greater shortfall is the fact that much of the information is not updated regularly, and this re-

26 Purvis, Green, & Iverson

source may be on the decline like some other projects which other- wise held promise for facilitating language capacity building and planning. The now defunct Michigan State University Webbook of Afri- can Language Resources (http://africa.isp.msu.edu/afrlang/hiermenu.htm) was another resource with potential for facilitating priority setting and capacity building for African languages. As a resource dedicated to African languages, the coverage of languages went much deeper than that of the UCLA Language Materials Project, drawing on the lan- guage lists established at the 1979 MSU conference discussed in pre- vious sections. Unfortunately, the database backing this resource was not updated regularly and the Webbook was officially archived in 2010. Additional resources, such as Web Resources for African Languages (http://www.africanlanguages.org/) and the Pan-African Localisation project (PanAfriL10n, PanAfrLoc, http://www.bisharat.net/PanAfrLoc/), the latter having drawn a substantial amount of information from the MSU Webbook, are also in a state of flux. The National African Lan- guage Resource Center (http://nalrc.wisc.edu/) has potential to carry on the mission for facilitating teaching and learning of major African language, but they appear to have started from scratch and tend to highlight specific resources produced through their center.

Steps towards improved management and maintenance for data on African languages Whether carried out by a new central resource or through the revival of existing resources with regular maintenance and better cross-referencing, additional enhancements for data management are recommendable based on the challenges of language prioritization discussed earlier. First of all, data should be keyed by the ISO (Inter- national Organization for Standardization) codes documented in and updated by Ethnologue to facilitate data maintenance, integration of data for a variety of user needs, and cross-referencing of information between resources. Furthermore, efforts should be made to augment the set of standard codes for “macro languages”—that is, specialized codes that help group together related languages varieties such as [ara] for some 30 varieties of Arabic spoken throughout the world or [orm] for the three distinct varieties of Oromo, as documented by Ethnologue. The Prioritizing African Languages 27

number of codes established for this purpose is far fewer than what is warranted, currently limited to Arabic [ara], Dinka [din], Gbaya [gba], Grebo [grb], Fula [ful], Kanuri [kau], Kongo [kon], Kpelle [kpe], Luyia [luy], Malagasy [mlg], Mandingo [man], Swahili [swa], and Tamashek [tmh] in Africa. Among others, notable groupings which would help facilitate the varying levels of interest in African language prioritization as discussed in this article include the Nguni languages and a more comprehensive set of Berber languages. On the other end of the spectrum, where fine-tuned regional focus is called for, stan- dards for distinguishing information on dialects of a particular lan- guage variety should be established. This step will come with substan- tial challenges, foremost being the accuracy and acceptability of distinguishable dialects; but a simple starting measure can be to tie language ISO codes with geographic locations (city names, country codes) as well as drawing on dialectal varieties documented in Ethno- logue. While the reliability of any population estimate may always be called into question (as was made apparent in the opening section of this article), a database of information servicing language prioritiza- tion needs should be as systematic as possible in terms of accurately and completely documenting the sources for population figures. Fur- thermore, greater efforts should be made to estimate or collect data on L2 (second language) speakers of African languages and to better document the scope of use of colonial languages and a better account of the distinctive pidgins and creoles spoken on the African conti- nent. As means to obtain updates and verification of not only demo- graphic information but also details of socio-cultural importance and political status, summary pages for individual languages and countries can be set up as wikis open to vetted experts or open to a wider community of contributors with the submissions verified by desig- nated experts. As much as Africa has been branded with the image of the “dark continent,” there is actually a wealth of information about African languages and cultures that can be tapped into for purposes of setting language priorities and helping individuals gain training in and familiarity with these languages. We should endeavor to reverse the trend whereby resources that are established for such purposes end up fading out of use (whether due to lack upkeep or loss of fund-

28 Purvis, Green, & Iverson ing in this era of economic difficulty), with data collected to support these resources becoming inaccessible. Improved database manage- ment methods such as those touched upon in this discussion will not only help preserve the longevity and utility of the resources served by these data, but also help provide a flexible system that can respond to varying requirements and levels of interest for the prioritization of African languages. Prioritizing African Languages 29

References Browne, W. (2002). What is a standard language good for, and who gets to have one? (The Kenneth E. Naylor Memorial Lecture Series in South Slavic Linguistics.) Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University Department of Slavic and East European Languages and Literatures. Bulcha, M. (1994). The language policies of Ethiopian regimes and the history of written Afaan Oromoo: 1844-1994. The Journal of Oromo Studies, 1, 91–115. Cartography: The true size of Africa. (2010, November 10). The Econ- omist. Dwyer, D. J. (1986). A resource handbook for African languages. A listing of the institutional, human, and material resources for the teaching and learning of the eight-two highest priority African languages. Global Mapping International. (n.d.). Steve Huffman language maps: An academic application of the World Language Mapping System. World GeoDatasets. Retrieved from July 7, 2011 from http://www.worldgeodatasets.com/language/huffman. Johnstone, P. (1993). Operation world. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House. Lewis, M. P. (Ed.). (2009). Ethnologue: Languages of the world (16th ed.). Dallas, Tex.: SIL International. Retrieved from http://www.ethnologue.com. Maps and country information. (n.d.). U.S. Department of State. Re- trieved August 1, 2011 from http://future.state.gov/where/maps.html. Mufwene, S. S. (2008). Language evolution: Contact, competition and change. London & New York: Continuum. Nguni languages. (n.d.). In Wikipedia. Retrieved April 3, 2011 from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nguni_languages. Population Division of the Department of Economic and Social Af- fairs of the United Nations Secretariat. (2010). World Popula- tion Prospects: The 2010 Revision. Retrieved August 10, 2011 from http://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/index.htm. Senegal. (2011). The World Factbook [online]. Washington, DC: U.S. Central Intelligence Agency. Retrieved January 11, 2011 from

30 Purvis, Green, & Iverson

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world- factbook/geos/sg.html. Thomason, S. G. (Ed.). (1997). Contact languages: A wider perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Unified Combatant Command. (n.d.). In Wikipedia. Retrieved April 3, 2011 from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Combatant_Comman d. Unified Nations geoscheme. (n.d.). In Wikipedia. Retrieved April 3, 2011 from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Geoscheme. WHO regional offices. (n.d.). World Health Organization. Retrieved April 3, 2011 from http://www.who.int/about/regions/en. Wiesenfeld, L. P. (1999). World almanac and book of facts. Mahwah, NJ: World Almanac Books. Wiley, D. (2004). Priorities for U.S. instruction in the African lan- guages: New criteria and new choices. Unpublished manu- script. Retrieved from http://elctl.isp.msu.edu/archive/regions/africa.php. Wiley, D., & Dwyer, D. (1980). African language instruction in the United States: Directions and priorities for the 1980s. East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, The African Studies Center. The World Factbook 2011. (2011). Washington, DC: Central Intelli- gence Agency. Accessed April 3, 2011 from https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world- factbook/index.html.

Author note We are grateful for helpful comments from numerous col- leagues, especially Nikki Adams and Michelle Morrison. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Tristan M. Purvis, University of Maryland Center for Advanced Study of Language, Box 25, College Park, MD 20742. E-mail: tpur- [email protected]

Title: Independence, Interaction, Interdependence and Interrelation: Learner Autonomy in a Web-based Less Commonly Taught Language Classroom

Marina V. Kostina, PhD Argosy University

ABSTRACT In the United States, teaching less commonly taught languages has been a very challenging task due to low student enrollment and the high costs of hiring permanent teaching faculty. Therefore, web- based distance learning (DL) is beginning to attract serious attention from the less commonly taught languages profession (Fleming, Hiple and Du, 2002). However, DL classes are often associated with stu- dent isolation, where learners are deprived of non-verbal clues, vocal expression, and eye contact that are crucial for foreign language learning (White, 2005). Thus, working in a more isolated context re- quires higher learner autonomy (White, 2005). This article provides a review of literature on autonomy that exists in the foreign language field, and describes four aspects of autonomy that need to be consi- dered by language teachers while developing their web-based courses. It also offers some practical suggestions for the less commonly taught language instructors that foster autonomy and decrease isolation on- line. Introduction In the United States, teaching less commonly taught languag- es has been a very challenging task because of low student enrollment and high costs of hiring permanent teaching faculty. Therefore, web- based distance learning (DL) is beginning to attract serious attention from the less commonly taught languages profession (Fleming, Hip- ple and Du, 2002). Web-based teaching provides numerous advan- tages, such as convenience and flexibility, and accessibility. However, DL classes are often associated with student isolation where learners are deprived of non-verbal clues, vocal expression, and eye contact that are to the norm in a face-to-face environment and that are cru- cial for foreign language learning (White, 2005). Working in a more isolated context requires higher learner autonomy and a greater ability

32 Kostina to maintain initial motivation without face-to-face support and/or encouragement from the teacher (White, 2005). Over the past several decades there has been a remarkable growth of interest in the concept of student autonomy in foreign lan- guage education. Autonomy has become a buzz word (Little, 1991, p. 2) in language learning research as a result of the shift towards com- municative approaches in teaching languages that put the student in the center of the learning process (Wenden, 1998). Autonomy is an “ability to have and to hold the responsibility for all the decisions concerning all aspects of this learning” (Holec, 1981, p. 3). It is both a social and an individual construct, which involves the personal de- velopment of each student and, at the same time, interaction with others (La Ganza, 2001, 2004). Autonomy can take a variety of forms depending on the learning environment and on learner characteris- tics, but often autonomous students are expected to assume greater responsibility, to take charge of their own learning (Benson, 2001) and to develop a “capacity for detachment, critical reflection, deci- sion-making, and independent action” (Little, 1991, p. 4). While every learning context requires a degree of independence, motivation, and discipline from a learner, these aspects are especially critical in foreign language DL, where the student is largely self-directed and unsuper- vised and is expected to be more autonomous. When students are more autonomous, “they are likely to be more enthusiastic about learning” (Littlejohn, 1985, p. 258) and will develop a focused and a purposeful approach towards their language acquisition process (Ca- milleri, 1997; Chan, 2001, 2003; Dam, 1995; Little, 1991). Autonomy also promises to resolve the problem of motivation, even for those students who lack enthusiasm (Little, 2001). Learner autonomy, thus, is very important in any educational environment, but especially, it is crucial in foreign language DL. Despite its importance, there are several challenges related to autonomy in the foreign language DL context. First, a single universal definition of autonomy does not yet exist (Little, 2001). This con- struct remains obscure, particularly in relation to language learning and teaching at a distance (Benson, 2001). Numerous definitions of autonomy often contain its synonyms, such as “independence” (Sheerin, 1991), “language awareness” (Van Lier, 1996), “self- direction” (Candy, 1991), and “andragogy” (Knowles, 1980). Auton- Independence, Interaction, Independence and Interrelation 33

omy has also been defined as a capacity or behavior, as learner re- sponsibility or learner control, as a psychological phenomenon or political notion, and as a developmental skill that depends on teacher autonomy (Benson 2001). Most researchers agree, however, that au- tonomous learners know the purpose for their learning, accept re- sponsibility for it, set their own goals, initiate their learning activities, and are involved in the ongoing revision and evaluation of their work (Holec 1981; Little 1991). Holistically, learner autonomy can be viewed as a combination of cognitive, metacognitive, affective, and social dimensions of language learning that are in constant interaction with one another (Little, 2001; Benson, 2001; White, 2005; La Ganza, 2001, 2004). Another challenge with learner autonomy in a web-based DL context is that it is often confused with self-learning and self- instruction. Traditionally, DL has been a very isolated activity where students work on their assignments independently, such as in corres- pondence courses (Holmberg, 1986). Most DL courses in the past had a pre-set structure in which the outcomes, the pace, and the con- tent of the courses were predetermined by the course writers and not by the students. If we assume that autonomous learners need to be “able to make significant decisions about what is to be learned, as well as how and when to do it” (Van Lier, L., 1996, p. 12–13), then it seems that a pre-determined DL environment created obstacles for this process. Distance study today is more than a self-study. Accord- ing to Holmberg (1989), distance education is “a kind of conversa- tion in the form of two-way traffic” that “occurs through the written or otherwise mediated interaction between the students and the tu- tors and others belonging to the supporting institution" (p. 27). Learner autonomy, therefore, does not assume self-instruction but presupposes the ability to interact in such traffic. Finally, technological innovations also bring challenges to the learning process and demand constant growth and expansion of learner autonomy. Students need to exhibit and develop new skills, motivation, and commitment (Kötter 2001; Rogers & Wolff, 2000). They also need to know how to use these high-tech tools to build their language competence and to navigate in a complex, intercon- nected, and constantly evolving community of peers through discus- sion forums, chats, blogs, teleconferencing, and other types of inter-

34 Kostina

active activities that were not previously available (White, 2003). Thus, learners’ ability to self-guide their learning process (i.e., to create online identity, to recognize their personal needs and to choose learning opportunities and resources that match these needs) becomes very important in the online classroom (White, 1995). In- evitable technical glitches and slow internet connections may also seriously impair learning and lead to student dissatisfaction with a course resulting in students’ withdrawal (Hara & Kling, 1999). These barriers can create the potential for misunderstandings between stu- dents and instructors and increase student isolation online.

Autonomy in the Foreign Language Context There are a number of descriptions of autonomy, but the for- eign language field still lacks a theory of autonomous language learn- ing and even fails to provide a unified definition of this concept (Benson & Voller, 1997). Many foreign language scholars either fol- low a constructivist view of autonomy, which describes this construct as an individual quality, or view it through the social interactionist perspective, which emphasizes the social dimension of autonomy. There are four aspects of autonomy that seem to arise from the lit- erature review: independence, interaction, interdependence and inter- relation. Let us examine each of these aspects in more detail below.

Independence The individual dimension of autonomy (independence) is based on the constructivist psychological theory, according to which people are constantly trying to make sense of the world around them based on their previous experience. “A person’s processes are psy- chologically channelized by the ways in which he anticipates events” (Kelly 1955, p. 46). Kelly (1955) believed that we anticipate events by “construing their replications” (p. 50), which means that we give meaning to events through our interpretation of them. Each individ- ual creates his or her meaning differently. In this way, autonomy is an independent feature that belongs to the learner. Consequently, the learning process is individual and the constructs involved in this process, including autonomy, are also individual. One of the most frequently quoted definitions of learner autonomy that stems from this constructivist world view comes from Henri Holec (1979). In his Independence, Interaction, Independence and Interrelation 35

paper “Autonomy and Foreign Language Learning,” Holec defined autonomy as an “ability to have and to hold the responsibility for all the decisions concerning all aspects of this learning” (p. 3). He be- lieved that such ability involves several decisions on the part of the learner, such as determining objectives, defining contents and pro- gressions, selecting methods and techniques, monitoring the proce- dure of language acquisition, properly speaking (e.g., rhythm, time, place, etc.), and evaluating what has been acquired (Holec, 1979). The autonomous learner is capable of making all of the deci- sions about educational process and taking charge of his or her learn- ing process (Benson, 2001; Holec, 1979). Dickinson (1995) also ad- vocated an individualized view of autonomy and defined it as a “capacity for active, independent learning…. for critical reflection and decision making, as well as the skills necessary to carry out a self- directed learning program, i.e., the ability to define objectives, define content and so on” (p. 167). The autonomous learner in this set of definitions is a proactive member of the learning process, rather than a passive receiver of learning materials (Boud, 1988; Kohonen, 1992; Knowles, 1975). Holec (1979) added the importance of choice as a necessary means of autonomy development. He referred to individual choice, rather than to collective choice made by a group of students. According to the researcher, knowledge cannot simply be passed on from the teacher to the learner. Each learner observes and controls his or her own learning process and makes decisions (or choices) of what to learn. In order to facilitate such personalized learning process, there must be room in a course for freedom of choice for the individual as well as for groups of learners. David Little (1991) brought a psychological dimension to the definition of learner autonomy. He believed that autonomy is “essen- tially a matter of the learner’s psychological relation to the process and content of learning, a capacity for detachment, critical reflection, decision-making, and independent action” (Little, 1991, p.4). Little (2000, p 69) combined his older definition from 1991 with Holec’s (1981) definition: Autonomy in language learning depends on the development and exercise of a capacity for detachment, critical reflection, decision making and independent action (see Little 1991, p. 4); autonomous learners assume responsibility for determin-

36 Kostina

ing the purpose, content, rhythm and method of their learn- ing, monitoring its progress and evaluating its outcomes (see Holec, 1981, p. 3).

The assumption here is that the ability to manage the learning expe- rience depends on the underlying psychological capacities of the learner. From this perspective, Holec’s (1981) definition described the implementation of autonomy rather than autonomy itself; his de- finition explained what autonomous learners are able to do but not how they are able to do it. Wenden (1991) saw learner autonomy as an educational goal and as a learning process, or autonomous learning, not as a product. Autonomy, is thus a developmental concept and a learner is constantly working toward it (Kostina, 2011). The underly- ing belief here is that there are some things to be achieved by the learner, as well as some ways of achieving these things (La Ganza, 2004). Benson (2001) warned us, however, that a view of autonomy that shifts the focus from the internal experience to the process of learning has created a crisis of identity (p. 13) where autonomy is no longer seen as an individual capacity but as a learning process or situation (Benson, 2001; Dickinson, 1995). Benson (2001) maintained that such a definition of autonomy was not accurate, as it presumed that the “individualized self-directed learning” was a “sufficient con- dition” for autonomy (p. 13). Similar beliefs were exhibited in Hurd’s (1998) work, who stated that “if learners are not trained for autono- my, no amount of surrounding them with resources will foster in them that capacity for active involvement and conscious choice, al- though it might appear to do so” (p. 72–3). White (1995) also sup- ported this idea, stating that “a self-instruction context for learning does not automatically equate with learner autonomy, but autonomy may arise and develop within the learner as a response to the specific demands of a self-instruction context” (p. 209). The view of autono- my as an individual characteristic has brought many important in- sights to the field of foreign language DL but also has limited its un- derstanding. It has negated the very nature of this construct, which includes a social dimension, as autonomy is only meaningful in rela- tion to others (La Ganza, 2004).

Independence, Interaction, Independence and Interrelation 37

Interaction The social view of autonomy is based on the Social Interac- tionism perspective, according to which we do not learn in isolation but through our interactions with others (Vygotsky, 1978). Vy- gotsky’s zone of proximal development is the gap between what learners can achieve on their own and what they can achieve in collaboration with others. Both Kohonen (1992) and Little (1996) considered the idea of collaborative learning through social interaction to be central for learner autonomy because it allows the development of reflective and analytic skills in learners. These abilities “depend on the interna- lization of a capacity to participate fully and critically in social interac- tions” (Little, 1996, p. 211). The origin of the view of autonomy as a social construct coincided with the wave of communicative language teaching in the 1980s (Breen & Candid, 1980; Canale & Swain, 1980). The followers of the communicative language movement emphasized the importance of interpersonal dimension in language learning and communication was placed at the heart of learning. The focus of lan- guage learning was on “the development of the learner’s communica- tive knowledge in the context of personal and social development” (Breen & Candlin, 1980, p. 91). Canale and Swain (1980) introduced the concept of “meaningful communication” as a complement to lin- guistic knowledge and focused on “use, not usage” (p. 24). The shift to a learner-centered classroom placed importance on the teacher in the development of learners’ autonomy. The teacher, in this perspec- tive, played an important role in matching his/her strategies with the appropriate levels of autonomy of their students. Candy (1991) stated that learner autonomy “is not a single, unitary concept, but rather a continuum along which various instructional situations may be placed” (p. 205). Breen and Mann (1997) maintained that autonomy is a “way of being that has to be discovered or rediscovered” (p. 134). They saw the classroom as a “microcosm of the wider world in which the self relates to society” (p. 142). Teachers have an important role in this process, as developing awareness of language learning does not come naturally to most learners; it is the result of conscious ef- fort and practice and instruction. It is essential that an autonomous learner “is stimulated to evolve an awareness of the aims and proc- esses of learning and is capable of critical reflection” (Dam, 1995, p.

38 Kostina

2). Murphy (2005) argued that learners must be encouraged to en- hance their capacities for reflection and self-direction; they should be given an explicit framework to guide their progress; and they must be provided a clear rationale, encouragement, support, and opportunity to practice within the course materials. Collaboration with other students also becomes important in this social dimension of learner autonomy. Language skills are ac- quired with more success when learners participate in personally meaningful activities in the context of social interaction rather than receive knowledge from the materials (Candlin & Byrnes, 1995). Thus, a foreign language is not “a subject to be absorbed but a sym- bolic medium through which knowledge about an arena of interest might be generated by the learner in society with others, through a focus on the constructive process of learning” (La Ganza, 2004, p. 24). Therefore, both teachers and student peers become an integral part in the process of the development of learner autonomy.

Interdependence Besides independent and interactive dimensions of autono- my, interdependence is also viewed as a key ingredient of the com- plex construct of autonomy. Little (2001) argued that autonomy in language learning develops through interaction, and that the inde- pendence of a learner is built through interdependence. Breen and Candlin (1980) also described a teacher as an “interdependent partic- ipant” (p. 99). In opposition to Holec’s individual sense of autonomy, Breen and Candlin (1980) emphasized the interdependence of the teacher and other learners as part of a communicative process where all parties “actively share the responsibility for learning and teaching” (p. 99). Early Holec’s (1979) and Little’s (1991) definitions of auton- omy were criticized by Hall and Beggs (1998) as being “asocial” (p. 27). They maintained that autonomy should be seen as an “internal- ised and individual state of mind.” They noted that Holec’s (1979) and Little’s (1991) definitions did not address “the interactive nature of language learning” (p. 27) and did not include “the interdepend- ence” that is at the core of language learning. Later, however, Little (1995) argued that learner autonomy depends on teacher autonomy. In order to foster learners’ autonomy, teachers must exhibit it in themselves. Teachers and students use the same reflective and self- Independence, Interaction, Independence and Interrelation 39 directing strategies for different goals: teachers, for managing their classrooms and students, for learning. Hence, teachers who wish to promote greater learner autonomy need to “start with themselves,” and should reflect on their own beliefs, practices, experiences, and expectations of the teaching and learning situation (Little, 1995; Smith, 2001). Therefore, according to the interdependent perspective, learner autonomy is dependent on teacher autonomy and vice versa. As a social construct autonomy is seen as a result of interdependent relationships whereby both teachers and learners share responsibility for the learning process. Therefore, autonomy seems to be both an individual and a social construct. According to La Ganza (2004), autonomy “arises from juxtaposed objectivistic and constructivist notions of reality and knowledge” (p. 23). Autonomy is, thus, an individual systematic learner progression leading to competencies in learning (Holec, 1979), but it is also a subjective individual construction through social discourse (La Ganza, 2004). Using Ackermann’s (1996) metaphor of learning process, which he described as “a dance between diving in and stepping out” (p. 32), I can conclude that autonomy is a result of the personal reflection (stepping out) as well as of social interaction (diving in).

Interrelation A new perspective on learner autonomy has been developed by La Ganza (2001, 2004) and supported by Kostina (2011). Accord- ing to the theory of Dynamic Interrelational Space (La Ganza, 2001, 2004) interaction is important for the development of learner auton- omy. However, it goes beyond individual and social views of auton- omy and includes an emotional aspect of interaction introducing the concept of interrelating. La Ganza (2008) stated that “interrelating implies more than just reciprocal action, which is sometimes referred to in the literature as interaction; rather, it implies establishing associ- ation, connection, verbally and non-verbally: interrelating comprises an affective dimension” (p. 370). According to La Ganza’s model, it is not sufficient to define learner autonomy as a learner taking control or taking responsibility, but by the extent to which a learner can real- ize these achievements depends upon his or her relationship with the teacher. Therefore, learner autonomy is seen as an achievement, at-

40 Kostina

tained interrelationally, between learner and teacher. It depends on how learner and teacher relate to each other and whether they devel- op relationships that are conducive to developing learner autonomy. The core features of the Dynamic Interrelational Space model (see Figure 1) are the dualities, or sources of inner tension. These dual- ities (T+/T- and L+/L-) may be explained as states of tension that are perceived by teachers and learners.

Y L+

X

T- T+

L- Critical In-Mind Boundary X: T+teacher Teacher seeks seeks influenceto influence T the +/ learning resists experience influence and/ T-/ or to Y assist: student the learner. seeks influence L Q 1 +/L rejects + Learner influence accepts Teacher’s L- influence on the learning experience and the assistance offered, or seeks Teachers’ assistance

T- Teacher resistant: encourages Learner to initiate and / or define his or her work and / or define the Q 2 learning experience L + Learner seeks Teacher’s assistance concerning work to be done or some clarification of the learning experience

T- Teacher resistant: encourages/ allows Learner to initiate and/ or define his or her work and / or de- Q 3 fine the learning experience L- Learner seeks empowerment: indicates to Teacher that he or she would like to struggle alone to initiate and/or define his or her own work and/ or define the learning experience

T+ Teacher seeks to influence the learning experience and/ or to assist the learner. Q 4 L - Learner seeks empowerment: indicates to Teacher that he or she would like to struggle alone to initiate and/or define his or her own work and/ or define the learning experience

Figure 1. The Dynamic Interrelational Space Model

Source: La Ganza, W. (2004). Learner Autonomy in the Language Classroom. PhD dissertation, Macquarie University. Independence, Interaction, Independence and Interrelation 41

T+ signifies that the teacher is trying to influence the learning experience; T- denotes that the teacher resists from this influence. L+ indicates the learner’s willingness to accept the teacher’s influence; and L- signifies the learner’s resistance to the teacher’s influence and/or his/her desire to seek empowerment to influence the learning experience in some way. La Ganza (2001, 2004) believed that the de- velopment of a learner’s capacity to be autonomous mainly occurs in the Q3 interrelational climate. Such a climate is characterized by re- straint and some discomfort on the part of the teacher. The learner here struggles in his/her learning process. The learner makes mis- takes, experiences doubt and uncertainty, and resists appealing to the teacher for correct answers and solutions. Besides developing a ca- pacity for resisting the influence of the teacher, the learner must also develop a capacity for persistence in using outside resources, as well as the teacher, for learning. The teacher, on the other hand, must de- velop a capacity for communicating to the learner and express to the learner that he/she is concerned for the student’s well-being in this educational process. The teacher also needs to be able to cope with his or her own anxieties associated with facilitating the learning process, such as worry about “when or [when] not, and if so, how, to offer help to the learner should the learner not seek the teachers’ in- fluence” (La Ganza, 2008, p. 66). This model shows that a learner’s capacity for development of autonomy can vary with different teach- ers depending on their interrelation. Therefore, La Ganza (2004) believed that learner autonomy is only meaningful in the psycho-social context and only when the teacher and the learner interrelate. Hence, La Ganza (2001, 2004, 2008) saw the term learner autonomy as problematic because it only emphasizes one side of the dynamic relationship whereby the learner self-governs in isolation from external factors. “The paradox of learner autonomy is that the learner can be autonomous while in faci- litating relationship with the teacher who is present externally, or, af- ter satisfactory experiences of autonomy, internally” (La Ganza, 2008, p. 67). Therefore, La Ganza (2008) redefined the term learner auton- omy as “the capacity of a learner to sustain a predominantly third qu- adrant interrelational climate in his or her experience- or a Q3 capaci- ty” (p. 67).

