This article was downloaded by: [Central U Library of Bucharest]

On: 13 November 2012, At: 14:32

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office:
Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Language and Intercultural Communication

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription
information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rmli20

English as a Global Language and Education

for Cosmopolitan Citizenship
Manuela Guilherme

Centro De Estudos Sociais, Universidade De Coimbra, Portugal

Version of record first published: 05 Jan 2009.

To cite this article: Manuela Guilherme (2007): English as a Global Language and Education for
Cosmopolitan Citizenship, Language and Intercultural Communication, 7:1, 72-90
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.2167/laic184.0

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial
or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or
distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that
the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions,
formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher
shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages
whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of
the use of this material.

English as a Global Language and

Education for Cosmopolitan Citizenship

Downloaded by [Central U Library of Bucharest] at 14:32 13 November 2012

Manuela Guilherme
Centro De Estudos Sociais, Universidade De Coimbra, Portugal
Due to the overriding power of World English in the global economy, media,
academy, entertainment, etc., EFL education has become a crucial curricular element
in the educational systems of developing societies. English language learning has
therefore been portrayed either as a fundamental tool that unquestionably brings
professional success or one that oppresses us under capitalism, neoliberalism and
the global market. Without questioning the veracity of both descriptions, indeed
precisely for this reason, this paper argues for a critical pedagogy of English as a
Global Language. The use of English as a common language, but not as a lingua
franca, can provide us with opportunities for acting as responsible cosmopolitan
citizens, without implying the loss of our cultural and ideological roots or the
transformation of the English language into a neutral, disengaged or unaffiliated
medium. This paper attempts to theorise this hypothesis based upon the ideas of
authors such as Santos on globalisation and the World Social Forum, as well as the
statements of EFL teachers on curriculum development.
Devido ao papel tao importante que o Ingles tem hoje na economia global, nos
media, na academia, no entretenimento, etc., o ensino/aprendizagem do Ingles como
lngua estrangeira tem-se tornado um elemento curricular fundamental nos sistemas
educativos das sociedades em desenvolvimento. Sem questionar a veracidade destas
afirmacoes e precisamente por causa disso, este artigo propoe uma pedagogia crtica
para o ensino do Ingles como Lngua Global. O uso do Ingles como lngua comum,
mas nao como lngua franca, pode dar-nos a oportunidade de agirmos como cidadaos
cosmopolitas responsaveis, sem que isto implique a perda das nossas referencias
culturais e ideologicas nem a transformacao da Lngua Inglesa num instrumento
neutro, sem conotacoes nem filiacoes. Este artigo tenta teorizar esta hipotese
baseando-se nas ideias de autores, tais como as Santos sobre globalizacao e o Forum
Social Mundial, e nas afirmacoes de professores portugueses de Ingles Lngua
Estrangeira sobre desenvolvimento curricular.
doi: 10.2167/laic184.0

Keywords: English, globalisation, cosmopolitanism, citizenship, curriculum

The concepts of language and citizenship have always been linked, at least
implicitly, to each other and both of them to notions of nationality in political
thought and, consequently, they have also been present in educational policies,
and particularly those concerning language education (first, second or
foreign). The hegemony of nationality, citizenship, education and language
has over the last centuries contributed to the consolidation of the structure of
the nation-state. This construction became more evident with the organisation
of the nation-state in the 18th century: Has a nationality anything dearer than
the speech of its fathers?. . . With language is created the heart of a people
1470-8477/07/01 072-19 $20.00/0
Language and Intercultural Communication

