EDITORIAL

English is here to stay as an Asian language. It is a working language for intranational and international communication in many parts of the region. According to a report, 350 million people speak English for various purposes in Asia, a number that is more than the combined populations of the United States, Britain, Canada, and Australia where English is a native tongue for many citizens.

However, the spread of English in Asia does not necessarily represent the transplantation of American English, British English, or any other Native Speaker English in the region. Rather it means that English is being increasingly de-Anglo-Americanized, and that new varieties of English are being established to reflect Asian ways of life.

Actually, Asian Englishes are diverse, with different social roles attached to the adopted language. Each country has used the language in its own cultural and linguistic contexts, thereby producing a distinct variety characterized by unique structural and functional features. Diffusion presupposes diversification.

The publication of Asian Englishes is timely. The new international journal explores various issues involved in the diffusion of English and its diversification in Asia/Pacific. It specifically highlights such themes as:

1. Varieties of English in Asia; (phonetics, phonology, prosody, vocabulary, syntax, semantics, pragmatics, discourse, and rhetoric);
2. Theories and methods of promoting effective teaching of English and testing of English proficiency;
3. English as a language of international and intercultural communication in Asia;
4. English-language journalism, literature, and other media;
5. Social roles and functions of English in Asian countries;
6. Multicultural English and mutual intelligibility;
7. Language policy and language planning;
8. Impact of English on other Asian languages;
9. English-knowing bilingualism
10. English-medium education.

We call upon scholars, teachers, administrators, and all other students of language contact and human behavior to support this journal by using it as a forum for exchange of observations, experiments, thoughts, and opinions relating to English as a multinational/multicultural and multiformal/multifunctional language in Asia.

Nobuyuki Honna
Editor in Chief
Asian Englishes

EDITORIAL

The notion of one language as an independent system is only an imaginary creation. As languages come into contact, they get mingled in many interesting ways. This has become increasingly obvious in Asian English studies, where multilingual analysis is a key to significant exploration.

On one hand, the forms and uses of English in Asia are enormously influenced by other Asian languages. While the influence is visible in lexical borrowing, it often gets blurred in syntactic superposition. Thus, deep insight is called upon to reveal the intrusion of Chinese and Malay into the reduplication phenomenon in Singaporean English and some other varieties as is seen in:

(1) Play-play, no money; work-work, no leisure. Combination is better.
(2) My friend from China, she likes (to) shop-shop.

On the other hand, the impact of English is tremendous on many languages in Asia. For example, many Japanese consider English loan words in Japanese as one of the most important, serious, and grave problems there is for Japanese language.

The reason is simply because people believe that the influx of a huge amount of English words into Japanese will eventually lead to the confusion, corruption, decay, and destruction of their national language. Fact No.1 is that 60% or often 70% of new words in annually revised dictionaries of neologisms are from English.

However, what is conspicuous in borrowing patterns is the drive for Japanization. Although English loans are superficially recognized as such because of their katakana representation, they are structurally and semantically treated as Japanese words. They are incorporated into Japanese.

They become part of the Japanese lexicon and grammar, frequently used in diverse ways and called upon to play important roles such as neologism and euphemism in contemporary Japanese society. As such, the real issue is not how to relinquish them, but how to accommodate them for the enrichment of Japanese.

What is needed in dealing with the two-way interrelation of English and other languages in Asia is a clear understanding of the complexity of languages in contact. We need to develop new tools of analysis that account for various ramifications of linguistic encounter. We also need to formulate new ways of thinking that explicate that code mixing is as essential as code switching in human behavior.

Asian Englishes offers a forum for such contributions.

Nobuyuki Honna
Editor in Chief
Asian Englishes

EDITORIAL

English today is a unique language. It is formally and functionally quite different from other languages of the world. For one thing, a sizable number of countries choose it as their national or official language. The concomitant result of this is that English is bound to reflect a diversity of disparate cultures. English is a multinational language and therefore a multicultural language.