42 Kostina

Figure 1 shows a line going through quadrants 2 and 3 to qu- adrant 4. This line is the Critical In-Mind Boundary, which demon- strates the place where teacher-learner interrelating risks breaking down because of a lack of rigor. La Ganza believed that if this boun- dary is crossed, the online learner might feel isolated, while the teach- er might also feel unsuccessful in fostering learner autonomy. The exact position of the Critical In-Mind Boundary depends on each teacher-learner relationship. Usually, the teacher receives a sign from the student that the boundary is about to be crossed, and that their connection is breaking down. The teacher might feel a loss of touch, after which the learner might drop out without a word. Thus, the re- lationship between the instructor and learner is effective within the boundary and breaks down beyond it. The role of the teacher is to maintain the boundary through a balanced student-instructor dialo- gue, which does not need to be verbal but must be affective. La Ganza (2004) suggested that the instructor must hold the Q3 and to develop learner autonomy without crossing the Critical In- Mind Boundary. In the contexts where teachers do not interfere with the learning process of their students, they need to show concern for their students. Interrelating thus includes more than the social pres- ence described by Rourke, Anderson, Garrison, and Archer (1999) or e-moderating discussed by Salmon (2003), neither one of which in- cludes the affective aspect of the teacher-learner dialogue that needs to be maintained. In order for the instructor to successfully foster the learner’s autonomy, he or she must engage intellectually and emo- tionally with the student. This emotional investment will also allow the teacher to feel connected to the student while they are engaged in the construction of knowledge. Such in-mind student-teacher dialogue can be evidenced through various communicative exchanges, where- by the teacher shows his or her concern and the student accepts it. However, such in-mind interaction often is nonverbal, which is more complicated to maintain online. In the face-to-face classroom “the blink of a learner’s eye can appear to signal a refusal of what a teacher was offering” (La Ganza, 2004, p. 365). In the online environment, student-instructor interaction can be interrupted by the student’s sudden silence and lack of responsiveness. Such interaction involves both intellectual and emotional engagement that must be constantly Independence, Interaction, Independence and Interrelation 43 maintained. Therefore, student-instructor dialogue is more than inte- racting; it is also interrelating (La Ganza, 2004). To conclude, autonomy is a multi-level, multi-dimensional construct. As a multi-level construct, autonomy is a dynamic phenome- non that changes over time (Kostina, 2011). It is a progression from being dependent to being fully autonomous (Wenden, 1991). Auton- omy also seems to be unique for different students. According to Lit- tle’s (1991), “autonomy can take numerous different forms, depend- ing on their age, their proficiency, and so on” (p.4). However, autonomy is not just something that happens on its own in the online classroom (Benson, 2001; White, 1995). It needs to be developed and supported by instructors (Hurd, 1998; Little, 2001). Specific instruc- tor strategies that involve communication, interaction, and interrelat- ing create a climate where autonomy can be fostered (Gibbs & Simp- son, 2004; La Ganza, 2011) As a multi-dimensional construct, autonomy is both an individual and a social concept. As such, autonomy includes a combination of skills that is related to the personal characteristics of the learner or is dependent on other ingredients, such as interaction with others, in- terdependence, and interrelation. This complex nature of autonomy that includes individual, social and interrelational dimensions can be visually illustrated by Figure 2.

Figure 2. Dimensions of Multi-level Multi-dimensional Construct of Autonomy

44 Kostina

Conclusion: Suggestions for Less Commonly Taught Language DL Teachers

Independence In order to foster student autonomy without pushing the learner beyond the critical in-mind boundary, less commonly taught lan- guage DL teachers should understand the factors that contribute to students’ feelings of isolation and use those techniques that are prov- en to promote students’ feeling of connectedness and increase their autonomy. Since many students value communication with their in- structor (Kostina, 2011), teachers need to provide detailed, timely, and individualized feedback and to be easy to reach. Establishing ex- pectations for how soon students will receive their grades or how often they will hear from their teacher will promote student satisfac- tion and increase their feelings of connectedness. Developing rapport with students is also important. Teachers can start a course with ice- breaking activities to ensure that students learn about each other and feel more comfortable contacting their peers during the course. Be- sides, posting some personal information about the teacher and even creating social networking opportunities within the class will also help connect with the students. The less commonly taught language DL teachers should also remember that autonomy is a developmental construct. Each student in their classroom comes with an individual set of skills and a varying degree of autonomy. It is crucial for the teachers to tune into their students’ abilities and adjust their instructional strategies accordingly. Through continuous communication with their students, and a quick assessment of their autonomy levels at the beginning of the course, an instructor can create a strategic approach for each individual stu- dent and provide more support to some learners while allowing oth- ers to take charge. In addition, creating an organized online environ- ment that is easy to navigate, that contains printable materials, and various opportunities for practice have the potential to increase stu- dents’ learning experience online. The use of a variety of media, espe- cially for foreign language learning, can make studying online fun and can create differentiation where various activities can match diverse students’ learning styles.

Independence, Interaction, Independence and Interrelation 45

Interaction In a DL less commonly taught language classroom, the de- velopment of communicative competence seems of particular impor- tance (Kostina, 2011). Therefore, teachers should structure their classes so that more time is devoted to the actual use of the language. It has been noted that many web-based language programs focus on reading, writing, and listening, rather than speaking (Ros I Sole & Hopkins, 2007). However, less commonly taught language DL teach- ers, just like face-to-face teachers should not revert to teaching grammar and passive language skills online, but should promote oral interaction and create opportunities for speaking in the target lan- guage. This need could be addressed by limiting grammatical presen- tations and posting more practice exercises online while freeing more time in the synchronous classroom for speaking. Less commonly taught language DL teachers should also not forget that in the online classroom peer discussions are as important as in the face-to-face context. Creating collaborative activities where students speak to each other in the target language will encourage students to develop their communicative skills and at the same time feel less isolated from oth- ers. Additionally, in a language DL classroom, the use of video for the synchronous classes seems to be of a great importance (Kostina, 2011). It makes the learning process more personal and close. It is also crucial for learners’ listening comprehension and pronunciation. Despite the fact that teachers’ contact information is usually available to all students in a web-based course, research shows that it is not enough (Kostina, 2011). Because of the lack of natural conver- sations in the web-based DL classroom, online teachers need to im- plement strategies that encourage student-instructor and student- student dialogue (Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005; Hansson & Wenno, 2005). Therefore, such strategies as sending reminders, regular check- ins, and the creation of collaborative tasks will promote these types of dialogue and will increase student satisfaction in the classroom.

Interdependence DL seems to be a very transparent environment where phys- ical distance does not diminish people’s ability to detect others’ feel- ings and intentions (Kostina, 2011). A teacher needs to sense when to pull back and when to reach out to his/her students. Many students

46 Kostina

demonstrate the need to solve problems, and even to struggle on their own (Kostina, 2011). Thus, the instructor needs to develop their own autonomy as it is interdependent with the autonomy of his/her students. In addition, instructor’s effort and genuine interest in the topic can be contagious for their students (Kostina, 2011). Often, online teachers do not have enough room in the course for sharing their personal feelings about their subject with the students. Howev- er, teachers should allow their passion for the topic to guide their vir- tual classes, just it would guide their face-to-face discussions. Provid- ing extra resources that ignite students’ interest for the target language and culture, for example, will permit teachers to share their fascination with certain aspects of that language or culture and to demonstrate the instructors’ effort. All this in turn may boost stu- dents’ motivation and satisfaction.

Interrelation La Ganza (2001, 2004, 2008) provides several strategies for continuously showing care for their students in order to maintain an interrelational climate where both teacher and student resist influen- cing each other on the academic level. Instructors in such a climate need to create a very strong affective bond with students to allow them to struggle on their own and still feel connected. La Ganza be- lieves that for this task, the teacher must be a perceptive resource, a participant observer, and a supporter of each learner’s individuality. As a perceptive resource, the teacher needs to invite consultation and welcome it when it occurs. He/she needs to provide meaningful help to the student’s inquiries and reply to requests, indicating that the learner’s questions have priority in the teacher’s schedule. The in- structor should also follow up on the situations that reflect any un- certainty. As a participant-observer, the instructor should use individual learning contracts and demonstrate genuine interest in what the learner might discover, showing empathy for the learner. The instruc- tor should also make an occasional discreet inquiry, reassuring the learner that he/ she is thinking about him/her. Being supportive of each learner’s individuality means to encourage discussion on various topics and to seek the learner’s opinions about the areas of his/her expertise and experience (La Ganza, 2004).

Independence, Interaction, Independence and Interrelation 47

References

Ackermann, E. (1996). Perspective-taking and object construction: Two keys to learning. In Y. Kafai and M. Resnick (Eds). Construc- tionism in Practice: Designing, Thinking and Learning in a Digital World (pp. 25–35). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Benson, P. (2001). Teaching and researching autonomy in language learning. Harlow, England: Pearson Education Limited.

Benson, P., & Voller, P. (Eds.) (1997). Autonomy and independence in language learning. London: Longman.

Boud, D (1988). Developing Student Autonomy in Learning. London: Ko- gan Page.

Breen, M. P., & Candlin, C. N. (1980). The essentials of a communic- ative curriculum in language teaching. Applied Linguistics, 1(2), 89- 110.

Breen, M., & Mann, S. (1997). Shooting arrows at the sun: Perspec- tives on a pedagogy for autonomy. In P. Benson & P. Voller (Eds), Autonomy and independence in language learning (pp. 132–49). London: Longman

Camilleri, G. (Ed.). (1999). Learner autonomy – The teachers’ views. Stras- bourg: Council of Europe.

Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical basis of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Lin- guistics, 1(1), 1-47.

Candlin, C., & F. Byrnes (1995). Designing for open language learning – Teaching roles and learning strategies. In S. Gollin (Ed .), Language in distance education: How far can we go? Proceed- ings of the NCELTR conference. Sydney: NCELTR, 126-141.

48 Kostina

Chan, V. (2001). Readiness for learner autonomy: What do our learn- ers tell us? Teaching in Higher Education, 6 (4), 505-519.

Chan, V. (2003). Autonomous language learning: Teacher’s Perspec- tives. Teaching in Higher Education, 8(1), 33-54.

Candy, 1991. Self-direction for Lifelong Learning. California: Jossey-Bass.

Dam, L. (1995). Learner autonomy 3: From theory to classroom practice. Dublin: Authentik.

Dickinson, L. (1995). Autonomy and motivation: A literature review. System 23 (2), 165–174.

Fleming, S., Hiple, D., & Du, Y. (2002). Foreign language distance education: The University of Hawai’i experience. In C.A. Spreen (Ed.), New technologies and language learning: Case in the less commonly taught languages (Technical Report # 25; pp. 13-54). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’i Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.

Gibbs, G., & Simpson, C. (2004) Conditions under which assessment supports students' learning. Learning and Teaching in Higher Educa- tion. 1 (1), 3-31.

Hall, D., & Beggs, E. (1998). Defining learner autonomy. In W. A. Renandya & G. M. Jacobs (Eds), Learners and language learning,(pp. 26–39). Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Language Centre.

Hansson, H., & Wenno, E. (2005). Closing the distance: compensato- ry strategies in distance language education. In B. Holmberg, M. Shelley, & C. White (Eds.), Distance education and languages (pp. 1– 19). Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.

Hara, N., & Kling, R. (1999). Students' frustrations with a web-based distance education course. First Monday, 4 (12), http://www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issue4_12/hara/index.html

Independence, Interaction, Independence and Interrelation 49

Holec, H. (1981). Autonomy in foreign language learning (first published 1979, Strasbourg: Council of Europe). Oxford: Pergamon.

Holmberg, B. (1986). Growth and structure of distance education. London: Croom Helm.

Hurd, S. (1998) Too carefully led or too carelessly left alone? Language Learning Journal, 17, 70–4.

Kelly, G. A. (1955). The psychology of personal constructs. New York: Nor- ton.

Knowles, M. S. (1980). The modern practice of adult education (revised and updated). Chicago: Association Press (originally published in 1970).

Kohonen, V. (1992) Experiential language learning: Second language learning as cooperative learner education. In D. Nunan (ed.) Col- laborative Language Learning and Teaching (pp. 14–39). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kostina, M. (2011). Exploration of student perceptions of autonomy, student-instructor dialogue and satisfaction in a web-based dis- tance learning classroom. (Doctorate dissertation). The Universi- ty of Iowa, USA.

Kötter, M. (2001). Developing distance learners’ interactive compe- tence – Can synchronous audio do the trick? International Journal of Educational Telecommunications,7 (4), 327–353.

La Ganza, W. (2001). Out of sight – not out of mind: Learner auton- omy and interrelating online. Information Technology, Education and Society 2(2), 27–46.

La Ganza, W. (2004). Learner Autonomy in the Language Classroom. (Doctorate dissertation), Macquarie University, Australia.

50 Kostina

La Ganza, W. (2008). Learner autonomy-teacher autonomy: Interre- lating and the will to empower. In T. Lamb & H. Reinders (Eds.), Learner and teacher autonomy: Concepts, realities, and responses (pp. 63- 79). Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Little, D. (1991) Learner Autonomy: Definitions, Issues and Problems. Dub- lin: Authentic Language Learning Resources Limited.

Little, D. (2001) How independent can independent language learn- ing really be? In J. Coleman, D. Ferney, D. Head and R. Rix (eds), Language-learning Futures: Issues and Strategies for Modern Languages Provision in Higher Education (pp. 30–43). London: Centre for In- formation on Language Teaching and Research (CILT).

Littlejohn, A. (1985). Learner choice in language study. ELT Journal, 39, (4), 253-61.

Murphy, L. (2005). Critical reflection and autonomy: A study of dis- tance learners of French, German and Spanish. In B. Holmberg, M. Shelley, & C. White (Eds.), Distance education and languages: Evo- lution and change (pp. 20–39). Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.

Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (2005). How college affects students: A third decade of research, Volume 2. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Rogers, D., & A. Wolff (2000). El espanol…ia distancia!: Developing a technology-based distance education intermediate Spanish course. Journal of General Education 49(1), 44–52.

Ros i Solé, C., & Hopkins, J. (2007). Contrasting Two Distance Lan- guage Learning Contexts. Distance Education 28 (3), 351-370.

Sheerin, S. (1991). State of the art: self-access. Language Teaching, 24 (3), 153-157.

Smith, R. C. (2001). Group work for autonomy in Asia. The AILA Review, 15, 70–81. Independence, Interaction, Independence and Interrelation 51

Van Lier, L. (1996). Interaction in the Language Curriculum: Awareness, Autonomy, and Authenticity. London: Longman.

Vygotsky, L. (1978) Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychologi- cal Processes. Boston: Harvard University Press

Wenden, A. (1998). Metacognitive knowledge and language learning. Applied Linguistics 19.4, 515–537.

White, C. (1995) Autonomy and strategy use in distance foreign lan- guage learning. System, 23 (2), 207–21.

White, C. (2003). Language learning in distance education. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Second Language Writing System Word Recognition (with a focus on Lao)

Christine Elliott University of Wisconsin-Madison

Abstract Learning a second language (L2) with a script different from the learner’s first language (L1) presents unique challenges for both stu- dent and teacher. This paper looks at current theory and research examining issues of second language writing system (L2WS) acquisi- tion, particularly issues pertaining to decoding and word recognition1 by adult learners. I argue that the importance of word recognition and decoding in fluent L1 and L2 reading has been overshadowed for several decades by a focus on research looking at top-down reading processes. Although top-down reading processes and strategies are clearly components of successful L2 reading, I argue that more atten- tion needs to be given to bottom-up processing skills, particularly for beginning learners of an L2 that uses a script that is different from their L1. I use the example of learning Lao as a second language writing system where possible and suggest preliminary pedagogical implications.

Introduction Second language writing systems have increasingly become the focus of a growing body of research drawing on the fields of psy- chology, education, linguistics, and second language acquisition, among others. The term writing system is used to refer to the ways in which written symbols represent language in a systematic way (Cook and Bassetti, 2005). Further, a writing system can be discussed in terms of both its script and its orthography. Cook and Bassetti de- fine script as the physical implementation of a writing system (i.e. the written symbols) and orthography as “the rules for using a script in a

1 Following Koda (2005), I define word recognition as “the process of extract- ing lexical information from graphic displays of words,” and decoding as the specific process of extracting phonological information.

54 Elliot

particular language” (p. 4). English and Spanish orthography, for ex- ample, are both instantiated through the same script (with certain mi- nimal variation), the Roman alphabet. On the other hand, modern Lao and Thai orthographies are distinctly different and use different though related scripts, even though they are closely related members of the same language family. Both aspects of writing systems have implications for second language learning. Students must learn the actual “graphic form of the units of writing” (script) (Coulmas, 2003 cited in Cook and Bas- setti, 2005, p. 3) as well as orthographic elements of reading such as grapheme-phoneme correspondences, direction, punctuation, etc. This paper looks particularly at decoding and word recognition issues related to learning L2 scripts and symbol-sound correspondences, with the goal of exploring how L1 and L2 writing system differences affect learning to read a second language. Further, where possible discussion is included focusing particularly on issues related to learn- ing the Lao writing system as an L2WS.

Introduction to Lao Lao is a member of the Tai-Kadai language family which in- cludes the national languages of both the Lao People’s Democratic Republic2 (Lao) and Thailand (Thai) and a number of varieties of both languages. Tai speakers, in fact, are found in all countries com- prising modern-day mainland Southeast Asia, though centered in the region comprising Thailand and Laos. Although Tai-Kadai languages predominate in both these countries, Laos and Thailand contain par- ticular language diversity, especially for their size and population. The population of Laos is currently estimated at 6.8 million (The World Factbook, 2009), however, estimates put the number of speakers of Lao as a first language at around only 50% of the popula- tion (Enfield, 2006). The Lao constitution officially establishes the Lao language and the Lao script as the official language and writing system of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic. However, Lao as a national lan- guage has yet to be codified. There are, in fact, several distinct varie-

2 Throughout the remainder of this paper, I will sometimes refer to the Lao People’s Democratic Republic simply as “Laos.” Second Language Writing 55

ties of Lao spoken throughout the country (commonly classified as Northern, Central, and Southern) which differ in pronunciation, vo- cabulary, and to some degree grammar. The Vientiane dialect (Cen- tral region) is perhaps closest to a “standard” version of spoken Lao, yet what constitutes “Vientiane Lao” is not clearly defined and is, as described by Enfield (2007), a “shifting” target due to a variety of social and political factors (p. 20). Lao is also spoken by at least 12 to 15 million people in Northeast Thailand (Brown, 2006, p. 697) as well as in the Lao diaspora, predominantly in France, the United States, and Australia. As much as 10% of the population of Laos fled following the foundation of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic in 1975 (Evans, 2002). As closely related members of the Tai-Kadai language family, Lao and Thai have similar lexicons and grammatical structure. As de- scribed by Enfield (1999), “Lao and Thai share extensive vocabu- lary…have very similar phonological and grammatical systems…[and] for all intents and purposes (i.e. in descriptive/structural linguistic terms) are dialects of a single ‘language’” (p. 259). However, because of what Enfield describes as “one-directional flow of cultural expo- sure” (Enfield, 2007, p. 17) (e.g. some Lao regularly watch Thai TV, listen to Thai music, etc.) Central Thai3 is well understood by many Lao, but Lao is not necessarily understood easily by speakers of Thai as a first language. Finally, Lao and Thai are both tonal languages utilizing contour tone phonemically, Standard Thai described as hav- ing five tones, and Lao most often described as having six tones (Yates and Sayasithsena, 1970; Kerr, 1972)4 5.

Writing Systems The world’s known writing systems can be classified into two main types: sound-based and meaning based. In sound-based sys- tems such as alphabets, graphemes, the minimal units represented in a

3 Central Thai is considered the standard variety of Thai and is currently much more codified than Lao. 4 See Enfield (2007) and Osatanada (1997) for discussion of tone in Vientiane Lao described as having five tones 5 Additional works describing Lao as having six tones: Roffe (1946) (Luang Prabang Lao); Compton (1979) (Southern Lao); Hoonchamlong (1984) (Pakse Lao).

56 Elliot

writing system, correspond to sounds, whereas in meaning-based sys- tems, graphemes correspond with meaning. In fact the same mor- pheme (e.g. a Chinese character) can occur in different languages (e.g. Mandarin, Cantonese, Japanese kanji) with the same meaning but dif- ferent pronunciations. The Chinese writing system is the most well- known example of a meaning-based “morphemic” script (sometimes referred to as a logographic or ideographic script). Much current L2WS research examines L2 learners whose L1 is meaning-based and whose L2 is sound-based or vice-versa. (Koda, 1990, 2005; Chika- matsu, 1996, 2006) According to Cook and Bassetti (2005) there are three main types of sound-based writing systems: alphabetic, consonantal, and syllabic. In syllabic writing systems such as Japanese kana, each gra- pheme corresponds to a syllable of the spoken language. Cook and Bassetti describe Arabic and Hebrew scripts as examples of conso- nantal writing systems where vowels are not usually represented. And finally, an alphabetic writing system such as is used for English represents all the phonemes of the spoken language. Cook and Bas- setti, however, do not discuss in any detail Indic derived scripts (such as Lao) which are most often described as containing properties of both a syllabary and an alphabet – therefore referred to as either an alphasyllabary or alternately an abugida6.

Southeast Asian language families and Indic Writing Systems Although the Southeast Asian languages of Lao, Thai, Khmer, and Burmese belong to three different language families (Tai- Kadai, Mon-Khmer, and Tibeto-Burman respectively) they share si- milarities among their scripts which were probably all derived over time from the Indic Devanagari script (originally used to write San- skrit) (Hartmann, 1986). According to Saloman (1996a, 1996b) the national writing systems of modern Burma, Thailand, Laos, and Cambodia (as well as of other languages found in mainland Southeast

6 Although there is not consensus in the literature as to the classification of lan- guages as abugidas versus alphasyllabaries, many of the world’s languages, es- pecially those originating in South Asia fall into this additional category (See Swank 2008 for a discussion of the terms abugida and alphasyllabary and the potential relationship between how classification systems are defined and prac- tical implications such as issues of pedagogy). Second Language Writing 57

Asia such as Cham, Shan, and Tham) are, more specifically, deriva- tives of Brahmi, a writing system originating in India in approximate- ly the mid-3rd century B.C.E. Brahmi was also the source script for many of the written languages of India (e.g. Punjabi, Devanagari, Tamil, Sinhala) and continued to evolve in India after its spread to Southeast Asia. Although there is general consensus that the Lao script and orthography developed from Indic derived writing sys- tems, the precise historical development of written Lao is not yet clear. As mentioned above, there is disagreement in the literature about whether writing systems related to the Indic Devanagari script (such as Lao) are better characterized as alphabetic or syllabic. Cook and Bassetti (2005), for example, classify Thai as a syllabic writing system whereas Hartmann (1986) and Red (1999) speak of Thai and Hindi as alphabets. Describing Khmer, Zehler and Sapru (2008) state that, “Although Khmer is an alphabetic language there are cha- racteristics of the writing system that depart from a strict alphabetic system and that have led some to characterize it as a syllabic system” (p. 188). This could equally apply to Lao and Thai (among others). Similarly, Vaid and Gupta (2002) categorize the script used to write Hindi as semi-alphabetic having properties of both syllabic and al- phabetic writing systems. As explained in Nakanishi (1980), many Southeast Asian scripts are similar to a number of scripts used to write Indian lan- guages in that consonants contain an “inherent” vowel-sound and use various diacritics to change the inherent vowel to other vowel sounds (p. 70). In fact, a key similarity of scripts derived from Brah- mi is that they can be categorized as “diacritically modified consonant syllabic scripts,” known as alphasyllabaries or abugidas. (See Bright, 2000 for discussion of these terms and their use). An abugida or al- phasyllabary is therefore similar to an alphabet, but consonants are considered to have an inherent vowel which is then modified by dia- critics that can occur as “satellites” before, after, above, and/or be- low the consonant. Regardless of the classification system one finds most precise, a key feature of Lao (similar to Hindi and other scripts in the Indic Devanagari family) is this feature that in a given syllable the vowel can occur before, after, above, or below the written consonant. For

58 Elliot

example, in order to write the Lao word /sau/ meaning ‘cease’ or ‘stop’, one combines the consonant ຊ /s/ with the vowel ເ ົາ /au/ to form the word ເຊົາ /sau/. However, a vowel/vowel diacritics can- not “stand alone” in Lao and are written in combination with the “null consonant” or placeholder ອ. Therefore the vowel sound /au/ must be written (ເອົາ). Other Lao vowels may be written above (ອີ) /i:/, below (ອູ) /u:/, after (ອະ) /aʔ/, before (ແອ) /ɛ:/ or a combina- tion of these slots as in the preceding example ເຊົາ /sau/. Research examining the issue of “vowel misalignment” (vowels which come after a consonant in speech but before a consonant in writing) in lan- guages such as Hindi (Vaid and Gupta, 2002) and Thai (Winskel, 2009) has found that such a mismatch does affect the L1 reading process. However, this research is preliminary and possible implica- tions for L2 readers have yet to be examined. Other features of Brahmi derived scripts that have carried over into Southeast Asian writing systems such as Lao are the tradi- tions of writing from left to right, absence of divisions between words, and minimal punctuation. Although there is little research to date, all these issues play a key role in the decoding of written text for both L1 and L2 readers. (See, for example, Randall, M. & Meara, P. 1988, looking at directionality related to Arabic, and Bassetti, 2009, examining word spacing in Chinese).

Overview of Lao and Thai writing systems As discussed above, Lao and Thai are closely related mem- bers of the same language family (See Diller, 1996 for a detailed de- scription of Lao and Thai orthographies). As pointed out by Diller (1996), the two scripts “are directly convertible” (p. 457) and share many of the same writing conventions. However, even with their many similarities Thai and Lao exhibit various differences, including between their writing systems. Diller (1996) describes written Thai as being composed of 44 consonant symbols and 19 simple vowel sym- bols, Lao having only 27 consonant symbols and 18 simple vowel Second Language Writing 59

symbols.7 Although Thai has 44 consonant symbols it only has 21 consonant phonemes, and similarly Lao has only 20 consonant pho- nemes. Both languages contain more consonant symbols than con- sonant phonemes because of the way both languages use three “classes” of consonants (including a set of “duplicates”) as part of the scheme for encoding tone within the writing system. Thai also has sets of consonants which represent different consonants in San- skrit and Pali but which are pronounced the same in modern Thai. While Thai has this “full complement of Indic characters” (Enfield, 2007, p. 18) that enables both Pali and Sanskrit to be transcribed, Lao does not, and as stressed by Enfield, never did. (Traditionally, Tham script was used in Lao temples to transcribe Pali, and Lao script was not used for this purpose). According to Ivarsson (1999), “Over a long period the Siamese [Thai] alphabet and orthography had gradually been modified, and at the end of the nineteenth century…appeared as quite a fixed system” (p. 70). Lao spelling, however, was much less standardized, and throughout the early and mid 20th century several competing ortho- graphies were proposed and employed at various times, in various contexts, and with different goals (See Enfield, 1999 and Ivarsson, 1999) including a proposal by the Lao Buddhist Institute to add let- ters to the Lao script in order to be able to transcribe Pali.