2007 M. Guilherme
Vol. 7, No. 1, 2007

72

Downloaded by [Central U Library of Bucharest] at 14:32 13 November 2012

English as Education for Cosmopolitan Citizenship

73

(Herder, 1982). However, this hegemony started to be de-constructed, both in

its idea and in practice, two centuries later, being overcome by the structuring
of political, economic and technological globalisation, and, furthermore, by the
increasing political recognition and social visibility of multicultural communities within the nation-state. However, language continues to be used to
create group membership (us/them), to demonstrate inclusion or exclusion,
to determine loyalty or patriotism, to show economic status (haves/have
nots) and classification of people and personal identities (Shohamy, 2006: xv).
The notion of citizenship1 has, therefore, become more flexible, both by
transcending the borders of the nation-state and by gradually renovating itself
intranationally. In the meantime, the notion of cosmopolitanism, once extrinsic
to the idea of nationality, has also acquired an intrinsic dimension, as we shall
see further on with reference to the four modes of production of globalization
(Santos, 1999). Furthermore, the difference between the concepts of migration
and mobility accounts for the existence of two types of cosmopolitanism, if we
focus on citizenship issues, which correspond to two types of bilingualism or
multilingualism and have been predominant in our societies: (1) deficit
cosmopolitanism and (2) elite cosmopolitanism. The first, intrinsic to the
contemporary nature of the nation-state, lies in the multicultural fringes of
society, generally restricted to the lower socioeconomic levels, which are only
recognised by a monocultural state to the extent that they are expected to go
through transitory bilingualism in order to reach monolingualism and to keep
their multicultural irreconcilable spaces apart, the private and the public. The
second, extrinsic to the nation-state, lies in the upper socioeconomic levels of
society, where multilingualism is the goal and the dialogue between cultures is
possible and, therefore, intercultural competencies are valued, regardless of
how they are achieved as long as they are strategically effective. However, not
only vertical and horizontal but also spatial and epistemological mobility has
intensified across and within societies and cultures, and (1) high class
cosmopolitanism has increased with the inclusion of a crowd of media
produced nouveaux riches ; (2) middle class cosmopolitanism has become
ubiquitous with globalisation and glocalisation and the resulting exchange
programmes in education; and (3) lower class cosmopolitanism has become
more educated therefore individually reaching the upper levels or establishing
global links at group level.
English teaching/learning currently raises, in any circumstance, complex
and controversial but very interesting issues about the various relationships
possible between language and citizenship in contemporary societies, regardless of whether they are more or less conscious in the minds of teachers and
learners. Language has turned both into one of the main symbols of national
ethnicity and one of the main instruments of citizenship. The homogenisation
and standardisation of the national language, resulting from the expansion of
the educational system and the media, has introduced a hierarchy into the
practice of citizenship based on linguistic norms. However, the globalisation of
the English language, resulting from various factors strengthened by the
development of electronic technology, has introduced new elements and
further possibilities into the civic life of nationals worldwide. All languages are
confronted, in their historical and social development, by issues of power

