Native versus non-native teachers of English as a second language (original) (raw)

Challenging the myth of native speaker competence in translation theory

Benjamins Translation Library, 2004

Many translation theorists argue that translations should be done only into the translator's mother tongue. They are convinced that if translators are working into a foreign language their translations inevitably sound strange to the native speakers of the TL, i.e. to the intended public of the text (cf. Kocijancic Pokorn 2000). For example, Peter Newmark in his Approaches to Translation expresses this opinion very clearly: The translator is in the best position to appreciate the "total" difference between one language and another. He himself usually knows that he cannot write more than a few complex sentences in a foreign language without writing something unnatural and nonnative, any more than he can speak one. He will be "caught" every time, not by his grammar, which is probably suspiciously "better" than an educated native's, not by his vocabulary, which may well be wider, but by his unacceptable or improbable collocations (Newmark 1981:180). The assumption that the translator "will be 'caught' every time" by native speakers of the TL stems from an equally widely accepted hypothesis in linguistics that every native speaker is able to rapidly detect any non-member of his/her linguistic community. For example Alan Davies in his book The Native Speaker in Applied Linguistics, after admitting that there is no consensus of opinion among linguists on the definition of the term "native speaker", claims that the detection of non-members of one's native linguistic community is one of the basic and essential characteristics of every native speaker: Let me say what I expect of the native speaker. I expect the native speaker to have internalised rules of use, the appropriate use of language, to know when to use what and how to speak to others. I expect control of strategies and of pragmatics, an automatic feeling for the connotations of words, for folk etymologies, for what is appropriate to various domains, for the import of a range of speech acts, in general for appropriate membership behaviour in him/herself and of implicit-and very rapid-detection of others as being or not being members (Davies 1991:94, my emphasis).

English as a Global Language A discussion on the meaning of native speaker and its characteristics.

A discussion on the meaning of native speaker and its characteristics., 2018

Several researchers (Bloomfield, 1933; Davies, 1991; Widdowson, 1995) have critically discussed and analysed the wide range of different definitions that the term native speaker (NS) has been given through the ages. The branch of applied linguistics has arduously studied the meaning that this particular issue entails and, variable as it is, its constant changes. It is thus my intention in this paper to gather together as many viewpoints as possible regarding the understanding of native-speakerism. Also, I shall try to explain whether or not and to what extent can a second language (L2) learner of a language become a NS of such. Moreover, I will be discussing on the native speaker’s dominance, as it has stood as one of the biggest problems that this phenomenon presents. Finally, I will eventually attempt to draw some conclusions in order to clarify some of the questions –and problems- that it shows from its definition to its practical use.

The Non-native Speaker Teacher (2011)

2011

‘Non-native English-speaking teachers’ (NNESTs) have tended to be conceptualized within ELT along the same lines as NNS in general. The second language acquisition literature traditionally ‘elevates an idealized ‘‘native’’ speaker above a stereotypicalized ‘‘nonnative’’, while viewing the latter as a defective communicator, limited by an underdeveloped communicative competence’ (Firth and Wagner 1997: 285). The resulting (in)competence dichotomy positions theNNS/NNESTas a deficient or less-than-native speaker (cf. ‘near-native’, Valdes 1998). In an attempt to solve this problem, a number of alternative terms have been suggested, for example ‘proficient user’ (Paikeday 1985), ‘language expert’ (Rampton 1990), ‘English-using speech fellowship’ (Kachru 1992), and ‘multicompetent speaker’ (Cook 1999).However, the field is still a long way from reaching a consensus about whether to adopt any of these labels.

Review of Native speakers and native users: loss and gain, by Alan Davies

In this collection of new and previously published work – focusing largely on English – Alan Davies explores what it means to be a native speaker, and how highly proficient non-native speakers (native users) are distinguishable from them. He argues that the former are defined in a maddening kind of circularity that makes the validity of the term questionable.

'To be a native speaker means not to be a nonnative speaker'

The construct of the native speaker is germane to second language acquisition (SLA) research; it underlies, and permeates, a signi® cant bulk of SLA theory construction and empirical research. Nevertheless, it is one of the least investigated (and for that matter, least understood) concepts in the ® eld. Even a cursory reading of the major SLA literature would not yield one readily available de® nition that captures the essential uses that have been made of the concept: including, but not limited to, setting the native speaker as a goal or a model for SLA or using the native speaker as a yardstick to measure second language knowledge. As is, the concept remains assumed¡ based on common sense observation and intuition¡rather than exposed to scienti® c inquiry. In this article I would like to draw attention to this pivotal yet much neglected concept by reviewing Davies (1991; on the native speaker. A by no means exhaustive account, the books outline principal parameters for considering the native speaker concept, thereby providing a useful basis for further inquiry.