Orthographic Depth As pointed out by Koda (2005) writing systems vary on two dimensions: orthographic type, the minimal language unit represented in a script, (discussed above) and orthographic depth. Orthographic depth refers to “the degree of regularity in symbol-sound correspon- dences” (p. 36) between the script and the spoken language. Ortho- graphies are considered “shallow” (Serbo-Croatian being an oft cited example) if these correspondences are highly regular or “deep” if the correspondences are not one-to-one. (English, for example, is a rela- tively deep orthography compared to Serbo-Croatian.)

7 Consonant and especially vowel inventories for Lao and Thai often vary in the literature depending on the criteria that are used to categorize consonants and vowels as well as historical factors related to language change over time.

60 Elliot

Describing orthographic depth for Lao, however, appears less straight forward. On one hand, using this classification system, Lao might be considered a relatively more shallow orthography because there is a fairly regular correspondence between graphemes and pho- nemes in post-1975 written Lao. This is due in part to standardiza- tion and regularization of spelling conventions by the communist po- litical movement (Pathet Lao) in support of universal literacy efforts beginning in the 1950s through the establishment of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic in 1975. From this time forward, words were to be spelled strictly according to their pronunciation, the karan ໌ was no longer necessary (indicating silent letters), and the letter ‘r’ was removed from the alphabet because spoken Lao does not traditional- ly make a distinction between /l/ and /r/ in speech (Enfield, 2007). However, on the other hand, the Lao writing system displays a number of features which appear to create less phonological trans- parency (i.e. greater depth), but which are rarely, if ever, discussed in the L2WS literature. For example, 1) Lao encodes contour tone within its writing system and 2) several vowels are written by combin- ing elements of other vowel symbols (for example the /F:/ sound ເອີ, is composed of the symbols used to write /e:/ ເອ and /i:/ ອີ. Perfetti and Dunlap (2008) refer to Lao as an “opaque/deep” lan- guage (p. 18), however, they do not explain why.8 It could be that they are taking into consideration the above features, and/or refer- ring to Lao as written primarily before the 1975 orthographic reforms and to the present day in the Lao diaspora. As a point of comparison, Thai has maintained its relatively deeper orthography and does not have as strict a one-to-one corres- pondence between symbols and sounds as many spelling conventions have been maintained from their Sanskrit and Pali origins even though they are not currently a reflection of modern standard Thai pronunciation. Therefore, Lao and Thai orthographies are good ex- amples of very similar spoken languages with writing systems of vary- ing orthographic depth.

8 See Perfetti and Dunlap (2008) for a helpful discussion of L1 and L2 writing systems and implications for learning to read. Second Language Writing 61

The Orthographic Depth Hypothesis It is hypothesized that readers rely relatively more heavily on visual processing cues than phonological processing cues when de- coding relatively “deeper” orthographies. Katz and Frost (1992) proposed the orthographic depth hypothesis (ODH) which states that: Shallow orthographies are most easily able to support a word recognition process that involves the language’s phonology. In contrast, deep orthographies encourage a reader to process printed words by referring to their mor- phology via the printed word’s visual orthographic struc- ture. (p. 71)

Katz and Frost caution, however, that the ODH does not specify particular levels of depth that would predict the predomin- ance of either type of decoding process. They do propose, however, that dominance of assembled (words are “sounded out”) or ad- dressed (the phonology of a whole word is stored in memory and retrieved as a unit) phonological processing may depend on factors such as word frequency or memory-related “cost factors” which may in turn vary between skilled and unskilled readers or be dependent upon linguistic knowledge. Because Lao is written much as it is pronounced, it should be relatively easier for both L1 and L2 learners to master Lao than Thai which is written etymologically, utilizes multiple written versions of the same spoken consonant sound, and has inherent vowels in some environments. However, as mentioned above, both writing systems are equally complex in the way that they encode tone, utilize “satel- lite” vowels and display “vowel misalignment.” I propose that these features would make both languages more difficult to decode com- pared to languages that do not have these features and that these cha- racteristics of the writing systems could present particular challenges for language learners whose L1(s) do not contain these features.9

9 “Satellite” vowels and vowel misalignment are perhaps best considered sepa- rately from the issue of “orthographic depth;” however, these features as well as absence of spacing between words are all crucial factors affecting how both L1 and L2 readers decode text and potential challenges for L2 readers whose L1 does not contain these features (such as L2 Lao learners whose L1 is English).

62 Elliot

An alternate proposal to the Orthographic Depth Hypothesis is the Universal Phonological Principle (UPP) that predicts that as- sembled phonological coding is always primary even in deep ortho- graphies such as Chinese. (See Perfetti and Dunlap, 2008, for a more detailed discussion of the Universal Phonological Principle and its relevance in learning to read an L2WS.)

Models of L1 Reading: The Dual Route Model and a Parallel- Distributed Processing (PDP) Model A dual route model of L1 reading was first introduced in the 1970s to capture the two main coding processes that appeared to be used by readers to move from printed symbols to reading aloud: a lex- ical route and a phonological route. This model proposed that these routes are functionally independent, but operate in parallel. Dual processing models were formulated to account for the fact that read- ers can pronounce words that do not follow regular rules (such as yacht, pint, and colonel in English) but are also able to systematically decode (“sound out”) non-words that could not have previously been stored as a unit in the mental lexicon. The main alternative to the dual route model is Seidenberg and McClelland’s (1989) parallel-distributed processing (PDP) model (cited in Koda, 1996). This connectionist model defines orthographic knowledge as “an elaborate matrix of correlations among letters, pho- nemes, syllables, and morphemes,” (p. 452) where frequency plays a determinant role in establishing the strength of connections. Moreo- ver, language acquisition in this model is not a process of learn- ing/internalizing grapheme-phoneme correspondence (GPC) rules, but rather “probabilities of form-function co-occurrences.”10

L1 Reading Research – Word Recognition and Decoding The importance of the role of word recognition and decoding in fluent L1 reading was overshadowed for several decades by a focus on research looking at top-down reading processes. While in the mid

10 See Koda’s, 2008, Transfer Facilitation Model for additional discussion of an application of a form-function approach to reading skill transfer from L1 to L2. Second Language Writing 63 to late 1960s reading received little attention within the audio-lingual approach, by the early 1970s the importance of developing advanced reading and writing skills was recognized but “without a strong theo- retical framework to guide practice” (Grabe, 1991, p. 376). However, by the mid to late 1970s Goodman (1967, 1985) and Smith’s (1971, 1982) “psycholinguistic model of reading” was gaining influence among researchers (cited in Grabe, 1991). Goodman proposed that reading was not a process of decoding letters and words but a process whereby the reader made and confirmed predictions based on background knowledge and “sampling” the text. Smith felt that the reader contributed much more to the reading process than did the letters and words on the page. This emphasis on top-down processing marginalized the importance of bottom-up decoding skills in becoming a proficient reader (Grabe, 1991; Koda, 2005). However, by the mid-1980s empirical evidence in L1 reading research began identifying the central role of word recognition in successful reading, both for beginning and advanced readers. Since then a growing number of studies have shown the importance of au- tomatic, lower-level processing. Chikamatsu (2006), for example, cites studies indicating a direct correlation between reading ability and word recognition skills “…from the early stages of reading in child- ren to advanced levels of reading in adults” (p. 67). In addition, re- search looking at eye movement patterns has shown that fluent read- ers focus on a very high percentage of the words on the page and do not normally guess or sample texts as proposed by Goodman (p. 385) as the primary means of getting meaning from a text. Finally, it is typically less successful readers with weak word recognition skills that rely primarily on context to determine meaning. Koda (2005), for example, reviews studies showing that the role context plays in word recognition decreases as reading proficiency increases.

L2 Reading Research – Word Recognition and Decoding Koda (1996) argues that L2 word recognition and decoding deserve further attention not only because relevant research is lack- ing, but also because there is a growing body of research that suggests that “different writing systems do require qualitatively different processing procedures” (p. 351). Although Koda (2005) acknowl- edges that L1 word recognition research was a logical starting point

64 Elliot

for L2 research, she cautions that “borrowed research paradigms” do not seem able to fully capture “the unique attributes of L2 reading” (p. 4). Cross-linguistic transfer of language awareness and processing strategies is hypothesized to play an important role in L2 word recognition. Further, cross-linguistic differences between the L1 and L2 such as type and depth are proposed to be a source of dif- ficulty for L2 readers who use their L1 knowledge and/or experience when trying to decode their L2. Learners may also transfer L1 word recognition strategies to their L2 reading. Although cross-linguistic transfer has been shown to be a key factor in L2 decoding, transfer should not be viewed as the sole influence on L2 reading. Both L1 and L2 orthographic knowledge and processing “interactively shape” L2 processing. Cook and Bassetti (2005) likewise agree that L2WS processing is a dynamic, interactive process that involves numerous factors in addition to crosslinguistic influence. Moreover, they argue that learning an L2WS necessary impacts L1WS processing as well.

The Linguistic Threshold Hypothesis and the Central Processing Hypothesis Another debate that has arisen in L2 reading research is wheth- er “learning to read an L2 is more a language problem or a reading problem.” Although this paper will not address that question in detail, it should be apparent that this issue is particularly relevant when consi- dering pedagogical implications for adult L2 reading instruction. The Linguistic Threshold Hypothesis (LTH) posits that L2 reading is pre- dominantly a language proficiency problem, whereas the Linguistic In- terdependence Hypothesis (LIH) proposes that “reading performance in a second language is largely shared with reading ability in a first lan- guage” (Bernhardt and Kamil, 1995, p. 17). However, as Bernhardt and Kamil point out, the LIH has rarely been investigated with adult learners and further, there are few studies of second language reading “that enable an examination in support for either of the hypotheses” (p. 19).

Second Language Writing 65

Memory and Automatization An additional issue is the role of memory and automatization in developing L1 and L2 reading skills. Studies in cognitive psycholo- gy, for example, have shown that the human mind has limited capaci- ty for higher mental activity. As discussed in Fukkink et al. (2005) a key problem for both L1 and L2 readers is that they “must allocate cognitive resources” to multiple activities simultaneously. Therefore, in order for reading to take place successfully, certain tasks must be executed “with low resource cost” (p. 55). Koda (2005) reviews studies showing that with increased processing experience speed not only increases but error rate de- creases. Further, according to Ellis (2002, cited in Koda 2005) per- formance efficiency “is directly related to input frequency and prac- tice.” Although Fukkink et al. (2005) did not find significant improvement in reading comprehension as a result of word recogni- tion training, learners in their study were “thoroughly familiar with the alphabetic writing system and fairly familiar with the letter- phoneme correspondences in English” (p. 71). In other words they had already reached a certain “threshold” in decoding and word rec- ognition ability. I propose that it is learners that have not reached this “thre- shold level” of familiarity with an L2WS who could particularly bene- fit from specific practice to develop word recognition and decoding skills, especially learners of an L2WS that is orthographically distinct from their L1WS. Finally as Grabe (1991) concludes, “… the issue of developing automaticity in word recognition is in need of further research; it is also typically neglected in many current textbook ratio- nales.”

Pedagogical Implications Based on the literature reviewed above as well as personal ex- perience as a language learner of alphabetic, logographic, and syllab- ic/semi-syllabic writing systems, I offer the following preliminary pe- dagogical implications. If as Koda (1996) suggests, efficient word recognition leads to successful comprehension performance, it seems imperative to directly address word recognition/decoding skills when learning or teaching a L2WS particularly (though not exclusively) at beginning

66 Elliot

levels. While writing systems that share scripts may pose fewer chal- lenges to L2 language learners, scripts that encode different minimal linguistic units and/or exhibit greater orthographic depth may require specific training in decoding in order for successful word recognition to occur as well as to automatize these processes. Inefficient decoding can quickly lead to frustration and dimi- nishing motivation, in turn resulting in less reading practice/time on task. As cited above, Koda (2005) reviews studies showing that with increased processing experience, speed not only increases but error rate decreases. And according to Ellis (2002), “performance efficien- cy is directly tied to input frequency and practice” (cited in Koda, 2005, p. 32). Top-down strategies and approaches should not be aban- doned, but, especially at beginning stages, learners do need specific decoding practice in order to increase automaticity leading to more fluent reading. Learners must be able to effortlessly map the spoken language to its graphic representation in order to then deal with the many “higher order” tasks associated with reading comprehension. Effective use of students’ background knowledge as well as contextu- alized activities (at all levels) should not be abandoned. But clearly, beginning L2 readers are struggling to learn to read a language. In addition, reading activities that increase learner motivation to read could lead to more reading practice and more efficient processing. One consideration should be reading texts and materials of an appropriate level for learners. Although some beginning L2 readers may find authentic texts motivational, others may quickly be overwhelmed if the level of the reading material is beyond their abili- ty. Ideally, interesting materials for extensive reading should be made available and extensive reading encouraged. However, at a very be- ginning level it may also be necessary to develop simplified texts for decoding practice. Hulstijn (2001) suggests, for example, having stu- dents read ‘new’ texts containing ‘old’ elements as a way to boost student motivation by (hopefully) allowing them to understand the entire text virtually effortlessly upon first reading. As an L2 learner this sounds very appealing, especially as dictionary use is particularly challenging and time consuming for many Asian languages, including Lao. Second Language Writing 67

Further, as word recognition is mapping spoken language to print, it seems imperative to instruct students so that they have a good command of the sound system, sound-symbol correspon- dences, and basic vocabulary before undertaking reading. Studies show that phonemic awareness is affected by instruction and “is higher when symbol-sound correspondences are explicitly taught” (Bassetti and Cook, 2005, p. 23). Studies of L1 and L2 readers also demonstrate the importance of learners’ metalinguistic awareness and reading development. This includes phonological awareness, “the ability to segment spoken words into their phonological constitu- ents,” grapho-phonological awareness, “the way phonological infor- mation is graphically represented in the writing system,” and grapho- morphological awareness,” the ability to identify, analyze, and mani- pulate morphological information in print” (Koda, 2008, pp. 225- 225). The relative importance of these types of awareness will nec- essarily depend on the characteristics of the language being learned. The encoding of tone through the writing system in Lao adds anoth- er layer of complexity which needs explicit instruction and practice in order to internalize these patterns. Students should be encouraged to create flashcards and ideally a computer program could help students learn symbol-sound correspondences and develop decoding/word recognition skills, encouraging both greater practice and increased speed through guided practice. Learners also need to be provided with strategies for improving their decoding skills both outside and inside of class. Many Southeast Asian languages associate each consonant to a specific word as a learning tool to aid L1 learners. Posters and charts of the alphabet are available showing the consonants along with this picture. In addition to providing a mnemonic device for remembering the letters, it also provides a meaningful way to build familiarity with a core of common words with concrete references. One issue that needs to be addressed, however, is the intersection of tone representation and decoding processes. Moreover, the tradi- tional method of choral repetition used for L1 Lao learners does not seem appropriate for beginning level Lao L2 learners as it assumes native-like/internalized knowledge of the tonal system. Additional research is needed.

68 Elliot

Because of the small number of L2 learners of Southeast Asian languages, heritage and non-heritage learners are often com- bined into the same classes. Clearly, heritage learners and zero profi- ciency language learners are in two very different places when they begin to read. Both need to learn the new script but heritage learners already have the spoken language to which they are mapping the script. It would be interesting to look more closely at decoding processes and progress among heritage and non-heritage learners. However, as discussed above, linguistic knowledge and language processing skills are both necessary for successful L2 reading, but one does not imply the other. Grabe (2004) lists “Ensure word recognition fluency” as the first of ten implications for academic reading instruction and curricu- la design based on current (though limited) research. His proposals for the best ways to teach word recognition fluency include “through timed word recognition practice” and “extended reading practice” as well as “greater phonological awareness,” “morphological awareness training,” and “assisted reading activities.” Grabe concludes by call- ing for specific research addressing the effectiveness of specific in- structional practices for greater fluency in word recognition. A Guide to the Study of Southeast Asian Languages published by the Council of Teachers of Southeast Asian Languages (COTSEAL) (Carpenter, Compton, Riddle, and Wheatley, 2000) gives helpful ad- vice directed specifically at learners of Southeast Asian languages. The authors highlight the particular challenges of learning to read and write these languages and stress the importance of repetition, memo- rization, motivation and practice, “putting in the time,” especially at the beginning levels. Although current literature may frame some of these practices as not in line with a “communicative approach” or as too “audio-lingual” in nature, learning to read and write in a language that employs an L2 script that is different from the L1 script involves particular challenges as discussed in this paper. As pointed out by Carpenter et al. (2000), the Foreign Service Institute estimates that it will take at least 1320 hours for an L1 English speaker to acquire pro- fessional proficiency in Thai, Lao, Khmer, and Burmese compared with 720 for French, German, and Spanish. Differences in writing systems certainly play a key role. However, even Carpenter et al.’s helpful guide provides little specific discussion or suggestions for the Second Language Writing 69 beginning stages of learning to decode (as opposed to read or write) a language such as Lao efficiently and effectively. Finally, some insights into the teaching of Southeast Asian writing systems are offered through a small but growing number of articles looking at the teaching and learning of Hindi as a second lan- guage. Van Olphen (1995) discusses the use of video for teaching the Devanagari script. Although he says that the results are the same as those “using pencil and paper,” he reports that the students enjoy the videos which seem to increase motivation. Red (1995) suggests that authentic Hindi texts may not be appropriate for beginning learners particularly because of problems relating to structure, cultural content, and rhetorical form. Interes- tingly, Red reports using the Roman alphabet (transliteration) in the early stages of teaching the Hindi script. The issue of when and whether to use a Romanized version of a Southeast Asian script at all in the teaching/learning process is an on-going debate among in- structors of Southeast Asian languages, though no known articles discuss this important (and controversial) topic. This issue deserves further study. Specific activities described by Red include having the students make flash cards, search for letters they have learned in newspaper articles, practice symbol-sound correspondences by seeing the grapheme written and hearing the phoneme pronounced simulta- neously, reading aloud, and reading of both simplified and authentic texts. And as Red points out, little is known about how L1 learners process Hindi, let alone L2 learners. This is also true for Lao and other Southeast Asian languages. In conclusion, this paper has argued that more attention needs to be given to bottom-up processing skills particularly for be- ginning adult readers of languages with a L2WS different from that of their L1WS. Pedagogical implications were offered as a preliminary attempt to apply L2WS word recognition and decoding theory and research to the challenge of L2 reading instruction. In particular, I proposed that learners need specific training in decoding L2WSs such as Lao in order for successful word recognition to occur as well as to automatize these processes. Issues such as orthographic type and depth, as well as other key concerns such as spacing and directionality (e.g. “satellite” vowels and vowel “misalignment”) create unique chal- lenges for learners and teachers of Indic-derived writing systems, and

70 Elliot

instruction needs to specifically assist students in developing decod- ing skills in the L2WS, particularly before learners have attained a cer- tain “threshold” level in their decoding ability. Possible activities to support this development include 1) use of flashcards, computer pro- grams, and other teaching aids to reinforce phoneme-grapheme cor- respondences and 2) repeated readings of level appropri- ate/simplified texts in order to promote “effortless” reading. Learners of an L2WS different from their L1WS need to “put in the time” in order to experience results, and drills and other repetitive activities will likely be needed in order to build L2WS decoding and word recognition skills. Additional research focusing on Lao and other South and Southeast Asian languages utilizing Indic derived scripts is needed, including research looking at both L1 and L2 adult readers. In partic- ular, research is needed examining how tone encoded within the writ- ing system, vowel misalignment/satellite vowels, and lack of word spacing affect L2WS decoding and word recognition. Finally, more detailed recommendations for specific L2 teaching techniques and activities need to be described and their use empirically examined. Hopefully increased interest in less-commonly taught languages in the United States will provide an impetus for a needed increase in research in the areas of both second language writing systems and Lao as a second language.

Acknowledgements Special thanks to Dr. Paul Toth and Dr. Carol Compton for their comments on drafts of this paper. Any errors are solely my own.

References Bassetti, B. (2009). Effects of adding interword spacing on Chinese reading: A comparison of Chinese native readers and English readers of Chinese as a second language. Applied Psycholinguistics, 30(4), 757-775. Bernhardt, E. B., & Kamil, M. L. (1995). Interpreting relationships be- tween L1 and L2 reading: Consolidating the linguistic threshold and the linguistic interdependence hypotheses. Applied Linguistics, 16(1), 15-34. Second Language Writing 71

Bright, W. (2000). A matter of typology: Alphasyllabaries and abugi- das. Studies in the Linguistic Sciences, 30(1), 63-71. Brown, K. (2006). Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, Volume 6. (2nd ed.). Oxford: Elsevier. Carpenter, K., Compton, C., Riddle, E., & Wheatley, J. (2000). A guide to the study of Southeast Asian languages. Journal of Southeast Asian Language Teaching, Vol. 9. Chikamatsu, N. (1996). The effects of L1 orthography on L2 word recognition: A study of American and Chinese learners of Japa- nese. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18(4), 403-432. Chikamatsu, N. (2006). Developmental word recognition: A study of L1 English readers of L2 Japanese. The Modern Language Journal, 90(1), 67-85. Compton, C. J. (1979). Courting Poetry in Laos: A Textual and Linguistic Analysis. Monograph No. 18. DeKalb, IL: Center for Southeast Asian Studies, Northern Illinois University. Cook, V., & Bassetti, B. (2005). An introduction to researching second language writing systems. In V. Cook & B. Bassetti. (Eds.), Second language writing systems (pp.1–67). Clevendon: Multilingual Matters, Ltd. Diller, A. (1996). Thai and Lao writing. In P. T. Daniels, & W. Bright (Eds.), The world's writing systems (pp. 457-466). New York: Oxford University Press. Enfield, N. J. (1999). Lao as a national language. In G. Evans (Ed.), Laos: Culture and society (pp. 258-290). Chiang Mai: Silkworm Books. Enfield, N. J. (2006). Languages as historical documents: The endan- gered archive in Laos. South East Asia Research, 14(3), 471-488. Enfield, N. J. (2007). A grammar of Lao. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Evans, G. (2002). A short history of Laos: The land between. NSW, Aus- tralia: Allen and Unwin. Fukkink, R. G., Hulstijn, J., & Simis, A. (2005). Does training in second- language word recognition skills affect reading comprehension? An experimental study. The Modern Language Journal, 89(1), 54-75. Grabe, W. (1991). Current developments in second language reading research. TESOL Quarterly, 25(3), 375-406. Grabe, W. (2004). Research on teaching reading. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24(1), 44-69.

72 Elliot

Hartmann, J. F. (1986). The spread of south Indic scripts in Southeast Asia. Crossroads, 3(1), 6-20. Hulstijn, J. (2001). Intentional and incidental second language vocabu- lary learning: A reappraisal of elaboration, rehearsal and automatici- ty. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 258-286). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hoonchamlong, Y. (1984). Tones in Pakse Lao: A preliminary analysis. Anthropological Linguistics, 26(2), 233-239. Ivarsson, S. (1999). Towards a new Laos: Lao Nhay and the campaign for a national "re-awakening" in Laos, 1941-1945. In G. Evans (Ed.), Laos: Culture and society (pp. 61-78). Chiang Mai: Silk Worm Books. Katz, L., & Frost, R. (1992). The reading process is different for dif- ferent orthographies: The orthographic depth hypothesis. In R. Frost & L. Katz (Eds.), Orthography, phonology, morphology, and mean- ing (pp. 67-84). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers. Kerr, A. D. (1972). Lao-English dictionary, Volume I. Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press. Koda, K. (1990). The use of L1 reading strategies in L2 reading: Effects of L1 orthographic structures on L2 phonological recoding strate- gies. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12(4), 393-410. Koda, K. (1996). L2 word recognition research: A critical review. The Modern Language Journal, 80(4), 450-406. Koda, K. (2005). Insights into second language reading: A cross-linguistic ap- proach. USA: Cambridge University Press. Koda, K., & Zehler, A. M. (2008). Learning to read across languages: Cross- linguistic relationships in first- and second-language literacy development. New York: Routledge. Laos. (2009). The World Fact book [online]. Retrieved May 10, 2009, from U.S. Central Intelligence Agency: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world- factbook/geos/la.html Nakanishi, A. (1980). Writing systems of the world. Tokyo: C.E. Tuttle Co. Osatananda, V. (1997). Tone in Vientiane Lao. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Hawaii, Manoa. Perfetti, C., & Dunlap, S. (2008). General principles and writing system variations. In K. Koda, & A.M. Zehler (Eds.), Learning to read across Second Language Writing 73

languages: Cross-linguistic relationships in first- and second-language literacy de- velopment (pp. 188-200). New York: Routledge. Randall, M., & Meara, P. (1988). How Arabs read Roman letters. Reading in a Foreign Language, 4(2), 133-145. Red, D. (1995). Learning to read Hindi. In V. Gambhir (Ed.), The teach- ing and acquisition of South Asian languages (pp.97-107). USA: Univ. of Pennsylvania Press. Red, D. L. (1999). Adults learning to read in a second script: What we've learned. Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics. Roffe, G. E. (1946). The phonemic structure of Lao. Journal of the American Oriental Society, 66, 89-295. Salomon, R. (1996a). Brahmi and Kharoshthi. In P. T. Daniels, & W. Bright (Eds.), The world's writing systems (pp. 373-383). New York: Oxford University Press. Salomon, R. (1996b). South Asian writing systems. In P. T. Daniels, & W. Bright (Eds.), The world's writing systems (pp. 371-372). New York: Oxford University Press. Swank, H. (2008). It all hinges on the vowels: Reconsidering the alpha- syllabary classification. Written Language and Literacy, 11(1), 73-89. Vaid, J., & Gupta, A. (2002). Exploring word recognition in a semi- alphabetic script: The case of Devanagari. Brain and Language, 81(1- 3), 679-690. Van Olphen, H. (1995). Visual cues and Hindi language acquisition. In V. Gambhir (Ed.), The teaching and acquisition of South Asian languages (pp.90-96). USA: University of Pennsylvania Press. Yates, W., & Sayasithsena, S. (1970). Lao Basic Course, Volume I. Washington, DC: Foreign Service Institute, Department of State. Winskel, H. (2009). Reading in Thai: The case of misaligned vowels. Reading and Writing, 22(1), 1-24. Zehler, M., & Sapru, S. (2008). Learning to read in Khmer. In K. Koda, & A.M. Zehler (Eds.), Learning to read across languages: Cross-linguistic re- lationships in first- and second-language literacy development (pp. 188-200). New York: Routledge.

Revisiting songs in Language Pedagogy

Rajaa Aquil Georgia Institute of Technology

Georgia Institute of Technology School of Modern Languages 613 Cherry St. Swann Building Atlanta, GA 30332-0375 Phone Office: 404 3857252 Fax Office: 4048940955 Phone Home: 4048432050 Email: [email protected]

Abstract This paper is about the Arabic component of a Song Project grant. The project addresses the critical need for advanced/intermediate content-based materials for the Less Commonly Taught Languages (LCTL). It is a Web-based course, capitalizing on songs as the base of a content-based course. The paper reports on the linguistic, cul- tural, cognitive and historical importance of songs -- and the metho- dology with which the researcher and materials developer designed the course and set the criteria for choosing the songs. The paper con- cludes with a description of the Web-based course.