For another, as the spread of English progresses, non-native speakers outnumber native speakers. Significantly, non-native speakers are taking advantage of this additional language and are exploring new dimensions of English usage structurally and pragmatically.

As most Asian countries recognize English as an indispensable language for intranational or international communication, furthermore, they are increasingly committed to strengthening and improving English language teaching. Most prominently, they start teaching English at the elementary level.

In this connection, it is important to note that in parts of Asia where English serves as an official language, if ELT expands and succeeds, people start speaking English among themselves. Wherever this happens, a set of indigenous patterns develop, a kind of patterns people find easier to handle. This phenomenon can happen in countries where English is taught as an international language if we encourage our students to speak English, as we must for various good reasons.

For example, Japanese speakers might say:

A1. He has a wide face (is well known).
2. He has a black belly (is roguish).
3. He has a tall nose (is boastful).

It would be illogical to reject these expressions as incorrect because these are non-native. Above all things, most Japanese learners are non-native speakers, encouraged to speak English by taking full advantage of the repertory they have, however limited it might be. It would also be hard to accept that A sentences are incorrect while B sentences are correct simply because they are native-based.

B1. He has a bitter tongue.
2. He has a sweet tooth.
3. He has green fingers.

One important issue here is diversity management. Conformism is not a plausible way of accommodating the multiculturalism of Asian Englishes. What is needed for mutual intelligibility is intercultural literacy, of which language awareness constitutes a fundamental component. A working knowledge of metaphors, for instance, will help students to establish rapport among speakers of different varieties.

Asian Englishes welcomes papers that deal with theoretical as well as pedagogical issues in this domain.

Nobuyuki Honna
Editor in Chief
Asian Englishes

EDITORIAL

If English is recognized as an Asian language, Japanese people, for example, may find themselves in a position to promote it as such in their regional cooperation efforts. There is a lot to be done to improve the sociopedagogical environment of English communication in Asia. For instance, English language teaching in Asian contexts can legitimately be listed for official development assistance (ODA) of the Japanese Government.

In order to persuade the Japanese International Cooperation Agency (JICA) of English in Asia as a possible ODA project, it is imperative that Japanese people be well informed of the fact that English is an indispensable language for wider communication in Asia and that English language teaching in this region is an appropriate field that JICA should concern itself with. There is much explaining to be done, but it's worth a concerted effort.

In spite of the increasing demand for English language teaching in Asian countries, the lack of qualified teachers is chronic. Can Japanese ODA funds be used for supporting teacher training programs? Perhaps for developing better teaching/learning materials? Or particularly for distance education? Then there is the use of multimedia and information/communication technologies. Japanese tax payers would agree to these expenditures only when they had a clear understanding of English as an Asian language.

Right now, there is a considerable number of Japanese volunteer teachers of English in Laos, Vietnam, or Cambodia. Most of them are dispatched there by the non-government, and non-profit organizations to which they belong. According to reports, they are deeply impressed by the extent to which their students, mostly children, devote themselves to learning this language of better opportunities under the difficult circumstances of scarce textbooks and other resources.

If English is an Asian language, it becomes appropriate that Japanese and other Asian nationals take responsibility for the language many of us are learning as well as enriching as a means of international and intercultural communication. Specialists here and abroad should send the Japanese official development assistance agency policy recommendations and program proposals for ODA officials to see the role they are called upon to play.

For the concepts of Asian Englishes to be put into practice, it is essential that we coordinate macro-sociolinguistic efforts on a regional scale.

Asian Englishes welcomes papers that deal with policy and application studies in this domain.

Nobuyuki Honna
Editor in Chief
Asian Englishes

EDITORIAL

The purpose of Japan's English Language Teaching (ELT) in public education is to develop a working command of this global language and nurture international and intercultural awareness on the part of our students. That is why ELT is often considered as part of a larger endeavor of international/intercultural understanding in education.