Downloaded by [Central U Library of Bucharest] at 14:32 13 November 2012

74

Language and Intercultural Communication

while competing with each other and dealing with divergent forces within
themselves both at the intra- and international levels. Sociologists, philosophers and linguists have, over the past century, increasingly emphasised the
historical and social construction of language, which Vygotsky summarised in
one simple statement: A word is a microcosm of human consciousness
(Bakhtin, 1929; Vygotsky, 1939/1986: 256). Despite the existence of some
voices opposing the nationally based citizenship model, such as the multiculturalists, who emphasise the linguistic and cultural rights of groups while
requiring a differentiated citizenship (Hall, 2000; Young, 1998), and the socalled postmodernist view of radical democrats, who argue for an active
integration of difference in the public sphere, the national perspective is, in one
way or another, prevalent in the notion of citizenship. However, considering
that in most cases English is a foreign and dominant language, although
still related to the power-negotiation process between languages, critical
English teaching/learning nowadays cannot avoid reflecting on identity
and citizenship discussions as related to regional, national, international and
transnational spheres. The use of English is, therefore, a controversial
and critical issue, in any of these spheres, throughout the world. Moreover,
the connotations of English are complex. It is the language of imperialism,
consumerism, marketing, Hollywood, multinationals, war and oppression
as well as of opportunity, science, social movements, peace processes, human
rights and intercultural exchanges. You may be discriminated against if you
dont use English, and also if your mastery of Standard English is thought
inadequate, but you can also suffer discrimination in some national contexts if
you do use it.
In the midst of all this there are several questions that have to be addressed.
Is it possible to use English as a lingua franca, a neutral language for business,
for scientific or for political purposes? Is it possible to empty English of all
these connotations and of its cultural roots and use it as a decontaminated tool
for our immediate purposes and for translating our cultures? What is this
global, cosmopolitan language we have borrowed and made our own or,
alternatively, that has been imposed, more or less aggressively, upon us? It is a
language that, in fact, we manipulate in our everyday lives while communicating with more immediate or more remote contexts and which has been
penetrating our minds and bodies deeper and deeper. How does it work in the
formation of our identities in their different spheres and in the fulfilment of
our citizenship? Finally, what is the role of citizenship and foreign language/
culture educators who deal with English teaching/learning and who are also
determined to implement a critical pedagogy (Guilherme, 2002)?2 The
questions raised here will guide our reflections on the role of global English
for the development of cosmopolitan citizenship, although I do not attempt to
answer them fully here.
The English language definitely cuts across national boundaries more than
any other language and is an icon of the contemporary age. It is undoubtedly
the language of the cosmopolitan/global professional elites, but it has also
been a tool for the citizens of the developing countries, mainly those colonised
by the English. Being the language of hegemonic globalisation, can it, at the
same time, be appropriated by the counter-hegemonic movements and used as

English as Education for Cosmopolitan Citizenship

75

an emancipatory tool? In fact, English is the language used both in the World
Economic Forum in Davos and one of the most frequently used ones in the
World Social Forum (WSF), in Porto Alegre. I would, however, like to focus on
the latter and reflect upon the role English can play in the development of
global awareness and cosmopolitan citizenship.

Downloaded by [Central U Library of Bucharest] at 14:32 13 November 2012

The World Social Forum Views of Globalisation and the Use of

Language
The WSF in itself represents an alternative to hegemonic globalisation and,
therefore, offers not only a different worldview but also guidance for the
development of global practices, processes and products within a radical
critique of present-day reality and the aspiration to a better society (Santos,
2003). The languages used as a common medium both in the WSF events and
on their website are Portuguese, English, Spanish and French, that is, the
European languages most widely spoken in the world. However, the WSF
defines itself, in its Charter of Principles, as an open meeting place (Point 1)
that brings together and interlinks only organizations and movements of civil
society from all the countries in the world (Point 5). Moreover, besides offering
a forum for transnational exchange between social movements and organisations other than political parties, government leaders or business companies,
from all over the world, the WSF has, according to Santos, created a certain
symmetry of scale between hegemonic globalization and the movements and
NGOs (Santos, 2003: 69).
Therefore, such an event and network demands common linguistic tools to
allow for wider communication despite the possibility of using various other
languages in smaller groups or in regional and local meetings. Besides, the
WSF structure is trans- and interthematic, in the sense that there are topics that
may interest all the participants as well others which are nation- or groupspecific. This, together with the above-mentioned characteristics, may allow
for the exercise of a dialogic imagination that Beck identifies with a
cosmopolitan perspective. In his words, the latter is an alternative imagination, an imagination of alternative ways of life and rationalities, which include
the otherness of the other (Beck, 2002: 18). However, the author also states that
cosmopolitanism means: rooted cosmopolitanism, having roots and wings
at the same time and he clarifies that there is no cosmopolitanism without
localism (Beck, 2002: 19).
However, the above description of global events and of a kind of global
awareness where the universal and the particular, the global and the local,
coexist and, therefore, where glocalisms emerge (Robertson, 1995),3 raises
issues concerning the use and the teaching/learning of the English language
as a cosmopolitan medium of communication and as a tool for enhancing the
development of cosmopolitan citizenship (Guilherme, 2004). To what extent
can the English language constitute a common ground where different
appropriations of the English language and of the English-speaking cultures
can dialogue? And one into which the various home cultures of the different
English-speakers (as native, second or foreign language) can be translated?
While, at the same time, make room for other languages to grow? This