Introduction In light of the rapidly increasing need for foreign language professionals with high levels of language and cultural proficiency in LCTL languages, it is important that the curricula for these languages be developed not only around books and materials chosen for length, difficulty and themes -- but around material, texts, genre and media that reflect the five Cs of the Standards for Foreign Language Learn- ing, namely, communication, cultures, connections, comparisons, and communities. The national standards for foreign language learning in the 21st century call for "for a holistic, inter-disciplinary approach in language teaching" which merges "culture and content together in a

76 Aquil

rich learner-centered environment."(Standards for Foreign Language Learning in the 21st Century, 2006). In language and literature pedagogy, the focus is on the acqui- sition of cultural literacy via the use of different genres that are anc- hored in culture (Orellana & Reynolds, 2008; Salcedo, 2010; Swaffar, 1989). No verbal medium can be as holistic as songs and popular music in their reflection of the culture of a given speech community (cf.Conrad, 1991, for using popular music for German langage course). Songs provide students ample learning opportunities, such as negotiating meaningfully nuanced language and cultural meanings hidden in the lyrics or melody of a song (Conrad, 1991). This is be- cause songs are products and practices of a society that can shed light on the philosophical as well as political and socio-cultural norms and perspectives of that society (Kong, 1995). These practices and prod- ucts shape the worldview of a cultural group, and only through lan- guage are they fully expressed. For example Kong (1995) found that songs are used by the ruling elite in Singapore to propagate certain ideologies aimed at political socialization. A song can also be a form of resistance against state policies and some social-cultural norms. In fact, songs are instrumen- tal in the construction of social movement culture (Roscigno, Danaher, & Summers-Effler, 2002). For all these reasons, songs can be part of a genre that targets advanced cultural literacy. This paper is about " Advanced/Intermediate Language and Culture through Song: New Materials for Arabic, Chinese, Japanese and Russian," a project by the school of Modern Languages (ML) at the Georgia Institute of Technology (Georgia Tech). The project ad- dresses not only the need for authentic, engaging, flexible material, but also the need for material that can stretch learners' cultural know- ledge, as well as develop crucial skills of listening comprehension, linguistic precision and cross-cultural reflection. The present paper reports on the Arabic component of the project. The project site is available on the Georgia Tech server at http://www.clsp.gatech.edu/Song_Project/. The paper is organized as follows. Section 1 is about the im- portance of songs pedagogically, linguistically, culturally and histori- cally. Section 2 is an overview of the literature regarding songs as an Revisiting songs in Language Pedagogy 77

instructional resource. Section 3 concerns the criteria in choosing songs and the best methods and techniques for utilizing songs in lan- guage classes. Section 4 is a description of the Web interface, and Section 5 reports on the method employed in designing the skeleton of the Arabic component of the project, as well as a glimpse on the contents of the course. The project utilizes two Arabic varieties, Egyptian Arabic, which is the Arabic spoken in Egypt, and modern standard Arabic (MSA), the formal variety that all Arab countries use in writing, read- ing and, in some, listening. Due to the influence of the Egyptian me- dia, Egyptian Arabic is the most widely understood regional dialect in the Arab world. Particularly due to the popularity of Egyptian songs and music, the decision was made to use Egyptian Arabic. Other Arabic varieties may be included in later phases of the project.

1. Importance of songs 1.1 Importance of songs pedagogically

The potential for popular songs to be a rich instructional re- source is abundant. Songs provide authentic material in the class- room (Conrad, 1991; Kramsch, 1993; Orlova, 2003; Spicher & Sweeney, 2007; Tarone, 2000). Combined with prior experience, cul- tural background and knowledge of the content of the situation in the song, a situated-scaffolding classroom becomes available, which helps learners at all levels of language and cultural proficiencies. Since songs are acquired by the ear, they can help to improve listening skills (Blodget, 2000; Orlova, 2003; Saricoban & Metin, 2000; Spicher & Sweeney, 2007; Yoo, 2002). As well established in the literature, listening comprehension, which is involved in listening skills, is a complex process (Anderson, 1976, 1983, 1995) with interrelated stages. These include speech per- ception (identification of phonetic sounds), word recognition (decid- ing which word has been said), parsing (the assignment of structure to the words recognized), and interpretation (assignment of mean- ing), i.e., lower-level processing, (Garfield, 1987), and knowledge, namely higher-level processing, which is beyond basic linguistic processing. This includes listeners' conceptual and experiential know-

78 Aquil

ledge and stored background information, inferencing, predicting, and checking expectations on the basis of the incoming linguistic in- put, knowledge, and experience; for example, schema, script, concept, and proposition (Brown & Yule, 1983). Songs are pure listening material that engages top-down and bottom-up processing and listening strategies, not only at the word but also at the phrase and discourse, conceptual and cultural level. New vocabulary can be explored, and in fact retained as evi- denced in text recall and delayed text recall (de Groot, 2006; Salcedo, 2010). Pictures, lists of information, and charts can be provided along with the songs that allow for speculation about the content of the song or questions about the song's language. This can be done by both the students and the teachers as pre-listening, while-listening or post-listening practice (Conrad, 1991; Willis & Mason, 1994). In this way, valuable class time is spent meaningfully in informal teacher- student and class discussion. This low anxiety atmosphere promotes and allows learners to inquire about new vocabulary or cultural nuances unfamiliar to them. One of the main objectives of L2 listening pedagogy is to re- late listening practice in the classroom to the kind of listening that takes place in real life (Field, 1998). Since lyrics of songs often embo- dy the discursive features of spoken language (Brown, 1995a; Kramsch, 1993; Ur, 1984), songs are conducive to a precision focus on discrete forms or morphology that are often missed in running speech because of their lack of saliency. Moreover, song lyrics gener- ally present a range of style, register and trope, often in productive tension with the musical setting (Conrad, 1991) Lyrics of a song can be an excellent source for vocabulary and grammar, as they are often rich in idiomatic language and every- day grammar and structure (Conrad, 1991). By providing it, we ex- pose our learners to language that is quite diversified and removed from the language of the classroom and textbook. As mentioned above, lyrics can illustrate different registers used in a given speech community and demonstrate the real contexts where one register is used and not another. For example, the sample poems of Nizar Quabbani, which are written in MSA, may be juxtaposed with Nancy Agram's popular songs, written in Egyptian colloquial Arabic.

Revisiting songs in Language Pedagogy 79

1.2 Importance of songs culturally

Songs are products and practices of a society that can shed light on the philosophical perspectives of that society (Gold & Revill, 2006; Shannon, 2003).These practices and products shape the world view of a cultural group, and only through language are they fully ex- pressed. The language of the songs will provide students with oppor- tunities to develop further insights about the culture that are available in no other way. Not only can songs provide the big C of culture -- as in the formal, social, political, and economic aspects of the cultural group -- but also the small c, which are aspects often studied by anthropolo- gists and sociologists. For example, the importance of “Tarab” in Arabic music; this is a cultural concept specific to Arab culture, where a strong relationship is witnessed between the performer or singer, the lyrics, the music, and the audience. Tarab is an ecstasy-like state an Arab enters while listening to a song. (Marcus, 2007) Songs provide students with the venues to constantly com- pare and contrast between the source and target culture, as expressed in diversified genres and texts. Thus greater insights are gained into not only the target culture, but also into their own. The benefit is that, by learning about the culture that is embodied in songs, students are enabled to participate in multiple communities at home or around the world in a variety of contexts where they will be able to commu- nicate in different modes: interpersonal, interpretative, and presenta- tional. Indeed, Cooper and Condon (Ajibad & Ndububa, 2008; 2004) liken song study to archeological excavation where: “Lyrics re- semble the historical remnants [from which] an archeologist must reconstruct cultural reality” (2004: 228). Songs, “saturated with sense,” naturally embed cultural knowledge, values, and perspectives through a compressing of what we might call the Seven Cs envi- sioned by our project at Georgia Tech. The Seven Cs is a competing framework for looking at culture and analyzing a song for the pur- poses of cultural literacy and competency (Galloway & Goldberg, 2009). These Cs are context, condition, chorus, conflict, connota- tion, comparison and continuity. For example, through the context

80 Aquil of a song, namely the time and place it is sung, students learn more about the socio-historical backdrop or political climate. They will ac- quire some understanding of the situation(s), issues and agendas that are present within the context and thus become aware of the condi- tion and the nostalgia, angst, playfulness or protest embodied within. Moreover, students can identify the chorus, or the heteroge- neous voices suggested by the recital of a song in its original cultural context. These voices are of the lyricists, the composer, as well the singer. For example, the voices that are present in the Arabic songs sung by Abdel Halim Hafez, Shaddia, and Mohamed Abdel Wahab, which demonstrated the national and pan-Arab ideology after the 1952 Egyptian revolution during Gamal Abdel Nasser’s period, reso- nate to this date. In fact, they have been credited with inspiring many of the youth in the January 25, 2011 revolution in Egypt and in the Arab Spring. The return to these songs and the message it contains is observed on new social media sites and on TV programs. Importantly, students acquire an understanding of connota- tion, that is, words and concepts that cannot be found in a dictio- nary. The situated scaffolding of the songs in context and condition provides ample clues to grasp the hidden meanings and cultural nuances. The notion of connotation does not only apply to words and intonation, but extends as well to silence -- as the pauses within the utterances. All of these features are well and adequately represented in songs. As for continuity, songs play a major role in sustaining con- tinuity of a community's identity and group cohesion. Particularly, the personal associations and emotional content that is generated and associated with the song is often sustained throughout the course of time and history. To this day, the song sung for the Prophet Mo- hammed by the dwellers of “al madina al munawara,” greeting him upon migration from Mecca to Medina, is sung and memorized by all children throughout the Muslim world. Turning to comparison and conflict, it is of paramount im- portance in our day and age to help our students acquire the ability to make non-judgmental and contextualized comparison of perspec- tives both within and between cultures. Songs provide opportunities to guide learners and students to see how views are expressed diffe- rently, based on many factors, including but not limited to age, natio- Revisiting songs in Language Pedagogy 81

nality, ethnicity, socioeconomic class or different eras in history. For example, the concept of hard work, as in “Shed il Hizam” by Sayid Darwish and Bon Jovi's song “Livin’ on a Prayer.” Songs can help language learners in recognizing the nodes of conflict through which the voices represented in the song express themselves, i.e. the lyricist, the composer, the singer, as well as the speech community to which the song belongs. In other words, songs illustrate most of culture's tension points at which possible compet- ing values, perspectives, and visions potentially lead to a culture clash. Ultimately, songs could provide the seeds of culture change. For ex- ample, the cultural concept of travel in songs such as “Salma ya Sa- laama,” compared to the concept of travel in the American culture. Arabic songs about travel exemplify emotions of separation, longing and hardship. The relation of travel to these emotions could easily be misunderstood by English-speaking learners of Arabic, unless the diachronic aspect of travel is explained to the learners. Travel in Arab history is associated with travel on the backs of camels for months and years, and to hardship resulting from it; hence, the rather melan- cholic lyrics.

1.3 Importance of songs historically A nation’s history can be examined through its popular mu- sic and songs. Songs often consciously or unconsciously address sig- nificant historical conditions a given speech community has passed through. These conditions can be explored in the lyrics of the songs, and accordingly, specific ideas and themes representing a certain era in a nation’s history can be identified. Popular songs reflect a multip- licity of facts, ideas and values, and are full of sociopolitical imagery. Cooper and Condon (2004) report that few teachers ever think of popular music as “serious music,” let alone “serious history.” They add that those teachers have not explored the sociopolitical imagery that can be found in songs by Elvis Presley, Chuck Berry, the Coast- ers or, John Lennon. Cooper and Condon compare the investigation of history through songs to archeological excavation: “Lyrics resemble the historical remnants available in an In- dian burial mound. Just as an archeologist must reconstruct cultural reality from innumerable fragments left by a former

82 Aquil

Native American civilization -- pieces of pottery, projectile points, tools for building, stone drawings, ancient toys and games, eating utensils, religious tokens and death masks.” (Cooper & Condon, 2004: 228)

1.4 Importance of songs cognitively Songs have shown to play a very important part in aphasiac patients' recovery. Studies show the effectiveness of melodic intona- tion therapy, which is a treatment that engages language-capable re- gions in the unaffected parts of the brain (Schlaug, Marchina, & Norton, 2008). This study reports on the effects of the treatment where a significant improvement in propositional speech took place and, in fact, was generalized to unpracticed words and phrases. Another famous case is the recovery of wounded Senator Gabby Gif- fords through songs. Senator Giffords lost her ability to speak be- cause of damage to the language pathways in her brain's left hemis- phere. However, by layering words on top of melody and rhythm, her brain was trained to use “less-traveled” pathways to fulfill the same purpose and destination. To summarize, empirical research confirms the strong learn- ing facilitation of songs, compared to simple drills on speech produc- tion (Ajibad & Ndububa, 2008; Escobar, Socorro, Marleny, & Arboleda, 2005). Consistent mapping of linguistics and musical in- formation enhances learning. In fact, a person learning a new lan- guage benefits from the motivational and structure properties of lan- guage in songs. Songs provide an endlessly rich resource. They provide ma- terial for excavation of cultural perspectives and the diversity of community voices. They can provide sources of inspiration for stu- dents to use their own voices to reproduce the sounds of the target language or the voice of the charismatic singer. Songs may also spur discussion of vital themes. However, despite the promise that songs hold for language and culture instruction, to our knowledge, songs have never been sys- tematically utilized as an instructional and pedagogical tool or as a focal point for the study of culture in Arabic. This gap needs to be filled, especially in the field of LCT languages.

Revisiting songs in Language Pedagogy 83

2. Overview of songs as instructional resource Songs have been an intrinsic part in the syllabi of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) instruction. Researchers found songs to be an effective learning tool as it improved learners’ listening and speak- ing proficiency of English (Escobar et al., 2005), served as an effec- tive motivational strategy (Ajibad & Ndububa, 2008), exposed learn- ers to authentic everyday and idiomatic language (Diamond & Minicz, 1994; Safnil, 1996), made learners aware of subtle cultural nuances (Milano, 1994), and enhanced learners’ long-term memory of material (Newham, 1995). Failoni’s (1993) review of the literature on song in the for- eign language classroom reveals a paucity of scholarly articles. Songs are incorporated into lesson plans as means of entertainment or reac- tion. Furthermore, teachers tend to avoid songs that do not reflect the “grammaticality” of the textbook, or that are not congruent with the plan of a given unit of a textbook. Similarly, in second language acquisition, researchers identi- fied the role songs play in learners’ interlanguage (Tarone, 2000), how songs increased learners’ vocabulary uptake (Milton, 2008), and viewed songs as a primary vehicle for teaching a foreign language (Barry & Pellissier, 1995; Kramer, 2001). In fact, researchers in psy- cholinguistic studies recently found that mapping linguistic and musi- cal information enhanced language learning (Schon et al., 2008). While some isolated songs and song tasks appear on the Web as occasional course fragments, no project that employed song as a base resource for any of the target languages has been found. Songs have been used in Arabic teaching curricula sporadical- ly, whenever the author sees some connection between the grammar and or the vocabulary of a song and that of the unit being taught. Songs tend to be considered chiefly as one more grammatical task or tool. An innovative, systematic, and content-based course about songs illustrating communication, connection, culture, contrast, and communities has not been heard of in teaching Arabic as a foreign language. Most of the content-based courses deal with the traditional viewpoint of teaching languages, such as Arabic poetry, literature and short stories. However, an online, content-based Arabic film course has been developed recently, “Perspectives: Arabic Language and Culture

84 Aquil

in Film,” by Zainab Alwani, Nasser, M. Isleem and Mbarek Sryfi (available at http://www.alucen.com/perspectives/). In “Perspectives,” the authors compiled nine movies from the Arab world (Egypt, Palestine and Morocco). The movies can be purchased or seen through online retailers. The authors developed pre-viewing and post-viewing questions to accompany each movie. The purpose of the course is to provide stimulating content for dis- cussion and analysis, to increase exposure to authentic language use, to portray the historical and cultural backgrounds, and to provide a forum for discussion, debates, and critical perspective on Arabic so- ciety. The authors state that the content of the course can be viewed either in or outside of class, or as supplementary material. In sum, as mentioned above, songs have not been considered as a content-based source illustrating communication, connection, culture, contrast, and communities in teaching Arabic as a foreign language. In teaching Arabic, songs tend to be considered chiefly as one more grammatical task or tool, and are rarely viewed as the ob- ject of study and analysis or the microscope into the broader culture. Pedagogically, songs need to be viewed differently. They need to be viewed as art, as culture, as history, as philosophy, as group identity, as the way of words, and as the actual voices of people. Songs are never viewed as the base resource of content-based instruction. Nor are they employed to illustrate a model for contextualized content clustering, for multi-level linguistic and cultural analysis, or for inte- gration into the curriculum either as full course or supplementary support material. The "Intermediate/Advanced Language and Cul- ture through Song: New Materials for Arabic, Chinese, Japanese and Russian" project at the School of Modern Languages at the Georgia Tech is an attempt to employ songs as the nucleus of a content-based instruction.

3. Criteria in choosing songs Often material developers and instructors face the problem of which songs to choose. In this section, I discuss some of the selec- tion criteria used in our project. The criteria center on the lyrics, intel- ligibility of the words and accent, nature of vocabulary (whether idi- omatic, colloquial or archaic), music, topic, and the stickiness of Revisiting songs in Language Pedagogy 85

words, phrases, and chunks. In short, the project asked the following questions:

Music and singability Is the song singable (whole or parts)? Does the instrumental music overpower the sing- er? Language and accent Are the words intelligible? Is the accent comprehensible? Do the lyrics use natural speech? Does repetition of keywords or phrases add to the meaning or singability? Is the vocabulary too idiomatic or colloquial, or is it archaic, obscene, or nonsensical? Topics and concepts Is the topic something students can relate to? Does the song expose learners to new concepts?

In our research for this project, we found that American country music is a window to American culture. For example, if one listens to Alabama's "Cheap Seats," a song of baseball mania in a Midwestern middle-class town, one can learn a lot about the culture of baseball in the U.S. Songs by Elvis Presley, Chuck Berry, the Coasters, or John Lennon can convey a great deal about their era and are a treasure in need of excavation. There are a number of ways to prepare students for listening to a song. An informal introduction by the teacher, and class discus- sion are time-honored techniques to make the content and language of the song accessible. Together, the teacher and class can question new vocabulary and talk about the situations described. They may examine pictures, look at or make lists of information, preview a chart, predict or speculate about the content of the song, read teach- er-made questions, or construct their own to be answered while lis- tening.

4. Description of our project Georgia Tech’s School of Modern Languages project is an innovative multimedia program that exposes students to a wide varie- ty of linguistically rich and musically engaging songs. The materials and mode we are in the process of developing and disseminating will

86 Aquil

come through a specially designed computer interface, which exploits the full potential of song as a focus of teaching and learning. The raw material of our project at ML is the songs them- selves. We use streaming audio, housed at our site and linked to the built-in media player of our downloadable interface. We designed an attractive, learner-centered interface that meets our criteria of com- pactness and inclusiveness, logical organization, ease of use for stu- dents, variability of components, and efficiency of compilation for authors of materials. In terms of pedagogical structure, we employ a standard pre- listening, (multiple) listening, and post-listening task format with var- ious iterations according to the different linguistic and cultural foci of the task cluster. Each of the listening phases is multitasked; for ex- ample, students may be asked to understand the gist of the message and later complete a close activity requiring careful attention to lin- guistic elements. Only after completion of this task do song lyrics become available. The culture-focus tasks are similarly scaffolded with, for ex- ample, a pre-listening task that probes word connotations in the home culture followed by a listening task that requires a simple nega- tive-positive response. Another example would be an association task related to the connotation of the word used in the song. Each culture task would then take students deeper into the song’s discur- sive layers. Post-listening tasks will require more reflective and deeper cultural and cross-cultural exploration and will be composed of: 1) "Questions for understanding," devoted to leading the students step by step, deeper into the song, unobtrusively focusing their attention on those aspects and details necessary to achieve a full understanding; 2)"Questions for discussion," devoted to broader issues both within the culture and comparatively between the target culture and home culture; 3) "Topics for writing or debate,” and 4) “Suggestions for further investigation,” which would include additional background reading or other songs related thematically, artistically, or by period. Accompanying the tasks is a full resource cluster, including annotation (lexical, stylistic, cultural), notes on grammar and syntax, photographs of realia, newspaper articles, excerpts from history, prose and poems, video clips, and other songs that target the cultural context. Roll-over of specially selected and marked words will pro- Revisiting songs in Language Pedagogy 87 vide English translation or, when possible, explanations in the target language; other words will be hyperlinked to reveal visual props, pho- tographs of realia, linguistic/stylistic annotations, or contextual con- tent in various media. In conclusion, our interface and course material is both simi- lar to and different from the online, content-based Arabic film course mentioned above (Alwani, Isleem, & Sryfi, 2011). First, in our course the pre, while, and post drills, questions, and activities are all in a single place. Hence, our course provides a more organized, compact, and compelling set of study material. The annotations that accompany the lyrics aid the students in understand- ing not only the vocabulary, but also the hidden cultural nuances that are between the lines. Some of the annotations include references to the original hard copy and online links to lexical, stylistic, and cultural information, as wells as vocabulary lists for evaluation, notes on grammar and syntax and lexicon, notes on collocations, study ques- tions, photographs, and other realia. By using songs, our project pro- vides the venue for the prosody and intonation of the language to be explored and taught. This offers our students many opportunities to simulate the language and improve their listening and speaking profi- ciency.

5. Arabic Materials development In this section, I discuss the over-arching framework utilized in deciding on songs and content of the Arabic course. I also provide an example of one or two songs from the seven chapters, which comprise the course.

5.1 Deciding on the skeleton of the materials The Arabic course is designed with an emphasis on history as well as language and culture. This is because the researcher and Arab- ic materials developer believes that songs in the Arab world have al- ways had a powerful impact on shaping perspectives and beliefs. Evi- dence of this can be seen in the role songs had in shaping the Pan Arab nationalistic movement during the period of Gamal Abdel Nasser, from the 1950s until 1970. From this perspective, the re- searcher designed the course with the hope that students will not on- ly learn the language and culture behind the songs but also the history

88 Aquil and events that shaped the culture and psyche of modern Arabs who experienced these events in their childhood and early adulthood (Palmer, 2007, 2008). In this way, the materials help fulfill the major objectives of the project: demonstrating and eliciting the context, condition, conflict, chorus, continuity, and comparison inter- linguistically and culturally. In the seven chapters of the course, there are one to five songs per chapter; if the songs are long, the chapters have only one or two songs. The objective of each chapter is to lay the ground for the students to learn the language, culture, and history of the era which the chapter portrays and thus be linguistically as well as cultu- rally exposed to the context, condition, connotation, chorus, conflict, continuity, and comparison with which each song is laden.

5.2 Chapters of the course Twenty songs, which best represent the times, culture and language of the historical period in question were identified via Web searches. Since our students, as well as most of the students learning Arabic in the U.S., begin with MSA rather than any regional dialects, it was decided to start with songs and poems in MSA or classical Arabic. Early units contain some lines from poems. It was felt neces- sary to include these poems in order to expose the learners to the role that oral tradition has in Arabic language and culture. One might think that it would be easier to start with the modern spoken varieties than MSA, but the contrary is true in the case of students learning Arabic in the U.S. (Palmer, 2007, 2008). Re- gional dialects are typically not introduced until years three and four of language learning in MSA. Therefore, as scaffolding, it was para- mount to start the course with a variation the students are familiar with, and that is MSA. Research indicated that Arabs’ linguistic heritage and culture was historically very rich during the Jahiliyya, Islamic and Umayyad periods. During the Ottoman Empire, Arabic language and heritage experienced a decline, from which it did not recover until the late 19th century. For these reasons, the decision was made to focus on and illustrate the periods to which some of the selected songs can be traced. The following are chapters of the course. Due to limitations of space, a summary of a song or two is given for each chapter. Note that the songs described in this paper are mostly patriotic songs. Revisiting songs in Language Pedagogy 89

However, the course does not only include patriotic songs -- it also includes popular and romantic songs. The decision on capitalizing on patriotic songs in the present paper is to show the importance of songs in teaching the history of a speaking community. A detailed description of all the chapters and pedagogical activities used in the course is planned for subsequent papers.

5.2.1 Introduction In the introduction, course objectives and layout are given, as well as a famous song by Amr Diab, “Habiby ya nour el ein,” for the purpose of enticing and motivating the students. This song is a con- temporary world-renowned song with a very upbeat rhythm.

5.2.2 Aljahiliya, advent of Islam, and Umayyad This chapter depicts the eras of the Jahiliyya, advent of Islam, and the Umayyad. Islam has shaped and continues to shape the Arabic culture and psyche to a great extent and it is paramount to demonstrate the linguistic and cultural context and conditions of the times before and when Islam appeared. Therefore, an example from the Jahiliyya pe- riod, which was prior to Islam, was chosen. Some lines from “al mu’alaquaat,” are selected to represent the period which is widely known for its linguistic richness and cultural connotations. These lines were written by a very famous poet of the time, Imr’ al Quays, whose poetry was admired by the Prophet Mohammed. The objec- tive is to give a glimpse of the era, its culture and the concepts that were important at that time, without delving into too much detail. This is precisely because the language used is very old and of such a literary nature that it can be considered obsolete according to modern language use and criteria. Nevertheless, a language and culture course of Arabic cannot establish its basis and foundation without mention- ing this period and the effect it had on Arabic culture. To depict the period of Islam, two oral traditions were picked: the call for prayers “aladhan,” and the song with which the dwellers of “al madina al munawara” greeted the Prophet Mo- hammed upon immigration from Mecca to Medina. No two choices better show the chorus and continuity represented by songs and oral traditions in Arab culture. Both are sung frequently to this day. The

90 Aquil call for prayers is repeated five times a day in all Muslim cities, the Prophet’s song is sung and memorized by all children throughout the Muslim world. For the Umayyad era, “lama bada yatathanna” (When He Started to Bend) is chosen. It is said to be influenced by the music of Andalusia. Its lyrics are about love and praise of the beloved. The language is classical Arabic. It also has some Turkish words, showing the influence of Turkish, since it had been the language of the domi- nants for a long period.

5.2.3 Modern eras as in the Kingdom era This chapter has a variety of songs: patriotic, popular and romantic. One of the most famous artists of this era is Sayed Dar- wish. Three of his songs are discussed in this chapter, “shed el Hi- zam” (Fasten Your Belt) , “salma ya salaama” (Safe and Safety) and “quum ya masri” (Rise You Egyptian) . These songs perfectly illustrate the competing cultural framework envisioned in our project. The lyr- ics and the music highlight the context and conditions and the back- drop of the times. For example, “shed el Hizam” and “quum ya ma- Sri” exemplify the lyrics' role in expressing the chorus and the varied voices as well as the song's role in sustaining the continuity of a speaking community. Some songs also embody cultural concepts that may seem different, such as the travel concept as expressed in the lyrics of “salma ya salaama.”. By laying the ground for comparison, learners can solve points of cultural clash and, as a result, avoid cul- tural conflict or tension.