Apparently ELT for this purpose is composed of three important elements. They are: (1) understanding other cultures, (2) explaining our own culture, and (3) understanding and learning English as an international language.

Unfortunately, Japan's school curriculum in international/intercultural understanding puts the most emphasis on understanding other cultures. As such, awareness training in explicitly explaining Japanese ways of life is almost completely ignored.

Children are often instructed to write Christmas cards to friends overseas, but are rarely told to make New Year's cards and to refer to Japanese patterns of behavior. Japanese customs are often said to be too peculiar to be used in crosscultural interaction.

Japan's ELT is inclined to reinforce this tradition by placing a high value on reading and speaking about foreign cultures, mostly of the UK and the USA. This has to be changed if we use English as an international language for self-expression and mutual understanding among all speakers of English.

If we intensify practice of these explanatory communication skills in ELT, we will certainly contribute to correcting the most important deficiency in Japan's international/intercultural education. This is the role we in ELT should play in public education.

Emphasis on explanatory awareness and proficiency in ELT has world-wide implications. If the world's ELT is culturally Anglo-American oriented or dominated, what is going to happen when Japanese and Vietnamese meet? When they meet, it is unlikely that they will talk about London or New York. Rather, the Japanese will be strongly interested in Vietnam and the Vietnamese in Japan.

It will be an interactive disaster if the Japanese and the Vietnamese cannot answer questions asked about their respective countries because they are not trained and prepared to discuss their customs. English is said to be a language for information. But if all of us are not ready to give our information in English, we cannot take advantage of the power given the language.

To foster this cultural awareness, we need to provide our students with more opportunities to read and write about our society in English. We have to encourage them to talk about themselves every time they learn new words, phrases, and constructions. Of course, comparative cultural studies are an efficient way for doing this. Stories about different cultures abroad can be used to stimulate their eagerness to talk about their families, friends, and communities.

Asian Englishes welcomes contributions from this point of view.

Nobuyuki Honna
Editor in Chief
Asian Englishes

EDITORIAL

In order to enrich the multiculturalism of Asian Englishes and to ensure their mutual intelligibility and communicability, it is important we develop internationally coordinated educational programs. Most effective is the introduction of language awareness training into school curriculums of Asian countries.

Teaching language awareness in Britain and Europe has proved useful for students to become conscious of the function of language in multilingual and multicultural settings. In Asian countries, we should cooperate to work for similar goals in an attempt to overcome, for example, the possible inconveniences to be caused by the spread of English as a multicultural language in this part of the world.

One thing that should be included in these programs is the study of metaphor. A cognitive and expressive device human beings are generally equipped with, metaphor relates concept x to concept y. Human beings have a propensity to use basic and concrete experiences to understand and express profound and abstract affairs.

Yet, in many countries in Asia, metaphor is considered as a technical term for literary criticism, a tool limited to analyze fiction and poetry. It is essential that we understand that metaphor is an operation ordinary people employ in all domains of their daily lives based on their perception of similarities in an array of natural and social phenomena.

The body-part lexicon is a good example. People use it to refer to various affairs associated with body parts. For instance, Japanese extend the head, the chest (or heart), and the belly as containers, each intended for a different type of content. Thus, the head is a container of knowledge ("He crammed everything into the head."), the chest of romantic thoughts ("He has his love for her hidden in the chest."), and the belly of emotions ("He decided to contain this conversation in his belly.").

If people are aware of the structure and the function of metaphor, they should not be confounded to hear a Japanese say in English: "He is a kind of person who does not reveal his belly to subordinates." If people see what metaphor is involved here, they would not have difficulty making sense of this expression: the belly is a container whose content this man does not show easily.