Downloaded by [Central U Library of Bucharest] at 14:32 13 November 2012

76

Language and Intercultural Communication

discussion exists alongside the discussion about the precedence of rights to

equality over rights to difference or vice versa. Should English language
teaching/learning be a priority because it gives access to knowledge, to
work and to the global market? Or should native languages take the lead
for reasons of human dignity? Santos statement helps us clarify the priorities
in cosmopolitan citizenship education and, as a consequence, it also offers
guidance in handling the issues of language priorities: people have
the right to be equal whenever difference makes them inferior, but they
also have the right to be different whenever equality jeopardizes their identity
(Santos, 1999: 227).
Although the feasibility of an effective transnational citizenship is considered premature because access to social and political rights still depends
very much on rules and regulations established by the nation-state (Falk,
2000), the growing importance, whether formal or informal, of transnational
organisations and of globalisation-from-below movements, like the WSF,
requires a different attitude towards language. If, on the one hand, strong
foreign languages, like English and Spanish, are becoming more and more
widespread, on the other hand, glocalisation and cosmopolitanisation also
provide for a greater contact with minority languages, promoting a world that
Beck describes as the internalized global both at an individual and national
level (Beck, 2002). As citizenship acquires a de-territorialised transnational
dimension, it allows for the globalisation and, consequently, glocalisation of
a few of the most widespread and most powerful languages, namely English,
but also for recurrent contact with and interest in other languages. These may
be either majority languages outside the North and the West, e.g. Mandarin in
Asia, Swahili or Shona in Africa, and Portuguese, a national but weak
language in Europe that, however, is widespread across the world, or minority
languages.
The linguistic and cultural processes described above may be understood
as coinciding with the four forms of globalisation distinguished by Santos:
(1) globalized localism
the process by which a given local phenomenon is
successfully globalized, be it . . . the transformation of the English language
into the lingua franca ; (2) localized globalism
the specific impact of
transnational practices and imperatives on local conditions that are thereby
destructed and restructured in order to respond to transnational imperatives;
(3) cosmopolitanism
the opportunity for subordinate nation-states, regions,
classes or social groups and their allies to organize transnationally in defence
of perceived common interests and use to their benefit the capabilities for
transnational interaction created by the world system; (d) common heritage of
humankind
the emergence of issues which, by their nature, are as global as
the globe itself (Santos, 1999: 217
218). As far as the English language is
concerned, the above processes can be applied as follows: (1) globalised
localism
the English language as a local phenomenon that is successfully
globalised; (2) localised globalism
the specific impact of such a transnational
linguistic tool on other home languages and cultures at a national and local
level; (3) cosmopolitanism
the opportunity for subordinate, even oppressed,
groups to use such a transnational linguistic tool to exchange their ideas,
organise their social struggles and even to challenge the very hegemonic

English as Education for Cosmopolitan Citizenship

77

criteria of truth and efficiency; and (4) common heritage of humankind

allowing groups to voice their arguments in international and transnational
meetings and to seek a platform of dialogue in order to administer the issues
regarding the sustainability of human life on earth, for instance.