5.2.4 Gamal Abdel Nasser and the July 23, 1952 revolution Gamal Abdel Nasser's impetus and role in rallying the people of the Arab world behind the Pan Arab movement is unforgettable. Songs by Abdel Halim Hafiz had a remarkable following. One of the songs in this chapter is “Hikayet sha'ab” (Story of a People). A song written and sung for the occasion of building the High Dam. The song depicts Egypt's history so beautifully from the times of the Brit- ish colonization until the time when Nasser was rejected in his re- quest for funds by the World Bank to finance building the dam.

Revisiting songs in Language Pedagogy 91

5.2.5 War, peace and investment era For this chapter, a song sung by Abdel Halim Hafiz on the occasion of the October 6, 1973 war is chosen. The song is called “aash illi 'aal” (Long Live the Person Who Said It). This song is sung for President Anwar Sadat as the hero of war and peace. In this chapter, a comparison is made between this song and another song by Abdel Halim by the name of “ada il nahaar” (The Day is Passed), a song writ- ten specifically about the Six-Day War of 1967, which Egypt lost. These two songs depict the context and conditions of these two vital wars in the history of Egypt.

5.2.6 Globalization and clash of civilizations Research into this era did not find many songs written for patriotic purposes; only two were found, “ilHilm il 'arabi” (The Arab Dream) and “il Damiir il 'arabi” (The Arab Conscience). The era demon- strates the invasion of video clips and popular songs known as “ag- hani shababiyya,” or youth songs. Hence, the decision was made to choose songs by Nanzy Agram, Amr Diab as well as some poems written by Nizar Qabani and sung by Majda Alrumi, to show the dig- lossic condition lived by the people in the Arab world.

5.2.7 Arab Spring No chapter can better describe how songs can depict the real- ity of what is going on in the streets than this particular chapter. The songs of this chapter are about the Egyptian revolution of January 25, 2011. One of the seven C’s (see 1.2) is embodied in the songs of this era, namely, continuity. The lyrics of the songs illustrate how Egyp- tians have sustained the cultural values they holds dear: values such as justice, freedom and human dignity. One of the songs in this chapter that beautifully portrays the condition, context and the time is “Izaay” (How) by Mohamed Munir. It tells a story of a man who loves his country but, because his country is run by corrupt people, it does not love him back in return. This is the same story of the young ones who sparked the January 25 revolution.

92 Aquil

6. Conclusion In conclusion, songs in language pedagogy as reported in this paper can be considered as an indispensable interdisciplinary re- source. As the base of a content-based language instruction, many facets of language and culture teaching are included in the curricu- lum. Song lyrics present an easily analyzed source of linguistic and cultural data. Not only do songs offer the ground to integrate the four skills of the language -- listening, speaking, reading and writing -- but also to integrate the four components of a given language -- pho- nology, morphology, syntax, and the lexicon. Many pedagogical tasks can be designed around songs to enhance language skills, such as lis- tening, speaking, grammar, vocabulary, reading and writing tasks. Fi- nally, songs teach students of LCTL the history, culture, sociology, and even politics of a given speech community. Aspects that are rare- ly dealt with in such languages and are not easily accessible to stu- dents. By reporting about the Georgia Tech School of Modern Lan- guages project of “Advanced/Intermediate Language and Culture through Song,” this paper supplies evidence that it is warranted to revisit songs as a curricular resource in LCTL.

References Ajibad, Y., & Ndububa, K. (2008). Effects of word games, culturally relevant songs, and stories on students' motivation in a Nigerian English language class. Tesl Canada Journal, 25(2), 27- 48. Alwani, Z., Isleem, M. N., & Sryfi, M. (2011). Perspectives: Arabic Language and Culture in Film. Anderson, J. (1976). Language, memory, and thought. Hillsdale, New York: Erlbaum. Anderson, J. (1983). The architecture of cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Anderson, J. (1995). Learning and memory. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Barry, S., & Pellissier, S. (1995). Popular music in a whole language approach to foreign language teaching. Dimension, 13-26. Blodget, T. (2000). Teaching the target language through the lyrics of melodic music. Songs for Teaching: Using Music to Promote learning. Retrieved from Revisiting songs in Language Pedagogy 93

http://www.songsforteaching.com/musicapaedia/teachingtar getlanguagethroughlyrics.htm Brown, G. (1995a). Dimensions of difficulty in listening comprehension. In D. Mendelsohn & J. Rubin (Eds.), A Guide for theTeaching of Second Language Listening. San Diego: Dominie Press. Brown, G., & Yule, G. (1983). Teaching the spoken language: An approach based on the analysis of conversational English. New York: Cambridge University Press. Conrad, B. (1991). Contemporary and historical Contexts in popular music: Theory and implementation of an intermediate level course. Teaching German, 24(1), 18-30. Cooper, B. L., & Condon, R. A. (2004). The popular music teaching handbook: an educator's guide to music-related print resources. Wesport: Connecticut: Libraries Unlimited: A member of the Greenwood Publishing Group. de Groot, A. M. B. (2006). Effects of stimulus characteristics and background music on foreign language vocabulary learning and forgetting. Language Learning, 56(3), 463-506. Diamond, J., & Minicz, E. (1994). Country songs: music, language and life. Journal of the Imagination in Language Learning, 2, 112- 115. Escobar, E. Y., Socorro, G., Marleny, D., & Arboleda, A. (2005). Pop music in the development of English listening and oral production skills. Lenguaje, 33(159-195). Failoni, J. W. (1993). Music as means to enhance cultural awareness and literacy in the froeign language classroom. Mid-Atlantic Journal of Foreign Language Pedagogy, Spring (vi), 97-108. Field, J. C. (1998). Skills and strategies for listening. ELT Journal, 52(2), 110-118. Galloway, V., & Goldberg, S. (2009). The seven Cs School of Modern Languages. Georgia Institute of Technology. http://www.clsp.gatech.edu/Song_Project/. Retrieved from http://www.clsp.gatech.edu/Song_Project/ Garfield, J. L. (1987). Modularity in knowledge representation and natural- language understanding. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.

94 Aquil

Gold, J. R., & Revill, G. (2006). Gathering the voices of the people? Cecil Sharp, cultural hybridity, and the fold music of Appalachia. GeoJournal, 65, 55-66. Kong, L. (1995). Music and cultural politics: ideologies and resistance in Singapore. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 20(4), 447-459. Kramer, D. J. (2001). A blueprint for teaching foreign languages and cultures through music in the classroom and on the web. ADFL Bulletin, 33(1), 29-35. Kramsch, C. (1993). Context and culture in language teaching. New York: Oxford University Press. Marcus, S. L. (2007). Music in Egypt: experiencing music, expressing culture. New York: Oxford University Press. Milano, G. (1994). Teaching English through Broadway Musicals. Journal of the Imagination in Language Learning, 2(102-104). Milton, J. (2008). Vocabulary uptake from infromal learning tasks. Language Learning Journal, 36(2), 227-237. Newham, P. (1995). Making a song and dance: the musical voice of language. Journal of the Imagination in Language Learning, 3, 66- 74. Orellana, M. F., & Reynolds, J. F. (2008). Cultural Modeling: Leveraging Bilingual Skills for School Paraphrasing Tasks. Reading Research Quarterly, 43(1), 48-65. Orlova, N. F. (2003). Helping prospective EFL teachers learn how to use songs in teaching conversation classes. The Internet TESL Journal, IX(3). Palmer, J. (2007). Arabic diglossia: teaching only the standard variety is a disservice to students. Arizona Working Papers in SLA & Teaching, 14, 111-112. Palmer, J. (2008). Arabic diglossia: student perceptions of spoken Arabic after living in the Arabic-speaking world. Arizona Working Papers in SLA & Teaching, 15, 81-95. Roscigno, V. J., Danaher, W. F., & Summers-Effler, E. (2002). Music, culture and social movements: song and southern textile worker mobilization, 1929-1934. The International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 22, 1-3. Safnil. (1996). How to integrate cultural aspects into English classrooms. Guidelines, 18(2), 73-77. Revisiting songs in Language Pedagogy 95

Salcedo, C. S. (2010). The effects of songs in the foreign language classroom on text recall, delayed text recall and involuntary mental rehearsal. Journal of College Teaching and Learning, 7(6- 30). Saricoban, A., & Metin, E. (2000). Songs, verse and games for teaching grammar. The Internet TESL Journal, VI(10). Schlaug, G., Marchina, S., & Norton, A. (2008). From singing to speaking: why singing may lead to recovery of expressive language function in patients with Broca's aphasia Music Perception, 25(4), 315-323. Schon, D., Boyer, M., Moreno, S., Besson, M., Peretz, I., & Kolinsky, R. (2008). Songs as an aid for language acquisition. Cognition, 106(2), 975-983. Shannon, J. H. (2003). Emotion, performance and temporality in Arab music: reflections on Tarab. Cultural Anthropology, 18(1), 72-98. Spicher, L., & Sweeney, F. (2007). Folk music in the L2 classroom: development of native-like pronunciation through prosodic engagement strategies. Connection, 1(35-48). Standards for Foreign Language Learning in the 21st Century. (2006). Lawrence, KS: Allen Press, Inc. Swaffar, J. K. (1989). Competing paradigms in adult language acquisition. The Modern Language Journal, 73(3), 301-314. Tarone, E. (2000). Getting serious about language play: language play, interlanguage variation and second language acquisition. In B. M. Swierzbin, Frank; Anderson, Michael E.; Klee, Carol A.; Tarone, Elaine (Ed.), Social and Cognitive Factors in Second Language Acquisition: Selected Proceedings of the 1999 Second Language Research Forum (pp. 31-54). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla. Ur, P. (1984). Teaching listening comprehension. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Willis, B. D., & Mason, K. (1994). Canciones en la clase: the why and how of integrating songs in Spanish by English-speaking and bilingual artists. Hispanica, 77(1), 102-109. Yoo, I. W. (2002). Focused listening with songs The Internet TESL Journal, VIII(7).

Arabic Heritage Language Learners: motivation, ex- pectations, competence, and engagement in learning Arabic

Ghassan Husseinali, PhD George Mason University

Abstract This paper investigates motivation, outcome expectations, competence and engagement of Arabic heritage learners. Fifty students belonging to two distinct groups participated in this study. The first group is com- prised of heritage learners coming from Arabic speaking homes (Arab HLLs) while the second group is comprised of non-Arabic speaking Muslims (Muslim HLLs). The study aims to uncover trends amongst Arabic HLLs, therefore, means for the whole group were calculated. In addition to means, t-tests were performed to compare the two groups with regard to motivation, outcome expectations, and competence. Frequencies for engagement items for each group are provided separately. The results indicate that, on the one hand, Arabic HLLs pos- sess a strong identity and community motivations. On the hand, their in- strumental or utilitarian motivation is very weak. On the levels of skills, Arabic HLLs are more drawn to study Arabic to improve their com- munication skills rather than to learn about their heritage culture. In comparison to Muslim HLL, Arab HLLs perceived themselves more competent to achieve speaking proficiency than Muslim HLLs. Mus- lim HLLs desired to learn more about Islam and Islamic texts than Arab HLLs. The results o this study are discussed in light of classroom in- struction and designing of curricula to match the needs of both groups of HLLs.

98 Husseinali

Introduction Arabic as a foreign language (AFL) in the US has gained expo- nential momentum in the last ten years creating an urgent need and a conducive environment to research the many facets AFL. Research on learning foreign languages, in general, can take on one of the fol- lowing three forms: language, teaching, and learner. This paper fo- cuses on the learner. More specifically, it targets heritage language learners (HLLs). Research on Arabic as a heritage language and con- sequently HLLs of Arabic is scant and fairly in the conception stage compared to research on other HLLs such as Spanish, Chinese and Korean. Besides, altruistic motivations to maintain and preserve heritage languages in the US (Fishman 1991), there are real practical benefits to understanding HLLs of any language. Not least of them, the speed at which HLLs can reach high proficiency levels (Kagan, 2005). Ka- gan (2005) contends that “HLLs, because of their long exposure to the language, are good candidates for gaining such [professional: su- perior or higher] proficiency more quickly if the instruction they are offered meets their needs” (p.220). Kagan found out that after eight weeks of instruction, Russian HLLs performance on translation tasks was comparable to that of non-HLLs who have been learning Rus- sian as a foreign language for three or more years. Therefore, in less than one semester, HLLs can reach the same proficiency level that non HLLs can reach in four years. This is a very impressive result. Furthermore, because language, culture and identity are all intercon- nected, promoting learning of heritage languages will strengthen HLL sense of bicultural identity. Lee (2002) concluded that “in order to enable individuals to experience the benefits of their bicultural identi- ties; it is imperative that we also make provisions to promote the teaching of heritage languages” (p. 132) This paper attempts to shed light on Arabic HLLs. More specifi- cally, it will focus on their ethnic and cultural background, their moti- vation, their expectations, their perception of their own abilities, and their engagement in learning Arabic.

The Impact of Standard Spoken in Tamil 99

Definitions Although there is a universal agreement that HLLs are different from traditional foreign language learners (Carreira, 2004; Lee, 2005; Valdes, 2005; Van Deusen-Scholl, 2003), the theoretical question of who qualifies as a HLL remains unsettled. Van Deusen-Scholl (2003) differentiates between Heritage language learners and learners with Heritage motivation. The first group comes from a background where the heritage language is spoken at home so they possess some level of linguistic proficiency in the HL, whereas, learners in the second group posses no proficiency in the HL, but they believe themselves to be connected to the heritage culture (HC) and consider learning the HL as the bridge to cross to HC. Van Deusen-Scholl defined a HLL as one who is “bilingual in English and a home lan- guage other than English with varying degrees of proficiency in the home language” (p 221). Van Deusen-Scholl (2003) cited Valdes’s (2001) more elaborate definition of HLLs, according to which HLLs have the following characteristics:  They are raised in homes where a non-English language is spoken;  They speak or merely understand the heritage language; and  They are to some degree bilingual in English and the heritage language. (p. 221) Thus, according to the first view discussed above, some exposure to the HL at home is assumed. This definition does not exclude learners with even passive abilities in the HL (merely understand the heritage language). A second view on HLLs gives more prominence to the role of identity that a heritage language can play. Cho, Cho, and Tse (1997) defined heritage language as ''the language associated with one's cultural background and it may or may not be spoken in the home" (p. 106). This definition excludes the proficiency dimen- sion assumed in Valdes’ definition. Therefore, if we take the linguistically motivated definition of HLLs to Arabic, then we will limit Arabic HLLs to those who come from Arabic speaking homes. But, if we extend the definition of HLLs to include learners who have cultural affinity to Arabic then we will extend our circle of HLLs to include the many Muslim students who take Arabic to connect to religious texts, especially those who

100 Husseinali

come from homes where the native language of their parents uses Arabic script such as Persian and Urdu. It is common to find Muslim learners of Arabic from Persian or Urdu backgrounds having some level of literacy in Arabic. Muslim students learning Arabic are defi- nitely different form traditional students learning Arabic as a foreign language, because they have at least passive literacy in Arabic gained through their exposure to the Qur’an. This paper assumes that learners of Arabic can be broadly classified into three groups. The first group consists of traditional language learners with no previous knowledge of Arabic or cultural connection to the language. The second group consists of learners who come from homes where Arabic is spoken. Learners in the second group have a high degree of variation in Arabic proficiency, but all of them have English as their dominant language. The third group consists of non-Arab Muslim learners. Most of the learners in the third group have acquired some basic literacy in Arabic from Sunday schools teaching them how to read the Quran, although not necessarily all might have this capacity. This study focuses on the latter two groups called here for convenience, Arab HLLs and Muslim HLLs. This study investigates their motivation, their outcome expectations, their competence, and their engagement in learning Arabic.

Curriculum and HLLs motivation From a practical point of view it might be impractical to mix HLLs with traditional foreign language learners because HLLs have an advantage over the other group (Husseinali, 2006). This advantage can be in terms of linguistic and/or cultural proficiency. Therefore, the next logical step in building a cohesive program would be to offer a separate track to HLLs whenever possible. (Valdes, 2001) identi- fied the challenge in teaching heritage languages to involve “under- standing the needs of minority language communities and of particu- lar groups of learners and adapting or developing pedagogical approaches that can bring about the best results” (p.31). Kagan (2005) advocated using classical literature, poetry and films in Russian heritage courses. In addition, she suggested including a cross-cultural perspective to the curriculum which will contribute to higher level discourse skills. In addition to selecting appropriate content for HL The Impact of Standard Spoken in Tamil 101

courses, teachers should also pay attention to the communicative mode to be targeted in HL courses. According to Valdes (2001) HLLs come to class with strong interpersonal mode of communication, but lacking a developed interpretative mode and presentational mode. Therefore, instruction in HL should focus on developing these two communicative modes. There are many studies comparing motivation and needs of HLLs with those of non HLLs (Husseinali, 2006; Lee, 2005; Noels, 2005). Noels (2005) compared motivation of HLLs and non-HLLs of German and found that HLLs differed primarily from non HLLs on- ly on identified orientations. Noels interpreted these results to indi- cate that learning German for HLLs was important for their self- concept and a desire to be more connected to the German speaking community. Husseinali (2006) found that Arabic HLLs (Arabs and Muslims) differed significantly from non HLLs on both identification and instrumental motivation.

Methods: Subjects: Fifty students participated in this study. Twenty three of them identified themselves to be of an Arabic heritage. The remain- ing twenty seven belonged to different ethnic groups but all of them were Muslims. There were twenty seven females and twenty three males. Twenty eight were enrolled in first year and twenty two in second year Arabic.

Instrument: A four-part survey was administered during the middle of the second semester. The first part comprised of sixteen Likert scale items (1= strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree) eliciting infor- mation about motivation to learn Arabic. The second part comprised of six multiple-choice questions eliciting information about engagement in learning Arabic. The third part comprised of seven Likert scale items (1= strongly disagree, 7= strongly agree) elicited information about desired outcomes form learning Arabic. Finally, the fourth part comprised of seven probability questions (10% to 100%) eliciting information about learners’ competence to achieve the mentioned out- comes.

102 Husseinali

Data analysis: Means for motivation variables, outcome variables, and ability variables were calculated to assess the strength of each variable among all HLLs. Then a t-test was performed on the data to determine if there are any significant differences between the two groups with regard to motivation, outcome, and competence. For the six multiple-choice engagement items, frequency of each choice was reported for the whole group combined as well as for each group in- dependently.

Results: 1. Motivation The average mean for each of the sixteen motivational va- riables is presented in table 1 below. The results show that Arabic HLLs have high motivation to study Arabic for identification orientations (“to understand and appreciate Arabic literature”, “interest in my own Arab culture”, “interest in my Islamic heritage”). They also have high motivation to study Arabic in order to connect with other speakers of Arabic, community oriented motivation, (use Arabic when I travel to an Arab country, use it with Arabic speaking friends, meet and converse with more varied people). HLLs are almost neutral on instrumental motivations (getting a job, foreign language requirement, studying abroad). Finally HLLs are least motivated to study Arabic as a result of (“events of 9/11”) or because they perceive the class to be “less demanding.”

Table 1: motivation variables’ means for all HLLs (N=50)

I study Arabic in order to/because: Mean Std. Dev

1. understand and appreciate Arabic art and Lite- 5.1000 1.64441 rature 2. meet and converse with more and varied 6.0800 1.12195 people 3. learn more about other cultures to understand 5.3000 1.78714 the world better 4. of interest in my own Arab culture 5.1200 2.25551 5. of interest in my Islamic Heritage 5.5600 2.17744 6. of my interest in Islam as a world religion 5.8200 1.64986 The Impact of Standard Spoken in Tamil 103

7. I feel Arabic is important in the economic de- 4.9000 1.94044 velopment of the world 8. I feel Arabic will help me better understand 5.1200 1.73370 the Middle East politics 9. of the events of 9/11 2.0800 1.42628 10. it will help me better understand the prob- 4.0400 2.14723 lems that Arabs face 11. I think it will be useful in getting me a good 4.8200 2.03731 job 12. I want to be able to use Arabic with Arabic- 5.5200 1.47413 speaking friends 13. I want to use Arabic when I travel to an Arab 6.2800 1.21286 country 14. I need to study a foreign language as a re- 4.2400 2.47073 quirement for my degree 15. I feel the class is less demanding than other 1.9200 1.53649 courses 16. I plan to study abroad 3.7400 2.35441

Then, t-test was performed to ascertain if the two groups or HLLS, namely Arab HLLs and Muslim HLLs, differ significantly on their motivation to learn Arabic. The two groups differed significant- ly only regarding three motivational variables as shown in table 2 be- low. Arab HLLs are more motivated to study Arabic (because of in- terest in own Arab culture), Muslim HLLs are more motivated to study Arabic (because of their Islamic heritage & because of interest in Islam as world religion)

Table 2: t-test comparing Arab HLLs and Muslim HLLs

I study Arabic in order to/because: T-test df Sig value (2tailed) Because of interest in my own Arab 6.89 48 .000 culture Because of interest in my Islamic Her- -4.00 48 .000 itage Because of my interest in Islam as a -2.51 48 .016 world religion

104 Husseinali

2. Expected outcomes The survey elicited responses on seven expected outcomes. The means of each outcome are presented in table 3 below. The highest mean was obtained for (receiving an A grade) outcome with a mean of 6.44. Communicative outcomes (speak Arabic fluently, communicate with native speakers in Arabic, reading comprehension) also scored high with means of 6.24, 6.26, 6.4, respectively. Interes- tingly, outcomes related to culture and identity (Arabic culture, Islam and relevant texts, Arabs’ way of thinking) had the lowest means. These results indicate that HLLs expect to achieve good grades and good communicative and literacy skills. However, their expectations of more abstract outcomes are tuned down.

Table 3: HLLs expected learning outcomes

The most significant outcome I want to get from Mean Std. Arabic class will be: Dev.

To speak Arabic fairly fluently 6.2400 1.23817 To communicate with Arabic speakers in basic Arabic 6.2600 1.29063 To develop reading comprehension of Arabic 6.4000 .96890 To receive an “A” grade from the class 6.4400 1.16339 To better understand Arabs and their way of thinking 5.1000 1.89790 To learn more about Arabic culture and customs 5.4800 1.56805 To understand Islam and relevant texts better 5.8800 1.70999

When comparing the two groups with each other using t-test statistic, Muslim HLLs differed significantly from Arab HLLs only regarding the outcome (understanding Islam and relevant texts better).

Table 4: t-test comparing Arab HLLs and Muslim HLLs expected outcomes

Item T-test val- Df Sig ue (2tail) To understand Islam and relevant texts -3.32 48 .002 better

The Impact of Standard Spoken in Tamil 105

3. Perceived Ability to Achieve Outcomes HLLs perceived themselves as most capable to (get an A grade, mean=8.4) and to (communicate in basic Arabic, mean= 8.18). They ranked their ability to achieve culture and identity outcomes lower than their ability to achieve linguistic skills. This may be due to the elusive nature of cultural input and assessment of culture in for- eign language classes compared to more concrete linguistic outcomes. Table 5: HLLs competence to achieve outcomes

My own ability to achieve the above outcomes? Mean Std. Dev. To speak Arabic fairly fluently 7.9600 1.60306 To communicate with Arabic speakers in basic Arabic 8.1800 1.54774 To develop reading comprehension of Arabic 7.9400 1.62141 To receive an “A” grade from the class 8.4000 1.45686 To better understand Arabs and their way of thinking 7.1400 2.49088 To learn more about Arabic culture and customs 7.2200 2.41838 To understand Islam and relevant texts better 7.8200 2.06714

When comparing the two groups using t-test statistic, Arab HLLs perceive themselves significantly more competent to achieve (speaking Arabic fluently) and (communicate in basic Arabic) as can be seen in table 6 below. Arab HLLs showed significantly more self- confidence in their ability to achieve these two goals than Muslim HLLs. This is fairly expected giving the proficiency (in speaking) ad- vantage Arab HLLs have over Muslim HLLs. Table 6: t-test comparing Arab HLLs and Muslim HLLs ability per- ceptions

Item T-test Df Sig valud (2tail) To speak Arabic fairly fluently 2.4 48 .021 To communicate with Arabic speakers in 3.2 48 .003 basic Arabic

106 Husseinali

4. Engagement in learning Arabic The following section presents results on the level of HLLs engage- ment in learning Arabic in terms of the amount of effort invested in the process, reflection, practice time, class participation, assignment correction and seeking opportunity to speak Arabic. The results in table 7 below point out that most HLLs will exert enough effort to learn Arabic. They do not expect learning Arabic to be an effortless endeavor. The majority will reflect on what they learned in class at least several times a week. In terms of time invested in learning Arabic, half of the HLLs will spend four hours a week studying Arabic after class. Thirty percent of HLLs will spend more than six hours learning Arabic after class. As for participation in class, fifty percent will par- ticipate voluntarily. However, there is a difference between Arab HLLs and Muslim HLLs in this regard. Twice as much percentage of Arab HLLs (69%) will volunteer answers compared to only (33%) of Muslim HLLs. Only twelve percent of HLLs will methodologically follow on feedback on their assignments. Arab HLLs are three times (39%) more likely to (use Arabic outside class) than Muslim HLLs (11%).

Table 7: HLLs engagement in learning Arabic

When I learn a foreign language, I ex- All Arab Muslim pect: HLLs HLLs HLLs 1. I will a. Pass on the basis of sheer 0 0 0 luck and intelligence b. Do just enough work to 4 9 0 get along c. Try to learn the language 82 82 81 d. Enjoy doing all the work 14 9 19

2. I will think about the words and ideas, which I have learned in my classes. a. Hardly ever 0 0 0 b. Once or twice a week 18 4 29 c. Several times during the 44 48 41 week The Impact of Standard Spoken in Tamil 107

d. Daily 38 48 29 3. I will spend this much time to practice the language after class a. Zero hours 2 0 4 b. One hour/week 14 13 15 c. Four hours/ week 54 56 52 d. More than six hours/ 30 30 29 week

4. I will a. Not necessarily be active 2 0 4 in speaking the language in class b. Answer the questions 30 22 37 when I am called c. Volunteer answers to the 18 9 26 questions which are easy d. Volunteer answers as 50 69 33 much as possible.