The idea of metonymy (synecdoche) should also be included in the study of metaphor. The knowledge of metonymy can save a lot of mis- or noncommunication among speakers of different varieties of English. Japanese train conductors might say: "Don't put your face out of the window." If the face were understood as representing the head here, this ubiquitous expression might be unlikely to appear incorrect, nonsensical, or illogical.

While language awareness teaching is generally important, it is indispensable particularly for the concept of Asian Englishes to be put into practice. It is an essential part of intercultural literacy. We should work together to develop its enlightening curriculum if we are to use English better as a language for international and intercultural communication while enjoying its multicultural values.

Asian Englishes welcomes contributions that explore theoretical and pedagogical issues in this dimension.

Nobuyuki Honna
Editor in Chief
Asian Englishes

EDITORIAL

As many Asian countries adopt English as their intranational as well as their international language, a variety of local patterns emerge, kinds of patterns people find useful to fulfill their needs and their ways of life. Most often, lexical and idiomatic transfer from indigenous languages is conspicuous. "Face" in Singapore and Malaysian English is a good example.

Face is an extremely important concept in Asian societies. In the oriental value system, face refers to an individual's pride, dignity, honor, and even identity. From the Chinese origin, two expressions (namely, losing and saving face) are universally used in English:

1. I lost a lot of face by being unable to answer this question.
2. This saved me a great deal of face. In Singaporean and Malaysian English, there are a lot more picturesque expressions related to face:
3. The guests are not coming. I don't know where to hide my face.
4. How can you be so insensitive? I really got no face now.
5. You must go to his son's wedding dinner. You must give him face.

In this connection, it has to be stressed that although these phrases are not part of British English or American English, they are not to be denigrated or stigmatized. If they are useful for certain purposes in Singaporean and Malaysian societies, they tend to become deep rooted there.

Just because nonnative speakers do not use English the way native speakers do, doesn't mean they are wrong or using the language incorrectly. If people are compelled or expected to speak English, it is natural that they should do so only in the way best fit for them.

Asian Englishes welcomes contributions exploring these and related issues.

Nobuyuki Honna
Editor in Chief
Asian Englishes

EDITORIAL

Many Asian nationals are finding themselves using English more frequently with other Asians than with people from the UK, the USA or other "native speaker" countries. As we are expected to have more and more contact with people from other Asian countries in the fields of business, tourism, overseas studies, environmental protection or regional cooperation, it is crucial time for us to start exploring issues in English communication in Asia.

Business people in Japan have been aware that English is an indispensable Asian language, broadly confronted with different varieties of English used in Asia and, of course, other parts of the world. High school teachers of English are beginning to show more positive attitudes than before toward the concept of English as such. The likelihood of using English with other Asians motivates an increasing number of college students to learn the language better.

The U.S.A. and the U.K. used to be the preferred places to go to in order to learn English. But now this urge has comparatively weakened. "The best way to learn English is to go to a country where English is spoken." This is an expression Japanese students learn in the classroom. But now this attitude has been less consistent and some Asian countries are being added to a list of their destinations.

A Japanese university, which is starting a new Department of International English in 2002, has decided to send all its 1st year students to Singapore's RELC (Regional Language Centre) for English language training in Asian contexts. It will be an invaluable benefit for Japanese students to be better informed of some important aspects of English communication styles of other Asian nationals.

Since we are all non-native speakers, we can feel at ease when we speak English with each other because we are on an equal footing. Free from the pressures of native-speaker standards, we find ourselves speaking English more flexibly and liberally. We should be more conscious of the significance of this fact in our English Language Teaching classroom. In order to put all this into practice, it is essential we coordinate our educational efforts in the spirit of regional cooperation in Asia, based on the widespread recognition that English is an Asian language.

Asian Englishes welcomes proposals addressing these goals.

Nobuyuki Honna
Editor in Chief
Asian Englishes

EDITORIAL

According to recent observations and surveys, there seems to be a remarkable change occurring in attitudes toward English among its teachers and students in Japan. They are more ready than before to accept English as a multicultural language.