Downloaded by [Central U Library of Bucharest] at 14:32 13 November 2012

English as a Global Language (EGL): A Cosmopolitan

Medium of Communication
In the 2000 study Through other Eyes: How the World Sees the United Kingdom ,
carried out on behalf of the British Council, some interesting issues were
raised concerning the dialogue between English speakers and the UK and the
importance and use of English.4 I will concentrate on the latter. In this study,
the British Council and the international opinion research organisation MORI,
concluded that nearly every young person [in the 28 countries where the
research study had taken place] spoke English (We did not define speak, so we
should understand the result broadly) (p. 55). These results also included
countries where English is not a national language, such as Vietnam, Greece,
Thailand, Italy, Spain and Korea, where more than 90% of the participants said
they spoke English (p. 55). Moreover, just about all of those who didnt speak
it [in countries, like Japan and Bangladesh, where English language ability was
least well developed] said that they would like to be able to (p. 55) and, to be
more precise, respondents were just about unanimous that knowledge of
English is crucial or very important for the purposes of international
business and education (p. 56). Acknowledgement of the importance of
English for travelling abroad also prevailed. In a previous study, in 1999,
carried out in a group of 13 countries, included in the study mentioned above,
the importance of English in career development and knowledge enhancement
was also strongly endorsed (p. 40).
This study formally acknowledges the importance of EGL in both
individual and collective goals with respect to professional and social success,
despite the fact that the majority of the world population does not speak
English and that those who do and have such concerns for professional and
social success are the affluent ones (Phillipson, 2001). They are, in Baumans
words, those who have the freedom to move and act (Bauman, 1998: 70). It is
precisely due to this awareness that fluency in English may, by and large,
represent and be accountable for economic success and, furthermore, that
English for business [has been] business for English (Phillipson, 2001: 191),
that places a considerable responsibility on EGL/EFL teachers as far as
cosmopolitan citizenship education is concerned. This acknowledgement
raises another issue: how can EGL teachers be made accountable for this
responsibility (i.e. cosmopolitan citizenship education) and to whom? Citizenship education is becoming popular, either as a subject or as a transversal topic
in the curriculum, in many countries across Europe and around the world, and
the bibliography is now immense. What role does it effectively play in EGL/
EFL classes in state schools (a compulsory subject in most educational systems
around the world)? How can these teachers perform their role as cosmopolitan
citizenship educators?

Downloaded by [Central U Library of Bucharest] at 14:32 13 November 2012

78

Language and Intercultural Communication

In this world, English is a powerful medium of different identifications and

representations and therefore the teaching/learning of EGL needs to include
the responsibility for preparation of cosmopolitan citizens who consciously
and critically mediate between various competing identity loyalties. And the
same certainly applies to the other strong national or international languages
on this planet. In this postmodern, fragmented global world our actions have a
global impact although we do not know well how to obtain the means to plan
and execute actions globally (Bauman, 1998: 60). As it has become more
difficult to engage in collective action and because the new rich do not need
the poor any more (Bauman, 1998: 72), it is essential that the citizens are aware
of the tricks that the new society plays on them. Furthermore, while nonWestern communities were busy working on one project (decolonisation), the
carpet has been pulled from under their feet by another project (globalisation)
(Canagarajah, 2005: 195
196) and, therefore, while new nation-states were
emerging, they were also being pressed from the outside by economic forces
that made them vacillate in their own freedom and autonomy. In order to
counter such pressures, from the linguistic point of view, hegemonic local
languages, in Africa mainly, have also emerged and threatened other minority
local languages, sometimes alongside authoritarian regimes. This has led to
the use of English and other European languages as symbolic instruments for
claiming democracy, economic and social justice, as well as legal equity, if not
as the main medium of an Afrocentric counter-discourse (Mazrui, 2004: 100).
Moreover, the impetus to use non-native languages of wider communication
[will] emanate[s] [more and more] . . . from an investment in reinforcing
transnational affiliations, which may be global or simply regional (Adejunmobi, 2004: 205).
Unveiling the dominant hegemonies, questioning both the ruling and the
subordinate ideologies, making connections between the different narratives at
the local, national and global levels, and giving voice to those discourses that
have been silenced are important steps that uncover the power relations which
determine the nature of intercultural interactions either amongst individuals
or amongst groups. In sum, the argument supports the need for a critical
pedagogy of native and foreign languages, of English in particular, so that the
education of a cosmopolitan citizenry also takes place along the way (Phipps &
Guilherme, 2004). Giroux also argues for this need by clarifying that learning
a foreign language is a largely humanistic endeavor rather than an elite or
strictly methodological task and the force of its importance has to be tied to
its relevance as an empowering, emancipatory, and democratic function
(Guilherme, 2006).