5. After I get my Arabic assignments back, I : a. Just throw them in my 10 9 11 desk b. Look them over but don’t 38 30 44 bother correcting mistakes c. Correct mistakes when I 40 48 33 have time d. Always rewrite them cor- 12 13 11 recting mistakes

6. I will try to speak Arabic after class: a. Never 2 0 4 b. Only when I have to 12 4 18 c. When I am offered the 62 56 67 opportunity to do so

108 Husseinali

d. In a wide variety of situa- 24 39 11 tions and as much as poss- ible

Discussion This study aims to find out the strength of Arabic HLLs mo- tivation, outcome expectations, competence, and engagement in learning Arabic. It also aims to examine if there are any differences between Arab HLLs and Muslim HLLs on all those variables. The results of this study clearly show strong motivation amongst all Arabic HLLs to learn Arabic for cultural and identity rea- sons (own Arabic culture, own Islamic heritage). Arabic HLLs are drawn to learn Arabic to connect to their native heritage rather than being exposed to it. On the other hand they are not motivated to learn Arabic for pure utilitarian reasons or as a result of the changing political environment. In terms of group differences, the results show significant dif- ferences between Arab HLLs and Muslim HLLs on two motivational variables. Arab HLLs are significantly more motivated to study Arab- ic to learn more about Arabic culture than do Muslim HLLs. On the other hand Muslim HLLs are significantly more motivated to learn Arabic to understand Islam better. Thus, while it is attested that HLLs differ from non HLLs in terms of identification motivation ( Husseinali 2006, Jin Sook Lee 05, Comanaru 2009 ), the significant differences between the two HLLs subgroups in this study with re- gard to identification motivation is new. One group is more interest- ed in general or secular identity connection to Arabic while the other is more interested in religious identity connection. Pedagogically, this means not all HLLs are equally motivated to study Arabic. Some have secular generic cultural motivation such as Arab HLLs; while others have specific religious cultural motivations such as Muslim HLLs. Arabic for heritage learners’ courses should distinguish be- tween the two groups. A number of other studies on HL teaching have reached the same conclusions. (Beaudrie, Ducar, & Relano- Pastor (2009) concluded that promoting a sense of self-identity and cultural pride is one of the primary needs of Spanish heritage learn- ers. The authors went on to suggest that Spanish for heritage learners should incorporate “courses whose focus is specifically culturally The Impact of Standard Spoken in Tamil 109

based” (p. 171). Kagan (2005) suggested that in order for HL instruc- tion to be effective the content for a typical HL Russian course should include cultural identity enhancers or connecters such as “classical literature, poetry and film”. The findings of this study sup- port this suggestion as far as Arab HLLs are concerned and adds that for Muslim HLLs Islamic identity enhancers or connectors should also be given equal weight. This is a new finding in Arabic heritage teaching. In terms of learning outcomes, the results show that HLLs valued immediate short term outcomes (getting an A), communica- tive outcomes (speaking and reading Arabic) more than long term ones (understanding one’s own culture or Islamic heritage). It seems that learners attach more value to reward outcomes. Although this finding may seem contradictory to the earlier one discussed above, it is not necessarily so upon closer examination. Arabic HLLs possess global motivations by being interested in learning more about their identity, but they also have local (classroom) motivation. Besides the global and local dichotomy we can understand the relation between the two motivational variables in term of value. For students the val- ue of connecting to their own culture and identity is important, but the value of learning specific skills is higher. This finding suggests that incorporating culture-based material in heritage courses should not come at the expense of targeting linguistic and communicative skills. In terms of competence, the results indicate that Arabic HLLs have highest competence with regard to “getting an A grade” and “be able to communicate in basic Arabic.” Understandably, Arab HLLs showed significantly more competence regarding ability to learn to speak Arabic than Muslim HLLs.

110 Husseinali

References:

Beaudrie, S., Ducar, C., & Relano-Pastor, A. M. (2009). Curricular Perspectives in the Heritage Language Context: Assessing Culture and Identity. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 22(2), 157-174. Carreira, M. (2004). Seeking Explanatory Adequacy: A Dual Ap- proach to Understanding the Term "Heritage Language Learner". Heritage Language Journal, 2(1). Husseinali, G. (2006). Who is Studying Arabic and Why? A Survey of Arabic Students' Orientations at a Major University. Foreign Language Annals, 39(3), 395-412. Kagan, O. (2005). In Support of a Proficiency-Based Definition of Heritage Language Learners: The Case of Russian. Internation- al Journal of Bilingual Education & Bilingualism, 8(2-3), 213-221. Lee, J. S. (2002). The Korean Language in America: The Role of Cul- tural Identity in Heritage Language Learning. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 15(2), 117-133. Lee, J. S. (2005). Through the Learners' Eyes: Reconceptualizing the Heritage and Non-Heritage Learner of the Less Commonly Taught Languages. Foreign Language Annals, 38(4), 554-567. Noels, K. A. (2005). Orientations to Learning German: Heritage Language Background and Motivational Processes. Canadian Modern Language Review, 62(2), 285-312. Valdes, G. (2001). Heritage language students: Profiles and possibili- ties. In J. K. Peyton, D. A. Ranard & S. McGinnis (Eds.), Her- itage languages in America: Preserving a national resource (pp. 37-77). Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics. Valdes, G. (2005). Bilingualism, Heritage Language Learners, and SLA Research: Opportunities Lost or Seized? Modern Language Journal, 89(3), 410-426. Van Deusen-Scholl, N. (2003). Toward a Definition of Heritage Lan- guage: Sociopolitical and Pedagogical Considerations. Journal of Language, Identity & Education, 2(3), 211 - 230.

The Impact of Standard Spoken Tamil in Singapore Tamil Classrooms

Seetha Lakshmi Nanyang Technological University Singapore

Abstract This paper examines recent changes in the teaching of Tamil in Sin- gapore to students from Tamil language homes. Tamil is a diglossic language, with a formal or H variety that is used mainly in writing and is learned in schools and a spoken or L variety that is used in infor- mal conversations and is learned naturally through exposure. Stan- dard Spoken Tamil (SST) is the variety used by educated Tamils re- gardless of their caste or region in Tamil Nadu. Following the review of the Tamil language curriculum and pedagogy in 2006 by the Minis- try of Education, Singapore (MOE), a Standardised variety of Spoken Tamil (SST) has become a key feature of Tamil language syllabus since 2008. This paper is based on a qualitative analysis of 18 primary school Tamil lessons and interviews with the participating teachers to understand: (a) the impact of introducing SST in Tamil classrooms; (b) the reactions of the teachers; and (c) those of the students to the lessons and techniques.

Keywords: Tamil language, Standard Spoken Tamil, Literary Tamil (LT), Writ- ten Tamil (WT), Tamil language classrooms, Singapore

Introduction

Language maintenance presents several long-term problems for mi- nority communities, one of which is language shift. The shift to the host country’s educational language can be as rapid as within two to three years. But community leaders encourage the new migrants to maintain their home languages as their heritage languages and for their ethnolinguistic identities (Mihyon, 2008; Wiley, 2001). In Sin- gapore, with a population comprising Chinese, Malays, Indians and

112 Lakshmi

Eurasians, the language of instruction in schools and universities is English. At the same time, students have to study their mother ton- gue language (Mandarin, Malay or Tamil) through the formal educa- tional system from the primary grades to Junior College. Children are expected to begin their formal schooling with a base in their home language.

However, the situation is complicated by the fact that some degree of language shift has already taken place in the communities in Singa- pore. Saravanan (2001) studied the network patterns of bilingual Chinese, Malay and Tamil children and found a shift in language use patterns from the community language to English. In general, the community language is preferred when interacting with the grandpar- ent’s generation, whereas English is used to speak with other children of the same age group. Mohamed Aidil Subhan (2007) reports on the declining linguistic proficiency of Malays as English is taking on the role of a lingua franca within the Malay community; he found that younger Malays were unable to use the standard variety of language.

As earlier mentioned, students in Singapore study two languages, English and one of these languages - Mandarin, Malay or Tamil. Bi- lingualism has been a feature of the Singapore school system since the 1960s (Tan Jason, 2002). “English has been touted as the lan- guage that will best provide access to science and technology. At the same time, the study of one of the three other languages -- Mandarin, Malay or Tamil -- was promoted as a means of preserving what were termed “traditional values” and of preventing deculturalization amid rapid societal modernization” (Tan Jason, 2002).

In Singapore, the three mother tongue languages (MTLs) are offered in schools as second languages. The Minister for Information and the Arts and Second Minister for trade and Industry stated that “[t]o transmit Chinese culture and the Chinese language effectively to suc- cessive generations of Chinese Singaporeans, we need a Chinese in- tellectual and cultural elite” (Yeo, 1998). On Malay, Masagos Zulkifli (2009) said that it is not the teachers’ responsibility alone but “a col- lective responsibility – involving parents, schools, Institutes of High- er learning, community organisations and the media”. In the Tamil The Impact of Standard Spoken in Tamil 113 community, the Ministers and social leaders wish to produce more cultural elites to make the language a living language in Singapore. The Tamil Language Curriculum and Pedagogical Review Committee (MOE, 2005) portrays its ideal future Tamil Singaporean with bilin- gual and bicultural abilities to have Tamil as the heartbeat of the community.

Teaching the MTLs in Singapore is a challenging task as more and more students come from English-speaking homes. The Educational Minister Dr Ng Eng Hen (2009) said that,

“Since the 1980s, more of our Prima- ry 1 students are coming from house- holds where English is the dominant home language... Only 1 in 10 of Pri- mary 1 Chinese students in 1982 (quarter century, age 33 today) came from homes that used English — the figure today is nearly 6 in 10. For In- dians it has moved from 3 in 10 to 6 in 10; Malays — 0.5 in 10 to 3.5 in 10. A seismic shift in language environ- ment has occurred within one genera- tion. Those above 40 years of age to- day would have grown up in homes that spoke their MTL, either predo- minantly or partly, either with parents, grandparents or siblings”.

In this multicultural and multilingual situation, teaching has to ad- dress the different needs of the different communities. Each com- munity is unique as it forms a different proportion of the population. The same techniques and strategies cannot be used to teach Manda- rin, Malay, and Tamil because of the differences in the communities’ language attitudes, language use in their personal and professional domains, opportunities for the use of the language within and outside homes, economic and cultural values of the language: and the com- munity’s economic development and confidence.

114 Lakshmi

As a minority community in Singapore, the Tamils and Tamil lan- guage use have their own issues. This paper first describes some of these issues. It then examines the use of spoken Tamil in Singapore, its impact on the Tamil language syllabus and the responses of stu- dents and teachers to Standard Spoken Tamil (SST).

Varieties of Tamil Tamil is characterized by diglossia (Britto, 1986; Ferguson, 1972). According to Ferguson (1972), there are two main varieties of Tamil - - the formal or H variety is used mainly in writing, and the second is the spoken or L variety that is used in ordinary everyday conversa- tions.

Within spoken Tamil, Schiffman (1998) has identified a variety termed Standard Spoken Tamil (SST) that is used by educated Tamil speakers to communicate in formal and informal situations. When a group of Tamil people from different dialect backgrounds meet, they use SST. It is a non-Brahmin variety that is not particular to a region and is understood by Tamils from all dialects. Schiffman (1998) de- scribed it as a spoken koine with a standardised grammar, syntax, and pronunciation. Annamalai (in Seetha, et al (2006) and Agasthialingom (2008)) adds that this is the variety that symbolises the community’s upward movement and developmental mobility of socio-economic status. SST is used between individuals in work settings as well as Tamil movies and dramas and is now being used in Singapore televi- sion dramas.

In contrast, Written Tamil (WT) is used in formal situations and in writing. It requires formal training as it involves a more complex me- thod of expression. Needless to say, the Tamil variety used in writing and for school examinations is not necessarily most suitable for use in daily interaction as it is more akin to a second language than a mother tongue. Annamalai (2011) says that there is a distinction be- tween the written language and writing the spoken language.

In Tamil Nadu, a few major varieties of Tamil language are used. WT is the variety generally used in Tamil newspapers, which can be un- The Impact of Standard Spoken in Tamil 115 derstood by a person who is able to read Tamil. The Literary level Written Tamil (LT) is the Tamil used in ancient poems. It is a variety easily understood by educated Tamil. Spoken Tamil is the variety used by people to interact in informal situations in the home, school and religious domains. Within Spoken Tamil, there are many dialectal varieties based on community sub-groups (e.g. Chettiar, Nadar, Brahmin, Mudaliar, etc.) and geographical districts (e.g. Tanjore, Trinelveli, Madurai, Arcot, and Chennai). Although these dialectical varieties of Spoken Tamil are considered a low variety much like the colloquial variety, a high variety of Spoken Tamil, the standardised Spoken Tamil has emerged in recent centuries.

In Singapore, SST has long been in use, and it has gained such wide- spread acceptance that it is assumed to be the native speaker’s spoken language. Unfortunately, this is not the form adopted in the class- room where emphasis is on the more literary form. Hence, students from English-speaking homes are unable to use the spoken form in their own community as the only variety they know is the WT variety. If Tamil were to be a living language in Singapore, it has to be used actively and spontaneously by young Tamil students. To bridge the divide between the community and the classroom, teachers need to be willing to bring samples of SST into the classroom by identifying suitable recordings and encouraging their students to listen to and discuss such material.

Standard Spoken Tamil as a Model for Language Usage SST is the variety used at homes and in informal interactions. No formal or special training is needed to learn the SST. Speaking in SST is easier than speaking in WT. SST connects the family, home, school, and community. At the same time, to acquire WT, a person has to go through formal training as it is used in formal situations and formal writing. In Singapore schools, written examinations in Tamil require the formal WT.

A very small percentage of Tamils in Singapore use colloquial Tamil (CT) terms in the midst of their SST; for example they say cootta nalla kottikko, which literally means to throw the rice well, whereas the SST

116 Lakshmi

term for kottikkoo is caappiTu which means eat. In classrooms too, certain students mix the colloquial terms with their SST.

In Singapore, the SST variety is used at home, in the community, media and business domains. In 1995, Tamil radio and television sta- tions switched from WT to SST in their informal programmes. Per- haps the most pressing reason to promote a switch to SST is that many students of the language complain that it is difficult for them to speak in Tamil. This, in turn, is because they were not exposed to the variety used in the classroom from their childhood (Saravanan, 1993). The first exposure of a Tamil child to WT is in the classroom. It is undoubtedly important that children be encouraged and supported to use their mother tongue language. If a Tamil family lives in a non- Tamil community, it becomes even more important to expose the child to the mother tongue language so that s/he can build a strong foundation in that language and be able to use it with confidence in his/her later life.

A child’s early exposure to Tamil would result in early acquisition of his/her mother tongue language. A child who is exposed to his/her mother tongue language will be able to enjoy his/her mother tongue language lessons. For Indian Singaporean children, late acquisition of Tamil in the school will make it difficult for them to learn the lan- guage with ease and to move to WT later. Before 2005, students were exposed to WT in their Tamil language classes and there were no op- portunities to use SST. This created an awkward situation wherein students speak in formal WT in informal settings.

The MOE Singapore (2005:14) which strongly encourages the use of SST gives the following examples to differentiate between SST and WT, a formal variety used in Spoken form:

a. I want money

enakku paNam veeNTum (WT) enakku paNam veeNum (SST)

The Impact of Standard Spoken in Tamil 117

b. He is very good

avar mikavum nallavar (WT) avaru romba nallavaru (SST)

c. Did you sell your house?

niinkaL unkaL viittai viRRuvittiirkaLaa? (WT) niinka unka vittai vittuttingaLaa? (SST)

In the above examples, there is no structural difference between the two varieties. But in b., the adjective mikavum in WT is romba in SST. It is also possible that more than one SST term exists for the same WT term. In c., the verb ‘sell’ in WT (unkaL) and in SST (un- ka) have different spellings.

Example 1: Mother is going to the shop In Singapore, there are a number of Tamil varieties used by the community. The Literary level of Written Tamil variety (LT) is ar- chaic Tamil used in formal situations. Some Tamil educators use this variety because they believe in using a pure and high variety of Tamil. Written Tamil (WT) is also a formal Tamil variety which is used in newspapers (Saravanan, 1993). This is not a difficult variety and can be understood without consulting a dictionary. The Standard Spoken Tamil variety (SST) is used by educated Tamils and it gives respect to the speakers in informal situations (Schiffman, 1998; Saravanan, 1993). The other varieties are used by certain community or age groups in the Singapore community. However, we see a high use of the SST variety starting in the late 1990s. In the simple example be- low, ‘Mother is going to the shop’, these varieties of Tamil are illus- trated. In all varieties (nos. 1 to 7), the Tamil word for mother and shop are the same. However, the phrase ‘is going to’ is celkiRaar in LT (no. 1), pookiRaar in WT (no. 2) and poorRaanka in SST (no. 3). In colloquial Tamil variety (CT), a non-standard spoken Tamil, the phrase ‘to the shop’ is shortened to kaTikki (no. 4). In no. 5, pooRaa is used instead. The word comes from a non-standard spoken Tamil used by a certain group of newly immigrated Tamil expatriates. In no. 6, pooRaani is another non-standard spoken Tamil that is used

118 Lakshmi

by students in their teens. Lastly, a non-standard spoken Tamil vari- ety used by primary school pupils in their informal speech is pre- sented in no. 7. The phrase going Raani shows the influence of English (going) in their speech.

Mother is going to the shop 1. அம்மா கைடக்குச் ெசல்கிறார் (LT) amma kaTaikkuc celkiRaar (LT) 2. அம்மா கைடக்குப் ேபாகிறார் (WT) amma kaTaikkuppookiRaar (WT) 3. அம்மா கைடக்குப் ேபாறாங்க (SST) amma kaTaikku pooRaanka (SST) 4. அம்மா கடிக்கிப் ேபாவுது (CT) amma kaTikki poovutu (CT) 5. அம்மா கைடக்குப் ேபாறா (a dialect used by newly immi- grated Tamil expatriates) amma kaTaikkuppooRaa 6. அம்மா கைடக்கு ேபாறானி (a non-standard spoken Tamil used by teenage students) amma kaTaikku pooRaani 7. அம்மா கைடக்கு goingறானி (a Taminglish variety used by primary school pupils) amma kaTaiikpooRaani

Mazhinan (1996:31), chairman of Tamil Education Review Commit- tee, SINDA, defined SST and the need for a critical awareness of it in Tamil Education in Singapore:

“From scholars to the man in the street, Tamils speak to each other in what is known as spoken Tamil. This is the natural or face-to-face commu- nication. Written Tamil or literary Tamil is used mostly in writings but also in formal communication such as The Impact of Standard Spoken in Tamil 119

public speaking and broadcasting. The difference between spoken Tamil and written Tamil is so much greater than the difference, for example, between colloquial English and formal English, that comparisons between the two languages become meaningless. This extreme diglossia is unique to Tamil among the four official languages in Singapore and therefore creates a unique problem for the Tamil educa- tion system”.

Nadaraja (in Seetha et al., 2006), a linguistic consultant for the Tamil syllabus at MOE, enumerated some observations and recommenda- tions on the use of SST/Street Tamil/Youth Tamil/Movie Tamil. First, he noted that WT was used as the language for textbooks after Primary one. So, he recommended the use of SST in textbooks as well as in classroom presentations. Second, he observed that Tamil teachers were using the regional dialect. He instead advised them to use the non-caste related dialect that is used by mass media (radio, movies, etc.) as it is considered SST and thus, it does not contradict his first recommendation. Third, he stressed that there is no such thing as street language and youth language; they are considered as home and regional dialects. Further, for comparison, he cited the problem on regional and social dialects in Tamil Nadu and stated that, “That is the reason why we always say that let us use only writ- ten Tamil for reading and writing and spoken Tamil only for listening in the classroom” (Nadaraja in Seetha et al., 2006).

In Singapore, the Spoken Tamil has been standardised by the com- munity and now among Singapore Tamils this variety is an accepted norm in informal situations. This SST is a symbol of a developed lin- guistic variety and a social marker of the community’s language ecol- ogy. As Schiffman (2010) stated, this variety is an emergent variety which is used in the mass media and spoken by educated speakers in the Tamil community in Tamil Nadu and Singapore.

120 Lakshmi

Spoken Tamil includes all spoken varieties of Tamil language includ- ing the varieties based on geographical districts, social groups (castes) and age groups of students. For standard spoken Tamil, there is a standardised variety. This standardised variety could be a dialectal variety but standardised by the educators’ community. In Singapore, it is the Tanjore variety as in earlier times, a significant number of Tanjore people came to live in Singapore. If there is no SST, within Spoken Tamil there is no high and low level difference. If a person speaks colloquial Tamil (CT) or a standard variety, both are consi- dered as spoken Tamil. But in reality, CT is not accepted. SST gives respect to the listener and speaker. As Annamalai stated (in Seetha et al., 2006), this variety shows the upward movement of the communi- ty and one’s status. Hence, a person who generally uses CT, must also try to use SST as it gives prestige and shows solidarity with the com- munity.

As an insider in Singapore Tamil classrooms, I overheard the follow- ing in trainee teachers’ talk in their teaching practicum. In Example 2, the teacher trainees used CT because they did not know the differ- ence between the low (stigmatised) and high varieties. SST is a non- stigmatised variety. Hence, teachers’ understanding of Spoken Tamil and SST are important to develop students as confident speakers of Tamil.

Example 2: Colloquial Tamil 1. Go to McDonald’s and pour well ெமக்ேடானல்ட்ஸ்ல ேபாய் நல்லா ெகாட்டிக்ேகாங்க (CT) McDonald’sla pooi nalla kottikkoonka (CT)

2. We won’t eat anything in the night ராைவக்கி நாம ஒன்னும் தின்னமாட்ேடாம் (CT) raavaikki naama tinnamaattoom (CT) rattirikku naanka onnum caapiTamaattoom (SST)

In no. 1, Example 2, kottikoonka is the colloquial term for the phrase ‘eat well’. In SST, it is caapiTunka. For no. 2, the SST for the collo- The Impact of Standard Spoken in Tamil 121

quial words raavaikki and tinnamaattoom are raatthirikku (in the night) and caapiTamaattom (we won’t eat), respectively.

The Tamil Community in Singapore Even though Tamil is considered a MTL in schools, majority of Ta- mil children aged five years and above do not communicate in this language. Statistics show a decreasing trend in homes speaking Tamil: 52.2% in the 1980s, 43.7%, in the 1990s and 42.9% in 2000. This is partly due to the influence of English, which is being used widely, but also because with both parents working, the use of Tamil at home decreases and Tamil is only used in the classroom. According to the latest survey, 38% of Tamil students speak English in their homes and 26% speak Tamil occasionally. Nearly 33% of Tamil students speak English and Tamil frequently while 30% of students speak Tamil at home and 23% of them said that they speak Tamil mostly with occasional English at home. Here, 82% of Tamil students use both languages in different proportions. Only 7% use Tamil at home and 12% use English as their main conversational language. We could say that only 38% of Tamil language students speak English at home and nearly 62% use Tamil at home. This may be seen as a positive signal but this is a small increase when compared to previous surveys on young students. 1

Among parents, there is growing concern that children spend more time on mother tongue language work (20%) and reading books (33%). They would prefer their children to spend more time on other subjects. In certain schools, for the primary classes to be selected as a good class, MTL is not counted in the selection and ranking criteria. Students who are in primary 6 and secondary 4 classes have a strong perception that learning the MTL subject is important (95% and 87%), enjoy Tamil lessons (94% and 87%) and like to learn the sub- ject (95% and 87%), respectively.

Tamil students have few opportunities to use the language outside home and school. They have to buy special software for Tamil if they want to use the language in computers and mobile phones.

1 http://www.moe.gov.sg/media/press/files/2011/mtl-review-report-2010.pdf).

122 Lakshmi

Without ready and free access to Tamil language in computing and mobile technology, they have no choice but use English. In addition, there are fewer chances for Tamil students to see advertisements or other printed materials in Tamil. This is reflected in a report pub- lished by MOE in 2010 that states that the percentage of Indian stu- dents whose first home language is English has increased from 49% in 1991 to 59% in 2010 (MOE, 2010). In another survey involving 1,600 Indian primary and secondary school students, K Ramiah found that six out of ten students prefer speaking in English and more than 40% admitted that they would not study Tamil if it were not compulsory. One student was quoted as saying, “it drives me crazy just to look at a comprehension passage” and another said, “my parents tell me that if I learn Tamil, I will only get a job as a coolie” (The Straits Times, 2000).

Despite the full support from the government to promote the use of the Tamil language, the community continuously raises questions such as Tamil cooru pooTuma? (Will Tamil provide food to you?) and Tamil paTittaal veLinaaTu pookamuTiyumaa? (Will you go overseas with Tamil education alone?). A significant number of Tamil community members are doubtful about reaping any benefits from using the Tamil language at homes. This is further compounded by the fact that Tamil is not taught in an interesting way in schools (Shegar and Ridzuan, 2005; MOE, 2005).

Reviews of the Mother Tongue Language (MTL) Curriculum Despite Tamil teachers’ strong beliefs in espousing literary level Writ- ten Tamil rather than using the informal variety in school settings, there have been complaints that the Tamil taught in school is archaic and not graded by difficulty level. In his study of primary school textbooks and syllabus, Schiffman (1998) found the vocabulary diffi- cult and stressed that SST has to be the foundation of textbooks in Singapore. He portrayed this state as being “tongue-tied” and raised questions about a language policy for Tamil as there was no spoken Tamil in the Tamil classrooms before 2005 (Schiffman, 1998). He suggested that corpus planning of Tamil is necessary to develop func- tional use of the language. Spoken Tamil should be standardized be- The Impact of Standard Spoken in Tamil 123

cause as Nadaraja says, “Singapore has its own dialect and it is more appropriate to use that in the teaching materials” (Seetha et al., 2006).

In 1996, the Singapore Indian Development Association (SINDA) conducted a review and called for an understanding and adoption of Standard Spoken variety in Tamil classrooms (Mahizhnan, 1996). SINDA also recommended addressing the clear differences and dis- tinctions between the Tamil education syllabuses for the Secondary school streams, namely, Express, Normal and Normal Technical streams, and stressed the need for a word list in textbooks. The MOE-engaged Forbes Research (1999) mother tongue language re- view committee found that students had difficulties in comprehen- sion and composition and did not have much fun or interest in learn- ing Tamil. The committee recommended suitable standards with the shift in the students’ home background (MOE, 2002). Certain fea- tures of the Tamil language syllabus, such as proverbs unsuitable for the local context, were removed. In 2004-2005, the Centre for Re- search in Pedagogy and Practice, National Institute of Education (NIE) conducted a curriculum review and recommended, among other things, using an accessible language i.e., SST, linking the text- book content with assessment, undertaking textbook reform, and using multimedia and IT.

In 2005, another review was carried out and a Forbes survey was conducted with its stakeholders (MOE, 2005). The findings remained the same. Students found open-ended comprehension very difficult and learning Tamil was not fun or ‘cool’. Here, the objective was to nurture and sustain in all children an interest in learning the mother tongue languages to their highest level, and in using the language well after they leave school. One of the review’s key recommendations was the use of Spoken Tamil in the Tamil classes to have confident and effective bilingual Indian Singaporeans. The committee strongly felt that use of SST in day-to-day life and outside classroom was the key to make Tamil a living language in Singapore. The new syllabus was implemented in 2008 for primary schools and in 2010 for sec- ondary schools; the textbook materials were produced in phases. In 2010, an MTL review was carried out again. A key finding was that the measures implemented in 2008 were effective and efforts would

124 Lakshmi be made to build on the strengths of the measures already in place. Information and communication technology (ICT) would be used more as young students are already ‘digital natives’. Further, the MTL curriculum needs to be tailored to the students’ home background to develop students “as proficient users who can communicate effec- tively using the language in real-life contexts and apply it in inter- personal communication, listening and reading for comprehension, and presenting in spoken and written forms” (MOE, 2011). The re- vised curriculum was implemented at the end of 2010. Table 1 presents an overview of all the above-mentioned reviews, recom- mendations and results. Since the recommendations from the reviews conducted by NIE and MOE (MOE, 2005; 2010), SST has become an important aspect of Tamil teaching in Singapore.