After attending a three-day seminar on the current English language situation, one Japanese teacher of English reportedly wrote: "I was once amazed at Vietnamese students' enthusiasm in trying to communicate in English, and wondered what made the difference. I have now realized that we had a wrong view of English. We will feel more at ease if we know that the important thing is to communicate in Japanese English, and build up and maintain a friendly relationship with people from different cultural backgrounds.... The first step will be to change teachers' concepts of English."

Likewise, as students learn more about the reality of English as a language for international communication, they tend to be increasingly appreciative of non-native speaker varieties of English. More often than not, they are fascinated by the extent to which English is used as a language of wider communication.

In another survey, Japanese college students were asked to read a story and to make comments. The story was about a failure in communication between a British superintendent and a Chinese constable that had occurred in the police department in Hong Kong before its return to China. The Chinese constable used the indirect request style. The British superintendent did not like it and would not listen to him any further.

Most students expressed sympathy with the Chinese constable transferring a common Chinese way of making a request into English. They judged that the British superintendent, not the Chinese constable, was responsible for the communication breakdown because he was not able to accept the Chinese style even though he perfectly understood what his interlocutor said and meant.

The students' reactions were a remarkable departure from the traditional understanding that non-native speakers should always try to conform to native speakers' communication styles. Yet if this developing trend is intensified, we will need to explore various issues involved with intervarietal understanding and communication.

Asian Englishes welcomes contributions in these domains.

Nobuyuki Honna
Editor in Chief
Asian Englishes

EDITORIAL

If English today is an international language, it can no longer be considered as a foreign language in Japan, China, Korea and many other countries. For the Japanese people it is an additional language for international communication.

While we use it as such, we are called upon to decrease dependence on native speakers in English-speaking situations, such as announcements in public places.

A few years ago, a parents association produced a video depicting school children’s experience of the Hanshin Great Earthquake, which shattered major industrial and residential areas in the Osaka-Kobe region in 1995. The narrator of its English version was a native speaker of English. Asked why a Japanese student was not used, an association leader replied, “Because English is not our language.”

Even now, Japanese companies and organizations tend to hire native speakers of English for their business promotion films. It is not because they have few Englishproficient Japanese in their human resources, but because they take it for granted that English is a foreign language in Japan. We should demythologize English as such and be liberated from the linguistic self-repression associated with it.

Japan is often referred to as an inscrutable nation. This reputation obviously is caused by the lack of information sent out overseas from Japan. While much is disseminated in Japanese for domestic consumption, little is prepared in English for international audiences. If English is to be our language for international purposes, we should mount efforts to use it as a language for wider information and communication.

Those abroad who attempt access to English-language web sites created by the Japanese government and corporate offices have often been disappointed at not finding what they wish to obtain. For instance, the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology carries no information in their cyberspace on the primary school English language program they launched in 2002. Overseas observers sometimes find English web sites here unrenewed or undecipherable. It is only hoped that they are not reminded of Marshall McLuhan’s axiom that the medium is the message.

In other words, government and business organizations are required to develop concrete and feasible language policies and programs. If their activities attract international interest, they are asked to distribute information in English as a global language. A working command of English utilized by employees is a great asset of any business firm and public office. Effective in-house training programs will contribute to increased credibility and therefore better evaluation of an organization.

It seems likely that public disclosure of these linguistic endeavors will be demanded by intelligent and forward-looking public in general and shareholders in particular. Since management response to linguistic needs is an essential strategic operation, it is desirable that companies make efforts to acquire and train personnel of sufficient capability of international languages. At the same time, they should be evaluated by an independent and qualified body for their linguistic performances.

This assessment can be called linguistic auditing in view of its indispensable rigor and professionalism.

Asian Englishes welcomes contributions addressing these societal issues involved in English as an additional language in Asia and the Pacific.

Nobuyuki Honna
Editor in Chief
Asian Englishes