A Critical Pedagogy of English as a Global Language (EGL)

A critical pedagogy of EGL, aimed at the education of cosmopolitan
citizens, integrates broader educational frameworks such as Human Rights
Education and Education for Democratic Citizenship. The Human Rights
Education dimension focuses on the rights of every human being in the world,
as stated in the documents of transnational organisations which were ratified
by a number of nation-states, and which are nevertheless assumed to take

Downloaded by [Central U Library of Bucharest] at 14:32 13 November 2012

English as Education for Cosmopolitan Citizenship

79

multicultural forms, according to the local contexts. A critical approach to EGL

would, therefore, be expected to meet these goals. Human Rights Education
has become more and more important in language education as the political
idea of human rights has developed and included the notion of linguistic
human rights (Phillipson, 1992, 2001). Skutnabb-Kangas makes a useful
distinction between linguistic human rights and language rights, the former
being language-related identity rights and the latter an enrichment-oriented
right (Skutnabb-Kangas, 2000a: 498). The latter (second and foreign language
education) should not be reinforced without the former (mother tongue
education), which is indispensable for emancipatory citizenship. However,
once linguistic human rights are fully ensured, language rights will only add
to them and English, if it serve[s] more equitable purposes, can also play a
role which is important but limited (Phillipson, 2001: 197).
From an institutional point of view, Human Rights Education has been
promoted through the initial recommendations of transnational organisations, adopted by national educational systems and implemented by
individual schools and teachers, while Education for Democratic Citizenship
relies more on the initiative of national education policy-makers. The latter, in
general, focuses on national identity and, in some cases, on intercultural
dialogue. Therefore, a critical pedagogy of EGL may add a multipleperspective approach as well as a discussion about the power relations that
underlie and surface differences within and beyond the limits of the nationstate (Guilherme, 2002). Moreover, it also demands an awareness that, for a
fully successful and effective cosmopolitan citizenship, knowledge of English
is important but it is not sufficient as there is an increasing awareness about
the necessity of high levels of multilingual competence in the future
(Skutnabb-Kangas, 2000b: 39), due to the fact that not only is Global English
far from being truly global but also communication may often be more
effective if we can communicate, more or less fluently, in our interlocutors
native tongue. Therefore, there is a need for a change in attitude in EGL
education and the challenge is that it empowers rather than subjugates the
learner and the society to which he or she belongs (Corbett, 2003: 208).
Moreover, Corbett (2003: 205
206) adds, the curricular goals of intercultural
education embed language teaching and learning in a wider educational
project that has explicit ethical implications.
The effective study of foreign languages, EGL/EFL in particular, implies
cultural, cross-cultural and intercultural learning.5 This process involves the
acknowledgement not only of facts, that is, the input of geographical,
historical, social or political data about English-speaking nations and cultures,
but also of the complexity of hidden meanings, of underlying values, and how
these articulate with the micro- and macro-contexts in which they/we exist
(Guilherme, 2000a). Human rights, for instance, are not simply a universal
language and they are not universal in their application, as Santos says, and
he identifies four international regimes of human rights in our time: the
European, the Inter-American, the African and the Asian (Santos, 1999: 219).
Can they be translated into English? To what extent can they be discussed in
English?