Table 1 The key issues and recommendations of the reviews Year Issues and recommendations 1996 Need awareness on SST and second language pedagogy 1999 Tamil lessons are difficult for students and the change of home language background 2004 Textbook reform, use of accessible language and link texts with assessment and use of IT 2005 Shift in home language background and difficulty for stu- dents to learn and write exams 2010 Use of IT and strengthening of the implementation of SST

Researchers have provided feedback that spoken language should be emphasized in classrooms. A number of research studies (Annamalai 2011; Asher, 1982; Ferguson, 1972; Mahizhnan, 1996; Mani & Gopi- nathan, 1983; Ministry of Education, 2005; Ramiah, 1991, 2002; Sa- ravanan, 1989, 1998; Saravanan, Lakshmi, & Caleon, 2007; Schiff- man, 1995, 1998, 2002, 2008) have been carried out to identify, define and develop spoken Tamil and the SST variety in educational and media domains. Following committee recommendations, the re- vised curriculum and textbooks for selected primary classes were in- troduced in 2008 in Singapore. Further, the project reports were pre- sented at the MOE Review committee. The nationwide awareness for Standarised variety of spoken Tamil in education allows the commu- The Impact of Standard Spoken in Tamil 125

nity to complement these efforts. Greater emphasis was recommend- ed to be placed on developing students’ listening and speaking skills especially in the lower primary years. Students need oral skills so that they can use Tamil confidently in daily situations (MOE, 2005: 35). The revised curriculum should ensure a strong grounding in spoken Tamil so that students develop a lifelong facility in the language through being able to comfortably switch between Standard Spoken and formal Tamil in different contexts (MOE, 2005: 36). Although spoken Tamil is currently used in many classrooms”, teachers still encourage their students to speak formal Tamil in a number of class- rooms. Don Snow (1996:16) argues that learners need to amass suffi- cient vocabulary in reading text and listening to speech in order to develop a solid foundation in that culture. After the curriculum re- view report at the NIE (Seetha et al., 2006), SST has an important place in Tamil teacher training.

Teachers’ understanding of spoken and written Tamil is critical, for which training is required. NIE started pre- and in-service courses; the majority of in-service teachers have gone through the new courses and pre-service teachers have studied the importance and use of SST in the classroom. Still, teachers need further guidance on how to assess SST in examinations. For this, they need an understanding of sociolinguistics and bilingualism theories that will help them un- derstand student difficulties in language learning. Teachers in the MOE-sponsored M Ed programme are aware of these theories. A significant number of Tamil teachers have studied in English-medium schools but still use the mother tongue at home. However, with li- mited input to their language, greater expertise is needed especially since a sizeable proportion of students in the Tamil classes are expa- triate children.

During formal interviews and informal discussions with the Tamil teachers conducted for this study, some teachers said that although changes have been implemented, the school management expects them to give good academic results. One of the changes that has been implemented is the use of Standard Spoken Tamil (SST) in classrooms. In addition, the students, particularly Primary 6 students, are expected to know Written Tamil (WT) for major government ex-

126 Lakshmi

aminations such as the PSLE (Primary Six Leaving Examination). The implemented changes have positive results as stated elsewhere in the paper but at the same time, teachers are required to teach WT to students for examinations and they are also expected to cover every- thing in the syllabus. This implies that teachers need to focus on pre- paring students for examinations and complete the syllabus and text- book lessons. Hence, they need more training on how to utilize the early primary classes to develop listening, speaking and reading and the upper primary classes to teach writing in order to prepare stu- dents for national examinations. A similar pattern of skills develop- ment and exam preparation can be followed in secondary school.

Compared to previous years, there is now significant progress in the use of Tamil. The Strait Times (February 20, 2000) reported that the Umar Pulavar Tamil centre was to be created as a national resource centre and mount it as a teaching centre to embrace the setting up of Tamil language elites who may become future leaders in Singapore. For the past few years, the Tamil Language Council and Tamil com- munity organizations have celebrated yearly the Tamil Language Fes- tival. Various programmes such as debates for students from primary school through Junior College build a foundation in the language and culture. There is interest in the community to use Tamil in the 24- hour radio programme Oli 96.8 where young comperes who are mostly bilingually educated can get a feel for the language. Vasanthan TV has been given extended hours and a separate channel. There is now wide viewership for locally produced Tamil dramas such as veettai, collamalee, nijankaL and vaijayanti. The popular programmes which used to be featured in Vasantham TV received recognition for their wide viewership. Recordings of these programmes are available at the xin.msn.com website.

The Use of SST in Singapore Mahizhnan (1996:31) argued that the review committee would like to urge MOE to set up a special committee to study the viability of in- troducing and using SST widely within the school system. In Singa- pore, SST has long been in use, and it has gained such widespread acceptance that it is assumed to be the native speaker’s spoken lan- guage. Unfortunately, this is not the form adopted in the classroom The Impact of Standard Spoken in Tamil 127

where the literary form is emphasized. Hence, students from English- speaking homes were unable to use the spoken form at the commu- nity and the only variety they knew is the written form, which is Writ- ten Tamil. In Singapore, if Tamil is to be a living language it has to be used actively and spontaneously by young Tamil students (Seetha et al., 2006; Shegar and Ridzuan, 2005). To bridge the divide between the community and the classroom, teachers need to use SST in the classroom by using suitable recordings and encouraging their stu- dents to listen to and discuss such material.

In speaking or oratorical competitions organized by various Tamil associations, students are good at speaking fast or using rhyme. However, in a debate, even students in higher classes struggle to speak in the impromptu round where they have to answer questions posed by the judge. Here, we find that native speakers or Singaporean students whose parents are from India are effectively bilingual in both the spoken and written varieties of Tamil, whereas Singaporean students who study Tamil as a second language have difficulty switching between the two varieties (Vaish, 2007; Shegar and Rid- zuan, 2005). This year, the government and the Tamil Language Council are organizing a month-long Tamil language festival.

Until 1995, audio media used WT, but now SST is used more widely in the media (Saravanan, 1993). Schiffman (1988) also noted that Tamil movies have adopted SST. As such, Tamil teachers especially those who are teaching early primary school classes, need to expose students to the spoken variety as this is the variety they are likely to encounter outside school. After being exposed to Standard Spoken Tamil, students can then better learn literary Tamil which still holds significance as a more formal variety for use in assessment and evaluation.

It is envisaged that the use of SST in the classroom will have several beneficial outcomes. First, if the language variety used at home is similar to the one used in schools, students are less likely to have dif- ficulty mastering the language. Second, the switch to SST will in- crease student motivation to communicate in Tamil and reduce the stress associated with learning Tamil. Third, the use of SST in school

128 Lakshmi

will heighten the impact of efforts by the popular media, such as Oli 96.8 FM (Tamil radio) and Vasantham Channel (Tamil Television channel), to reach out to Tamilians of all age groups in their mother tongue, which will in turn increase the salience of Tamil as a living language in Singapore.

SST can work as the link between the home and school language to help students improve their Tamil. Thinnappan (in Seetha, et al. 2006) and Rajendran (in Seetha et al., 2006) stated that SST should be en- couraged, but research is needed (Annamalai in Seetha, et al, (2006)). Teaching SST in schools will increase students' awareness of their ethnicity, language, and identity in Singapore. In bridging their ex- periences at home, in the community, and at school, students will learn to appreciate their culture. This is in fact a key objective of the current Tamil curriculum in Singapore schools. Most importantly, the propagation of the spoken form of the language will slow down the level of language loss that continues to be observed in Singapore, where Tamil is a required second language for students of South In- dian backgrounds (Seetha et al., 2006).

The Study From 2005, both the Tamil education community and the Tamil community became aware of major changes in Tamil education and the use of Standard Spoken Tamil. Hence teachers started using Standard Spoken Tamil from 2006. Their syllabus was re-designed and the textbooks implemented in 2008 (MOE, 2008). The three re- search questions addressed during the project were: 1. What is the impact of the SST which has been implemented in the school curriculum? 2. What are the responses of the teachers who teach this variety of Tamil? 3. What do the students, who are the future Tamil-speaking Singaporeans, think about the lessons and the techniques that are used by the teachers who teach Standard Spoken Tamil?

The Impact of Standard Spoken in Tamil 129

Data Collection The data analysed for the present study come from audio and video recordings of eighteen lessons from Primary one to five Tamil class- rooms and interviews with the stakeholders, i.e. teachers and students under two research projects, “An Examination of the use of Standard Spoken Tamil in the school and media domains in Singapore in order to establish SST as an additional resource for the teaching and learn- ing of Tamil” (CRP 10/06 SL) and “Curriculum Implementation in Early Primary Schooling in Singapore (CIEPSS)” (OER47/08MS). Eight lessons from Primary three to Primary five classes from eight schools comprise the data taken from the first project. These lessons which are nearly seven hours in length were recorded from 2008 to 2010. Data from the second project come from another eight schools and consist of five hours of five Primary one Tamil lessons and five Primary two Tamil lessons that are five hours and 10 mi- nutes long. The lessons were recorded between March and Novem- ber 2009. All 14 excerpts used in this paper were extracted from the aforementioned data sets. The team of research assistants who had transcribed the lessons includes a native speaker. They all have ex- tensive experience in Tamil language research and were trained by the principal investigators of both projects. The transcriptions were coded using a scheme developed by the author based on Spoken Ta- mil grammar (Schiffman, 1979, 1999). In addition to the video and audio recordings of the lessons, the author interviewed the teachers who conducted the lessons. As part of the first project, she also talked with primary school students on their Tamil language classes through formal and informal interviews during her learning work- shops and school visits. She also observed student-to-student inte- ractions before and after their Tamil language classes.

Language Varieties used in Tamil Classrooms This section examines the language forms used by teachers and stu- dents in Tamil classrooms. Based on the observations of lessons done for the present study, sen- ior Tamil teachers in Singapore tend to use more WT while younger teachers use spoken formal Tamil with code switching. Due to their limited content knowledge and unaware of how to use their passive

130 Lakshmi

cultural knowledge, younger novice teachers tend to follow their les- son scripts strictly and in doing so, they fail to invite their students to be active participants in class. When speaking Tamil, teachers occa- sionally include words from WT in order to avoid using their English equivalents. When this is not possible, teachers mix English with SST.

During group activities, students tend to speak in English even though some are proficient in SSL when the teacher is not around. In the presence of a teacher though, the students use SST. When writing answers or compositions, students are willing to raise ques- tions and request translations for English terms or request a WT equivalent for the SST terms.

Based on this corpus’s frequency profile, the following five words are most frequently used by students in their classroom conversations with their peers and teachers: வந்து-vantu (came); இருக்கு- irukku (have); நான்-naan (I); அந்த-anta (that); ஒரு-oru (one) and ஆசிரியர்-aaciriyar (teacher). These words are also among the 500,000 SSL words in the corpus data bank transcriptions from the first project (Lakshmi and Saravanan, 2009).

Many students have their first experiences with Tamil in the class- room and they are exposed to WT before any kind of spoken Tamil. This is usually the case for students from English-speaking homes as illustrated in Example 3 below. In Example 3, the students used the verbs, uNNaamal (without eating), alikkaama (without giving), kaanp- pikkiraTu (it shows) and the nouns mannanai (the king), and payanum (use) in WT instead of the SST terms caapiTaamal (without eating), kuTukkaama (without giving), kaatturatu (it shows), and the nouns raajaavai (the king), prayojanamum (use), laabamum (profit).

The Impact of Standard Spoken in Tamil 131

Example 3: WT and SST mix 1. I will give my food என்ேனாட உணைவ தருேவன் ennooTa uNavai taruveen

2. He gave it to him without eating. He will always promote good values, that’s why they give அவர் உண்ணாமல் அவர்ட்ட ெகாடுத்துட்டு அவர் எப்ேபாதும் நல்ல பண்புகைள வளர்ப்பார்னு அவர்ட்ட ெகாடுக்குறாங்க avar uNNaamal avarkitta koTuttu avar eppotum nalla paNpu- kalai valarppaarnu avarkitta koTukkuRaanka

3. It did not benefit பயனும் அளிக்காமப் ேபாயிட்டு payanum aLikkaama poyittu

4. I think it is showing the king. Aang. மன்னைன காண்பிக்கிறது என்று நிைனக்கிேறன். ஆங். mannanai kaanppikkiratu enru ninaikkireen. Aang.

Primary School Lesson Excerpts In the early primary classes, the students show an interest in speaking. Students from English-speaking homes use English and Written Ta- mil. The teachers also use English, either when they are unsure about the Tamil translation or to help students understand.

132 Lakshmi

Excerpt 1 The language variety used by the teacher (WT or SST) influences which variety students use to continue the turn. This can be seen in the excerpt below. When the teacher uses SST, students tend to re- spond in SST. But when the teacher uses WT, students feel pressured to respond in WT.

1. Generally ஆசிரியர் வணக்கம் நாம் இப்ெபாழுது the ஒரு முக்கியமான ஒரு teacher uses WT ெசய்திையப் பற்றிப் ேபச விரும்புகிேறாம். நீங்கள் அேநகமாக அந்த இயற்ைக பற்றிக் ேகள்விப் பட்டிருப்பர்கள்ீ . இயற்ைக நமக்கு நல்லைதயும் ெசய்கிறது; அேத சமயத்தில் நமக்கு பல தீங்குகைளயும் விைளவிக்கிறது. அது தீங்கு என்று ெசால்லமுடியாது, அது இயற்ைகயின் நிகழ்ச்சி. இப்படி ஒரு நிகழ்ச்சி ேபான வருடம் உலகத்தில் நடந்தது. யாருக்காவது ெதரியுமா? என்ன நிகழ்ச்சி என்று? aasiriyar vaNakkam naam ippoRudu oru muk- kiyamaana oru ceidiyaip paRRippeeca The Impact of Standard Spoken in Tamil 133

virumpukiRoom. niingkal aneekamaaka anta iyaRkai paRRik keeLvip pattirup- piirkaL. iyarkai namakku nallataiyum ceykiRatu. adee samayattil namakku pala tiingukaLaiyum viLaivikkiratu. adu tiin- gu eNru solla muTiyaaTu. adu iyarkaiyin nikaRcci. ippaTi oru nikaRcci poona va- ruTam ulakattil naTantatu. yaaruk- kaavatu teriyumaa? enna nikaRcci enRu? Teacher Greetings. Now we would like to talk about some important news. You would have probably heard about nature. Nature does good to us; at the same time, it causes a lot of harm. We cannot come to the conclusion that it was a bad incident, but rather it was an act of nature. An incident like this happened last year in the world. Does anyone know? What is the incident?

2. . Teacher மாணவர் அதுதான் சுனாமி uses WT

only maaNavar atutaan cunaami. Student That was tsunami

3. …. . Teacher ஆசிரியர் ம் சுனாமி இந்த சுனாமி continues என்று ெசால்லப்படுகின்ற with WT ஒரு இயற்ைகப் ேபரிடர் ேபான வருடம் நடந்தது. எங்ேக நடந்தது, எங்ேக ஆரம்பித்தது என்று யாருக்காவது ெதரியுமா?

134 Lakshmi

aasiriyar m. . cunaami. inda cunaami enRu colla- paTukinRa oru iyaRkaippeeriTar poona varudam naTantatu. engee naTantatu, engee aarampittatu enRu yaarukkaavadu teriyumaa? Teacher Mm... Tsunami. A natural disaster known as a tsunami occurred last year. Does anyone know where it happened? Where it started?

4. WT மாணவர்: இந்ேதாேனசியாவில். maaNavar Indonesiavil. Student: In Indonesia

5. WT only ஆசிரியர்: இந்ேதாேனசியாவிேல ஆரம்பித்ததாக ெசால்கிறர்கள்ீ . சரி அங்கிருந்து அந்த சுனாமி என்ற ஒரு.. இயற்ைகப் ேபரிடர் ஏற்பட்டுப் பல பகுதிகைளப் பாதித்தது. அது யாருக்காவது ெதரியுமா எந்ெதந்த பகுதிகைளப் பாதித்தது என்று? aasiriyar Indonesiavilee aarampittataaka colki- Riirkal. cari ankiruntu anta cunaami enRa oru... iyaRkaip peeriTar eerpattup pala pakutikalaip paatittatu. atu yaa- rukkaavatu teriyumaa ententa pakutika- laip paatittatu enRu? Teacher: You say that it started from Indone- The Impact of Standard Spoken in Tamil 135

sia. Okay. From there, the natural disaster called the tsunami occurred and affected many areas. Does any- one know what areas it affected?

6. : . Country’s மாணவர் ஸ்ரீலங்கா name is in WT. It is same in the SST too. maaNavar: Sri Lanka Student: (Sri Lanka)

Excerpt 2 At the same time, sometimes the students’ language also influences that of the teacher. In Excerpt 2, the teacher repeats the students’ answer, ‘form fill up’ pannoom (we filled up the forms) and uses a few more English terms.

1. : Teacher ஆசிரியர் ேபான வாரம் என்ன uses mostly ெசஞ்சிங்கனு ஞாபகம் SST இருக்க? aaciriyar: poona vaaram enna cenchinkanu gnaapakam irukka? Teacher: Do you remember what you did last week?

2. : form fill up Students மாணவர்கள் பன்ேனாம் used SST with code maaNavarkaL: Form fill up pannoom mixing in English Students: We filled up the form

136 Lakshmi

3. : form fill up Teacher ஆசிரியர் ஆமா follows stu- பன்னங்ஙீ . ஆமா form dents’ reply and used பத்தி ேபசுேனா இல்ல? Very stressful you know?.. SST and code mixing சில மாணவர்கள் சரி in English ெசால்லிட்டங்க ஆனா ைகெயழுத்துப் ேபாடல. aaciriyar: aamaa form fill up panniinka. aamaa form patti peecunoo illa? very stressful you know?. .cila maaNavarkaL cari collittaanga aanaa kaiyeRuttu pooTala Teacher: Yes, you did fill out the form. Yes, we spoke about the form, right? You know, it was very stressful. Some students said ok, but have not signed it.

There are currently about 700 Tamil teachers working in Singapore schools (Nalluraj, 2012; MOE, 2012). After the closure of the only Tamil High School in 1982 (Ramiah, 1998), the teachers who are enlisted into Tamil teach- ing received bilingual education. About 150 teachers who are native speakers recruited from India to work here as Tamil teachers are mostly assigned in Sec- ondary schools and Junior Colleges. Those who were born and brought up in Sin- gapore and studied Tamil as a second language are relatively young and enthusias- tic about upgrading their academic qualifications. During the interview, many of these young teachers generally want to teach in SST and engage their students by equipping them with aural and oral skills. Being in this position, they greatly motivate students from English-speaking homes who struggle to speak Tamil via SST. One of them told that, “speaking in Standard Spoken Tamil is easy and not stressful. Students are also happy to listen and answer without fear!” This also surfaced in one of the focus group discussions in another study in which the author was also involved (2006). Hence in the early primary classes, we witness the use of SST as an encouraging situation. The Impact of Standard Spoken in Tamil 137

Excerpt 3 In Excerpt 3, the student asks a question using SST. When teachers encourage the use of SST, students are less afraid to ask questions.

1. , Fluent use மாணவர் என்னா ஆசிரியர் இன்னிக்கு of SST என்ன ெசால்லித்தரப் ேபாறங்கீ ? maaNavar enna aaciriyar, innikku enna collitara pooRiinka?

Student Teacher, today what is the name of the lesson that you are going to teach?

Excerpt 4 At the same time, they are very confident in talking to the teacher and initiating the conversation. This is apparent in Excerpt 4.

1. : , Fluent use மாணவர் நீங்கதான் ஆசிரியராச்ேச of SST நீங்க சரியாத்தான் ெசால்வங்கீ ! maaNavar: niinkataan aaciriyaraaccee, niinga cariyaataan colvinka! Student: You are a teacher, so you will tell the correct things!

Excerpt 5: Teacher is the role model Generally in class, the Tamil teacher is speaking in SST. The teacher is the role model for the students. Sometimes students have difficul- ties, as they do not know the exact Tamil word for an English term. As they think in English and study most of their subjects in English, they use the English term in the midst of their Tamil speech. Espe- cially Tamil students have difficulties in finding Tamil terms for a number of verbs in the Tamil classes. Copy is one such verb. In Ex- cerpt 5, students use the word copy while talking about Amir. Here, if the teacher can understand the students’ situation and frequently use

138 Lakshmi the Tamil term for copy in subsequent lessons, then the Tamil term becomes familiar to students and subsequently they will use it in their speech.

1. : ! One Eng- மாணவர் அமீர் காப்பிப்பண்ணுரா lish word

and one maaNavar: Amir copy paNNuRaa SST word

Student: Amir is copying 2. : . . . Mostly ஆசிரியர் இல்ல அவரு SST . ெசாந்தமாதா எழுதுறாரு பாத்துக்ேகாங்க அவர் எப்படி எழுதுறாருன்னு கவனிங்க. . . எழுதிட்டீங்களா? சரி

aaciriyar: Illa . . . avaru contamaataa eRutuRaaru. paattukkoongka. avar eppaTi eRutuRaa- runnu kavaningka. eRutittiingkaLaa? cari.

Teacher: No. He is writing on his own. See, observe him how he is writing. Have you written? Ok.

At times, teachers too use English terms. Here we could ask whether Tamil teachers should use English words in the class. Although the answer is no, in a multilingual, globalised country, current teachers who have gone through English-medium education have limited con- tent knowledge in Tamil and Tamil vocabulary and thus do not know the exact Tamil term for some English words.

The Impact of Standard Spoken in Tamil 139

Excerpt 6 In Excerpt 6, the teacher used words like ‘group’ and ‘correct’ in the midst of their Tamil speech. Sometimes these words also register well in their minds and they use them in their lessons. For these teachers, the content-oriented degree programme in Tamil is very useful in equipping them with the Tamil language.

1. : . . . . Teaching voca- ஆசிரியர் ஆ ரம்பம் bulary. Except ஆரம்பம் சரி that word, teach- er uses SST ஒன்று! சரி இங்க இருந்து aaciriyar: aa. . rambam. aarambam. cari, onRu! cari. inka iruntu. Teacher: aa. . rambam.(starting). aarambam(starting). Ok. onru(one). From here. . 2. Teaching voca- மாணவர்கள்: ஆ. . . லயம் bulary

maaNavarkaL: aa. . layam

Students: aa. . . layam (Temple).

3. : . . . Teaching the ஆசிரியர் ஆ லயம் following two இரண்டு. . இந்த nouns: aa. ... layam (Temple). குரூப்புல இருந்து! Irandu (two)... நிஷாந்; aaciriyar: aa. . layam. iraNTu. Inta Teacher uses group-la iruntu! Nishanth Group-la (the group) instead of KuRuvula Teacher Temple. . . Two . . . From

this group. Nishanth. 4. Teacher is teach- ஆசிரியர்: ஆ. . ப்பம் ஆ. . .

140 Lakshmi

. . ing vocabulary ப்பம் ஆ ப்பம் by repeating

கரக்ட் சரி மூன்று same word. இங்க இருந்து! aaciriyar: aa. . ppam. Aa. . .ppam. Mostly teacher aa…ppam. Correct. cari. uses SST and moonRu. Inga irundu! one English word

Teacher Indian pancake. .. Indian aa...ppam (Indian pancake. . Indian pan pan cake made cake. . Correct. Three . by rice); muunRu From here. (three).

Excerpt 7 In Excerpt 7, the teacher mostly uses SST and otherwise she uses written Tamil terms that are mainly nouns. For example, taaL (paper), aintee ainntu (only five), onRu (one), iranTu (two), naanku( four), kuru talaivarkaL (team leaders). Here, they do not use Standard Spoken Tamil to tell the numbers. It might be their orientation in school and they continue with that trend without changing to Spoken Spoken Tamil. Here the teacher needs to be conscious of what he or she is saying in class, as they are role models for their students. At the same time, in Singapore teachers also use the term potti for the spoken Ta- mil term petti, which means box. In the past, people from India came with a box (trunk) and the whole community called it potti instead of petti. For paper, they do not use kaayitam as used in Tamil Nadu, but the WT word taaL. In Tamil, in some places in Singapore, however, the WT word is used in SST. For example, book is called pustakam in India. But in Singapore, the WT word, puttakam is used in SST. Cur- rently, second language educated Tamil youths use the WT words for SST.

The Impact of Standard Spoken in Tamil 141

1. : ……… Generally ஆசிரியர் ேகள்விெயல்லா teacher இல்ல. . . எனக்கு uses SST except the அந்தக் குழு terms, ku- தைலவர்கள் எல்லாம் Ru talai- . varkaL வாங்க குழு (team தைலவர்கள் மட்டும் leaders). For the இங்க வாங்க! இைத English புடி! நிஷந் இருங்க word, ‘pencil’, it வேர! ேமகான்! இருங்க is the வேர! ேமகான்! இருங்க common வேர! ேமகான்! இப்ப term in Tamil, too. உங்க குழு தைலவர்கள் ஒங்ககிட்ட ஒரு தாள் ெகாடுக்கறாங்க. கைடச்சதா? ேபன்சில் எடுத்தாச்சா?.. aaciriyar: …………keelviyella illa. ….enakku antak kuRu talaivar- kaL ellaam vaanka. kuru talaivar- kaL mattum ingka vaangka! Itai puTi! Nisanth, irungka vareen! Mekaan! Irungka vareen! Meekaan irunka vareen! Meekaan! Ippa ung- ka kuRu talaivarkaL ongkakitta oru taaL koTukkiraangka. ka- Taiccataa? Pencil eTutaaccaa? Teacher No question. For me the group leaders only come here. Hold this. Nishanth, wait, I will

142 Lakshmi

come. Meekaan, wait I will come. Meekaan, wait I will come. Now your groupleaders are giving a paper to you. Have you received it? Have you tak- en your pencil?

2. மாணவர்கள்: ஆமா. . . maaNavarkaL: Aamaa Students: Yes

3. ஆசிரியர்: ெபயர் எழுதியாச்சா? சரி. . எழுதறதுக்கு ஐந்ேத ஐந்து கணக்குத்தா. .ஒன்று. . . இரண்டு. . . மூன்று. . . நான்கு. . ேததி வந்து பலைகயில இருக்கு. பாத்தாச்சா? aaciriyar: peyar eRutiyaaccaa? cari. . . eRuta- Ratukku aintee aintu kaNakkut- taa . . onRu… iraNTu . . . muu- nRu. . . naanku. . . teeti vantu palakaiyila irukku. paataaccaa? Teacher Have your written your name? Ok. You need to write only five sums. One, two three, four. .. The date is on the board. Have you seen it?

The Impact of Standard Spoken in Tamil 143

Excerpt 8: Use of both varieties in the class Here the teacher uses the word one which in spoken Tamil as onnu. It shows that the teacher is able to use both varieties in the class. Also, she is speaking interestingly to the students. She said, “I haven’t put appam” which means she hasn’t cooked appam. But the lesson is on aappam which has a long vowel at the start of the word. But the stu- dent used the word with the short vowel in front. With her answer, the student will be able to correct his mistake in pronouncing the word correctly.

: aaci- ! Teacher is ஆசிரியர் ேமகன் அப்பம் stressing on riyar: . . . . long vowel Teacher: ேபாடைலய நா ன் Mekaan! appam pooTalaya naa. . . for the word, n appam. appam Mekaan! I am not cooking ap- is WT and pam! aappam is SST மாணவர்கள்: ஆப்பம்!; maaNavarkaL: aappam Students: Indian Pancake

Excerpt 9 Here in Excerpt 9, the teacher use the English word to evaluate whether the students have understood her question. So the teacher used aaN (male) means boy or girl? The students answered boy. The excerpt shows that the teacher’s language is the model for the stu- dents. In this excerpt, the teacher uses WT and the students follow his style and answering in WT.

1. : . aaN is word which means ஆசிரியர் ஆண் ‘male’. Teacher is teaching

. words starts with vowel, aaciriyar: ஆண் aa. Teacher: . . ஆண் Here she repeats the னா? Boy girl? word ‘aaN’ and asks the aaN aaN aaN. students whether the .naa? Boy, girl? meaning is boy or girl?

144 Lakshmi

Male male male. .means Boy or girl? 2. : Boy Students answer, ‘boy’. மாணவர்கள் Boy maaNavarkaL: Boy Students: 3. Teacher says it is correct. ஆசிரியர்: Boy. சரி! aaciriyar: Boy. cari Teacher: Boy. Correct.

Excerpt 10 Tamil teachers are the gate keepers of the language and role models for the students to use that language. Teachers too understand their challenges in using SST in class. They sometimes, try to use the literal translation for the English words in their lessons. If they use it every day and make it as a regular word for the students to use, then they will remember it. In Excerpt 10, the teacher used, paLLippai for school bag (paLLi= school, pai=bag).

1. ஆசிரியர்: சரி உக்காருங்க. aaciriyar: cari ukkaarunka SST has Teacher: ok. Sit down been used

2. : SST has ஆசிரியர் சரி எல்லாரும் பள்ளிப் been used.

ைபைய தைரல Also, literal translation வச்சாச்சா? ஓேக. இங்க of கவனிக்கணும். aaciriyar: Cari. Ellaarum pallippaiyai taraila English vaccaaccaa? Ok. inka kavanikka- term in

Num. Tamil has been used. Teacher: Ok. Have you placed your school bag on the floor? OK. See here. The Impact of Standard Spoken in Tamil 145

Excerpt 11 When students use English words, the teachers ask the class for the Tamil word or meaning. Through this, the teacher encourages the class to learn, understand, and use the corresponding Tamil words for English terms. Here, it is encouraging that students know the Tamil words for the English words.

1 : birthday Student use மாணவி என் வர SST and Eng-

lish word maaNavi: மாதிரி இருக்கு en birthday vara maatiri iruk- ‘birthday’. Female student: ku It looks like my birthday is coming 2 Teacher uses ஆசிரிைய: உன்ேனாட birthday . SST and re- வர மாதிரி இருக்கா? peats student’s . . . birthday term, ‘birth- ஆஹ் day’ in Eng- என்ன lish. . ெசால்லுவாங்க aaciriyai: unnooTa birthday vara maatiri At the same irukkaa? Aah. . birthday time, she asks enna colvaanka the Tamil term for ‘birthday’

Teacher: Your birthday is coming? AAH. How do you say birthday? 3 : . . Students give மாணவர்கள் பிறந்த நாள் Tamil transla- maaNavarkaL: . tion for Students: பிறந்தநாள் piRantanaaL. . piRantanaaL ‘birthday’ Birthday birthday 4 Teacher ஆசிரிைய பிறந்தநாள் வரா generally uses

146 Lakshmi

SST மாதிரி இருக்கு உனக்கு. சரி ஸ்ேவதா aaciriyai: piRantanaaL varaa maatiri irukku unakku cari Sweetha Teacher: It looks like a birthday is coming to you. Correct, Sweetha.

Excerpt 12 Teacher’s encouragement and advice is helpful to students to speak Tamil during the group activity. Here the teacher told them to speak Tamil during the group activity.

1. . . Generally ஆசிரியர் நீங்க வந்து ஆஹ் the இல்ல. அந்த teacher is using ேபர்கைளயும், அந்த SST படங்கைளயும் வந்து ஒட்டப் ேபாறங்கீ . சரியா?...... ஒரு எழுத்த இந்த மாதிரி ஒட்ட ேவண்டும். சரியா? எந்த குழு சரியா ெசய்றாங்க? முதல்ல ெசஞ்சி முடிக்கிறங்கீ . அப்படின்னு நா பார்க்கப் ேபாேறன். ஆனா ெராம்ப The Impact of Standard Spoken in Tamil 147

முக்கியமா நீங்க என்ன ெமாழில ேபசணும். aaciriyar: niinga vantu Aah illa. anta peerkaLaiyum, anta paTankalLaiyum vantu ottappooriinka. cariyaa? ...... oru eRutta inta maatiri otta veenTum., cariyaa? enta kuRu cariyaa ceiRaanka? mutalla cenci muTikkiRaanka. appaTinnu naa paarkkapooReen. Aana rompa mukkiyamaa niinga enna moRila peecaNum. Teacher: You are all going to paste the names and pictures. Ok. You have to paste one letter like this. First you do it. Then I will see how you are going to com- plete the task. But, very impor- tant, you have to talk in which language? 2. மாணவர்கள்: தமிழ் maaNavarkaL: tamiR Students: Tamil 3. ஆசிரியர்: தமிழ்ல ேபசணும்.

அப்புறம் சண்ட ேபாடக்கூடாது. பாரக்கலாம். aaciriyar: tamiRla peecaNum. appuRam canTai pooTakkuuTatu. paarkkaalaam. Teacher: Speak in Tamil. Then, don’t

fight. Let’s see.

148 Lakshmi

Excerpt 13 Excerpt 13 demonstrates Tamil students who are able to speak in SST to the Tamil teacher. The students answered well in Tamil.

1. : . Teacher மாணவர் நரி வந்து ஒரு மிருகம் and stu- maaNavar: dents speak student: அத வட்ல ீ வளக்க in SST முடியாது. nari vantu oru mirukam. ata viitla vaLakka muTiyaatu. Fox is an animal. We could not rear it at home.

2. ஆசிரியர்: ஏன் அத வட்ல ீ வளக்க ? aaciriyar: முடியாது நரியும் Teacher: அழகாதாேன இருக்கு? een ata viitla vaLakka muTiyaatu? nariyum aRakaataanee irukku? Why couldn’t we rear it at home? It also looks pretty.

3. மாணவர்: நரி அழகா இல்ேல maaNavar: Nari aRakaa illee Student: Fox is not pretty 4. ஆசிரியர் அழகா இல்ைலயா? aaciriyar: aRakaa illaiyaa? Teacher: Not pretty?

5. மாணவர்: ஆனா நரி அழகாேவ

இருக்கு ஆனா அழகா இல்ல. ஏன்னா நரி வந்து

கருப்பு நிறத்துல இருக்கு. maaNavar: எனக்கு கருப்பு நிறம் The Impact of Standard Spoken in Tamil 149

. Student: புடிக்காது aanaa nari aRakaave irukku. aanaa aRakaa illa. eennaa nari vantu karuppu nittula irukku. enakku karuppu niram puTikkaatu. But fox is pretty. But not pretty. Because fox is black. I don’t like black. 6. ஆசிரியர்: கருப்புற நிறத்துல

இர்க்றதால உனக்கு aaciriyar: பிடிக்காதா? சரி முக்கியமா

Teacher: ஏன் நரிய வட்ல ீ வளக்க முடியாது. karuppu nirattula irkkRataala unakku piTikkaataa? cari. mukkiyamaa een nariya viitla vaLakka muTiyaatu You do not like it because it is in black. Ok, why we could not rear the fox at home? 7. மாணவர்: கடிக்கும். அதுக்கு வந்து maaNavar: Student: ெராம்ப கூரான பல்லு kaTikkum. atukku vantu romba kuuraana pallu it will bite. it has very sharp teeth. 8. ஆசிரியர்: கூரான பல்லு, சரி aaciriyar: kuuraana pallu. cari. Teacher: Sharp teeth. Ok. 9. மாணவர் ெராம்ப பயமா இருக்கும் maaNavar romba payamaa irukkum Student: Very scary

150 Lakshmi

Excerpt 14 When asked about the students’ Standard Spoken language in Tamil class, Primary school teachers told that generally they have to teach SST to some students who are from English-speaking homes. Among them, some have studied Tamil in kindergarten and they have known WT. Students from Tamil speaking homes are able to speak in Tamil language. Excerpt 14 shows that teachers are the role mod- els for their students. If they start speaking in SST, students will fol- low them and for those who need, teacher can provide help.

இப்ேபா பிள்ைளங்க நல்லா தமிழ் ஆசிரியர்1: ேபசுறாங்க. வட்டுல ீ அப்பா அம்மா ேபசுனா இன்னும் நல்லாயிருக்கும்.

இப்ேபா இருக்கற பாடபுத்தகமும்

நடவடிக்ைகங்களும் ஒதவியா aaciriyar 1: இருக்கு

ippoo piLLainka nalla tamiR peecRraanka. viittula appaa, ammaa peecunaa innum nallyirukkum. ippoo irukkaRa Teacher 1: paaTaputtakamu naTavaTikkainkaLu otaviyaa irukku

Now children are speaking Tamil well. If father, mother speak Tamil at home, it will be more good. Current text books and activities also helpful.

ஆசிரியர்2: நாமளும் மாணவர்கேளாட நல்லா

ஆர்வமா ேபசுனா பிள்ைளகளும் சந்ேதாசமா ேபசுவாங்க வகுப்பைற

நல்லாருக்கும். தமிழ்ல ேபச aaciriyar 2: முடியாதவங்களுக்கு ஆங்கிலத்துல

ெசால்லித் தமிழ்ல ேகப்ேபன்

The Impact of Standard Spoken in Tamil 151

naamaLum maaNavarkaLooTa nallaa aarvamaa pee- cunaa piLLaikaLum canttoocama peecuvaanka. va- Teacher 2: kuppaaRai nallayirukkum. tamiRla peeca muTiyaata- vankaLukku aankilattula collittamiRla keeppeen If we talk to the students with interest, they too speak happily. Class is also fun. For students who cannot speak in English, I will teach in English and later ask them to tell it in Tamil.

The teacher also needs to use differentiated instructional approach to teach SST to different groups of students. However, during group activities, the native speakers who are expatriate Tamil students pro- vided assistance to the other students to learn and understand SST. With the movie clips, local Singaporean Tamil dramas, and television programmes, teachers can infuse interest in listening and speaking SST among students.

Generally, we find that both the teacher and the students use SST. Both groups are doing well and enjoying the language in the class. However, the teacher is the role model for the students’ language use. English words are there when the class or teacher is not sure about the correct Tamil word. The students are confident in answering the teacher and expressing their opinions and are able to self-correct their pronunciation or vocabulary. The teacher regularly clarifies her comments and students’ answers so that students understand the les- son. This is a positive trend in the Tamil class as the teacher moti- vates students and enables them to speak freely (Pohan, 2003; Zeich- ner, 1993) while meeting the objectives of the lesson.

After the 2005 Tamil language curriculum and pedagogy review committee’s report, SST play an important role in the Tamil class- room. From 2008 onwards, the new syllabus, textbooks, and teacher training provided scaffolding to SST in Tamil classrooms. Communi- ty organizations and media played additional roles to encourage and educate the community to use Tamil at home and public domains when they meet another Tamil. Through this, there is a greater awareness and strong impact in the students Tamil language use in

152 Lakshmi

Tamil classrooms. However, there still are some doubts and confu- sion among teachers, parents and students.

Several other observations that emerge during the study:  When students do not know a Tamil word, they tend to use the English term.  Expatriate students are resourceful in carrying on sustained con- versations in SST.  Teachers are generally keen on using SST during oral discussions, but at times they use English or WT. Teachers who have recently completed pre-service and in-service training consciously use SST in their class with fewer WT and English terms.  Among secondary school teachers, SST is used in nearly 80% of all classroom interactions, while 20% of the discourse is con- ducted in WT. The lessons are mostly focused on examinations with heavy content and archaic language. In one primary school Tamil class, the teacher used a large number of WT terms be- cause the students had been most exposed to that variety.  WT terms are most often used when teachers repeat their stu- dents’ answers.  When teachers use ICT, interesting stories and task-based activi- ties, students are happy to speak in SST variety.  Scaffolding and use of prior knowledge encourages students to speak in SST.  Teachers use code mixing when they would like to facilitate dis- cussion with the students without disturbing the flow of the les- son. Students use code mixing when they do not know the cor- rect Tamil word for the particular English noun or verb.  Some teachers incorporated colloquial terms in their discourse.

The author interviewed some of the students for this study. When she asked them about the use of SST in the Tamil class, the students said that they were happy to use it and they hoped to do well in their written examinations which are generally given in WT. The first co- hort that had gone through the new syllabus and curriculum materials sat for their Primary School Leaving Examination in 2010. The re- sults of their MTL Examination have shown the impact of SST use The Impact of Standard Spoken in Tamil 153 in the classrooms. After the release of the results, the teachers were interviewed by the author. They said that they were happy with the results. At the lower primary classes, it is obvious that students are happy to use SST in class especially when there is good rapport and understanding between teachers and students. However, the students wish to use the Internet, iPad, iBook and Web 2.0 instead of paper- based materials for their lessons. In addition, they would like to have the lessons using age-related themes such as rap singers, movie ac- tors, young leaders, meaningful Tamil cultural practices, traditional celebrations, Tamil youngsters from Tamil diaspora communities and their ideal people from various domains instead of ancient kings, se- rious science and culture-based lessons. For lower primary students, they prefer more stories, songs, animated movies and prior know- ledge based lessons.

Conclusion and Recommendations After the in-depth emphasis for SST adoption in teacher training and the implementation of the Review Committee Report (MOE 2005), there has been a development and positive impact on the use of SST in Tamil classrooms. With the constant use of both SST and WT, students will be able to understand the differences between the two varieties and develop their skills in both varieties. For that, it is im- perative to use SST in the written form instead of WT. When it comes to stories and speech bubbles, textbooks need to have a dif- ferent script for SST and it will add value in the learning of Tamil. In the Tamil class, the dialogic teaching (Alexander, 2010) and constant engagement with the content has to be developed for students to de- velop higher-order skills and vocabulary. For that, authentic task- based teaching and learning is essential. Introducing authentic activi- ties and authentic assessment (Gopinathan, 2000) will help students to learn about their ethnicity, culture and language. If teachers use authentic task-based teaching and encourage task-based learning, the use of SST will increase as there are no opportunities for Tamil stu- dents to use their SST in the multilingual community. Also, as Senior Minister of State, Ministry of Trade and Industry and Ministry of Education Mr Iswaran (2010) mentioned, many students come from English-speaking homes. They have opportunities to use SST in their classroom only. In that classroom too, it is inevitable to provide sup-

154 Lakshmi port to the students’ vocabulary to build their confidence in using Tamil. Hence, teachers need to provide ample input and supportive opportunities to their students. The Tamil syllabus also needs to be changed to include pictures, discussions, and culture that encourage the use of listening and oral skills.

Tamil in Singapore needs to develop a niche for itself. The ecology of Tamil language teaching and learning in the past 20 years shows that the educational community in Singapore is changing towards the teaching of a second language. Yet some students are having difficul- ty in speaking in SST because of English speaking home background. Here it is time to profile them based on their home language and provide them more help to find fun in speaking SST. With the con- tinued support from the government, constant effort from the teach- ers, and encouragement to the students, we can assure that Tamil language will be a living language in Singapore. Through this, Singa- pore can develop itself as a hub for second language teaching and learning for Tamil and provide its experience and expertise to the Tamil diaspora in the United States, Europe, Australia and New Zealand.

Acknowledgments I would like to express my sincere thanks to Prof Renu Gupta for her guidance, advice and continuous encouragement in reorganising the paper despite her busy academic research schedule. Special thanks also go to Prof Vanithamani Saravanan for her continuous support and guidance. My sincere thanks to the anonymous reviewers for their advice and comments for the improvement of this paper. Lastly, I would like to express my gratitude to the Centre for Research in Pedagogy and Practice and the Office of Educational Research, Na- tional Institute of Education, Singapore for the research funding through research grants CRP 10/06 SL and OER 47/08 MS.

The Impact of Standard Spoken in Tamil 155

References

Agasthialingom, S., (2008, April). Standard Spoken Tamil. Personal communication. Alexander, R. (2010). Speaking but not listening? Accountable talk in an unaccountable context. Literacy, 43, 103-111. Annamalai E. (2006). In L. Seetha, V. Vaish, S. Gopinathan, & V. Saravanan (2006). A critical review of the Tamil language syllabus and recommendations for syllabus revision- Research Project Report. Singapore: National Institute of Education, Centre for Re- search in Pedagogy and Practice. Annamalai, E. (2009). Spoken Tamil. In L. Seetha & V. Saravanan. (Eds.), Standard Spoken Tamil and Pedagogy (pp. ix-xiv). Singa- pore, Singapore: Pasumpon Publications. Annamalai, E. (2011). Social Dimensions of Modern Tamil. India: Cre-A. Britto, F. (1986). Diglossia. A study of the theory with application to Tamil. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press. Asher, R. E. (1982). Tamil. Lingua Descriptive Series. Amsterdam: North Holland Publishing Co. Pohan, C.A. (2003). Creating caring and democratic communities in our classrooms and schools. Childhood Education, 79, 369-393. Zeichner, K. M. (1993). Educating Teachers for Cultural Diversity (NCRTL Special Report). MI: National Center for Research on Teacher Learning. http://education.msu.edu/NCRTL/PDFs/NCRTL/SpecialReports/ sr293.pdf

Snow, D. (1996). More Than a Native Speaker: An Introduction for Volun- teers Teaching English Abroad Rev. Ed., (p. 16). Alexandria, VA: TESOL. Emmitt, M., Pollock, J., & Komesaroff, L. (2003). Language and learn- ing: An introduction for teaching. Australia: Oxford Press. Ferguson, C. A. (1972). Diglossia. Language in education: A source book (pp. 38-45). London: Routledge & Kagan Paul. Goh, Y. S. (2007). English Language Use in Chinese Language Teaching as a Second Language: Making the Most of the Learner’s Linguistic Re- source. In V. Vaish, S. Gopinathan, & Y. Liu (Eds.), Language,

156 Lakshmi

Capital, Culture: Critical Studies of Language and Education in Sin- gapore (pp. 119-132). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers, Gopinathan, S. (2000, November). Challenges for Mother Tongue Teaching and Learning in the New Millennium. Plenary address presented at the seminar Let Us Make Learning and Teaching Tamil an Interesting Experience in Singapore, Singapore. Gopinathan, S., & Saravanan, V. ( 2003). Education and Identity Is- sues in the Internet Age: The Case of the Indians in Singa- pore. In M. Charney, & B. S. A. Yeoh, & C. K. Tong (Eds.), Asian Migrants and Immigration: The Tensions of Education in Immi- grant Societies and Among Migrant Groups (pp. 32-51). Amster- dam: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Iswaran, S. (2010, June). Speech. Presented at the Inauguration of the 9th Tamil Internet Conference, Coimbatore. Retrieved from http://www.news.gov.sg/public/sgpc/en/media_releases/a gencies/moe/speech/S-20100624-1. Mahizhnan, A. (1996). Report of the Tamil Education Review Committee, Singapore: SINDA. Masagos Zulkifli. (2009). Speech. Presented at the UniSIM. Retrieved from http://www1.sim.edu.sg/sim/pub/gen/sim_pub_gen_conte nt.cfm?mnuid=323&id =3782. Mihyon, J. (2008). Korean Heritage Language Maintenance and Lan- guage Ideology. Heritage Language Journal, 6(2). 54-71. Ministry of Education. (2002). Speech by Minister on Schools 2011. Re- trieved from http://www.moe.gov.sg/media/speeches/2002/sp21052002 b_print.htm Ministry of Education. (2004). Chinese Language Curriculum and Pedagogy Review Committee Report (CLCPRC Report), Singapore. Ministry of Education. (2005). Tamil Language Curriculum and Pedagogy Review Committee Report (TLCPRC Report), Singapore. Ministry of Education. (2005).Malay Language Curriculum and Pedagogy Review Committee Report (MLCPRC Report), Singapore. Ministry of Education. (2008). 2008 Syllabus Tamil Language Primary. Curriculum Planning and Development Division, Singapore. The Impact of Standard Spoken in Tamil 157

Ministry of Education. (2009). Teachers — The Heart of Quality Educa- tion. Press Release. Singapore: Ministry of Education. Re- trieved from http://www.moe.gov.sg/media/press/2009/09/teachers- the-heart-of-quality.php. Ministry of Education. (2011). Nurturing Active Learners and Proficient Users. 2010 Mother Tongue Languages Review Committee Report. Singapore: Ministry of Education. Retrieved from http://www.moe.gov.sg/media/press/files/2011/mtl-review-report- 2010.pdf. Ministry of Education. (2012). School Information Service. Retrieved from http://app.sis.moe.gov.sg/schinfo/SIS_index.asp. Mohamed Aidil Subhan bin Mohamed Sulor (2007). Planning for Malay Language In Education: Lessons of History & Present Ecology. In Y. B. Liu, V. Vaish, & S. Gopinathan, (Eds.), Language, Capital and Culture: Critical Studies of Language in Education in Singapore. (pp. 157-174).Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. Nadaraja P. N. (2006). In L. Seetha, V. Vaish, S. Gopinathan, & V. Saravanan (2006). A critical review of the Tamil language syllabus and recommendations for syllabus revision- Research Project Report. Singapore: National Institute of Education, Centre for Re- search in Pedagogy and Practice. Nalluraj, S. (2012, January). Personal communication. Singapore. Ng, E.H. (2009, December). Speech. Presented at the 12th Appoint- ment Ceremony for Principals, Singapore. Retrieved from: http://www.moe.gov.sg/media/speeches/2009/12/29/spee ch-by-dr-ng-eng-hen-at-the-35.php. Rajendran, N. S.(2006) In L. Seetha, V. Vaish, S. Gopinathan, & V. Saravanan. A critical review of the Tamil language syllabus and rec- ommendations for syllabus revision- Research Project Report. Singa- pore: National Institute of Education, Centre for Research in Pedagogy and Practice. Ramiah, K. (1991).The pattern of Tamil language use among primary school pupils in Singapore. Singapore Journal of Education, 11(2), 45–53. Ramiah, K. (1998). A Study of the Errors made by students in Tamil Lan- guage. Singapore.

158 Lakshmi

Ramiah,K. & Seetha,L. (Eds.) (2002). Teaching and Learning of Tamil Language through Mass Media. Singapore: Tamil Art Printers. Saravanan, V. (1993). Language and Social Identity Amongst Tamil- English Bilinguals in Singapore. Language, Culture and Curricu- lum. 6(3). 275-290. Saravanan, V. (1989). Variation in Singapore Tamil English. (Unpub- lished doctoral dissertation). Monash University, Australia. Saravanan, V. (1998). Language Maintenance and Language Shift in the Tamil-English Community. In Language, Society and Educa- tion in Singapore: Issues and Trends, 2nd ed. Times Academic Press. Saravanan, V. (2001). The significance of bilingual Chinese, Malay and Tamil children’s English network patterns on community language use patterns. Early Child Development and Care, 166, 81–91. Saravanan, V., Lakshmi, S. & Caleon, I. (2007). Attitudes towards literary Tamil and standard spoken Tamil in Singapore. Inter- national Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10(1), 58– 79. Schiffman, H. F. (1998). Standardization and Restandardization: the case of Spoken Tamil. Language in Society, 27(3), 359-385. Schiffman. H. F. (1979). A Grammar of Spoken Tamil (pp. i-viii, 1-104). Madras: Christian Literature Society. Schiffman. H. F. (1995). Language shift in the Tamil communities of Malaysia and Singapore: The paradox of Egalitarian language policy. In G. Bills (Ed.), Language loss and public policy, Southwest Journal of Linguistics, 14(1-2). Schiffman, H. F. (1998). Standardization or restandardization: The case for “Standard” Spoken Tamil. Language in Society, 27, 359–385. Schiffman, H. F. (1999). A Reference Grammar of Spoken Tamil. Cam- bridge: Cambridge University Press. Schiffman, H, F. (2002). Tongue-tied in Singapore: A language policy for Tamil? Journal of Language, Identity and Education, 2(2), 105– 125. Schiffman, H, F. (2008). Tamil language policy in Singapore: The role of implementation. Language, capital, culture: Critical studies of The Impact of Standard Spoken in Tamil 159

language in education in Singapore (pp. 209–226). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. Schiffman, H. F. (Ed.) 2010. An English Dictionary of the Tamil Verb. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania. Seetha, L., Vaish, V., Gopinathan, S., & Saravanan, V. (2006). A criti- cal review of the Tamil language syllabus and recommendations for sylla- bus revision- Research Project Report. Singapore: National Institute of Education, Centre for Research in Pedagogy and Practice. Seetha, L., Saravanan, V. (2009). Standard Spoken Tamil and Pedagogy. Singapore: Pasumpon Publications. Shegar, C., & Ridzuan A. R. (2005). Tamil Language Instruction in Singa- pore: A Preliminary Report of findings of classroom pedagogical practice- Research Project Report. Singapore: Centre for Research in Peda- gogy and Practice, National Institute of Education. Tamil teaching to undergo revamp. (February 20, 2000). The Strait Times, p. 28. When it is cool to say ‘Vanakkam’. (November 25, 2000). The Straits Times, p. H14. Thinnappan, S. P. (2006). In L. Seetha, V. Vaish, S. Gopinathan, & V. Saravanan (2006). A critical review of the Tamil language sylla- bus and recommendations for syllabus revision- Research Project Report. Singapore: National Institute of Education, Centre for Re- search in Pedagogy and Practice. Tan, J. (2002). Education in the Early 21st Century: Challenges and Dilem- mas. In D. da Cunha (Ed.), Singapore in the New Millennium: Challenges Facing the City-State (pp. 154-186). Singapore: Insti- tute of Southeast Asian Studies. Vaish, V. (2007). Bilingualism without Diglossia: The Indian Com- munity in Singapore. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10(2), 171-187. Wiley, T. G., (2001). On defining heritage languages and their speak- ers. In J. K. Peyton, D. A. Ranard, & S. McGinnis (Eds.), Her- itage languages in America: Preserving a national resource (pp. 29-36). Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics and Delta Systems. Yeo, G. (1998, September). Speech (Delivered in Mandarin). Pre- sented at The 1998 Speak Mandarin Campaign Launch, Sin- gapore. Retrieved from

160 Lakshmi

http://www.mandarin.org.sg/index.php?option=com_conte nt&view=article&id=108%3Aminister-george-yeo- 1998&catid=54%3Aofficial-speeches-1984- 2005&Itemid=63&lang=en.