Downloaded by [Central U Library of Bucharest] at 14:32 13 November 2012

80

Language and Intercultural Communication

Current theories and practices of EGL teaching around the world may be
simplistically divided into three main perspectives: (1) the traditional framework, where the English language is connected to specific cultures of the
Inner Circle, in Kachrus description of English-speaking cultures, and to a
few standardised models of native speakers, all viewed as hegemonic entities
(Alpektin, 2002; Kachru, 1986); (2) the modern framework, where the English
language is used as a disinfected tool for functional purposes, pretending to be
stripped of any cultural, ideological, historical or political baggage, either in
business, scientific or other exchanges; (3) the postcolonial framework, where
English is the language of Intercultural Communication, Human Rights and
Cosmopolitan Citizenship, which has killed the notion of a native speaker
and discarded its traditional ethnocentric historical and ideological load in
order to highlight its appropriation by local cultures and its role in translating
them and, therefore, in solving intercultural conflicts.
Described in this way, the three approaches above
the first being ethnocentric, the second ethno-cleansing and the last ethno-decentring
seem too
nave to be feasible. English was not invented along with cinema, television or
the internet; it has its own heritage that is territorially and chronologically
related to specific cultures and territories (Guilherme, 2003), and to world
developments that have de-territorialised but not emptied it. While being used
as the language of business or of science, for example, it also carries meanings
and values, apart from the cross-cultural and intercultural nuances and the
national, regional and individual idiosyncrasies of those who speak and those
who listen to it. Furthermore, in describing Human Rights or Democratic
Citizenship, it entails particular historical and cultural meanings (Byram &
Guilherme, 2000).
However, a multiple perspective does not mean that anything goes as a
critical pedagogy should speak against the notion that all cultural realities
need to follow one dominant narrative or that all diverse cultural realities need
to be given voice, since it is obvious that many of these realities harbour racist,
classist, and sexist assumptions (Crawford & McLaren, 1998: 146). Not only
does English, first of all, carry its own historical, cultural and political baggage
and not only does EGL, most probably, entail particular beliefs, attitudes and
values, but it also gives access to countless social, cultural, political and ethical
options. Therefore, its use requires a critical mind capable of constantly
making provisional or final choices amongst them, that is, of being critically
selective. Furthermore, intercultural interactions, like intracultural ones, and
therefore linguistic exchanges, involve asymmetrical power relations. As such
intercultural exchanges imply the use of a foreign language, they can become
even more ambiguous and subtle (Guilherme, 2001). Power relations rely on
assumptions of status that depend on different variables present in each
cultural framework, like social class, age, gender, race, ethnicity, geographical
region, etc. but that, in situations of multicultural interaction, incorporate new
cross-cultural and intercultural dimensions and generate new communicative
dynamics. Moreover, the range of contacts and experiences that are now
accessible has widened and their intensity has also increased due to greater
mobility and advances in communication technologies, which have considerably facilitated cultural exchange.

Downloaded by [Central U Library of Bucharest] at 14:32 13 November 2012

English as Education for Cosmopolitan Citizenship

81

A critical pedagogy of the English language gives room both for the socalled sociology of absences and sociology of emergences (Santos, 2003). According
to Santos (2003: 12), the sociology of absences consists in actually proving, in
sociological terms, that what does not exist is in fact actively produced as nonexistent by hegemonic criteria of rationality and efficiency. The counterhegemonic strategy of the sociology of absences consists in replacing a regime of
monocultures by a regime of ecologies. Among the five ecologies identified
by the author,6 the ecology of knowledges, calling for the validation of
previously discredited knowledge(s) that may offer alternative criteria of
rigour, illustrates the kind of change in attitudes that such an epistemological
operation entails. The sociology of emergences then opens up the horizon of what
is possible, of what may be considered as alternative, by identifying signals,
clues, or traces of future possibilities in whatever exists (Santos, 2003: 25).
What role can EGL, within the framework of education for cosmopolitan
citizenship, play in the implementation of such epistemological operations?

Active Cosmopolitan Citizenship

Turner defines global citizenship as a language of obligation and virtue
and cosmopolitanism as a set of virtues. Amongst this set of virtues, the
author highlights the commitment to protect the cultural diversity of the
global commonwealth and identifies as main strategies for achieving this goal,
amongst others, care for other cultures, ironic distance from ones own
traditions, concern for the integrity of cultures in a hybrid world, openness to
cross-cultural criticism through the process of self-reflexivity with respect to
both our own cultural context and other cultural values and Socratic irony, in
the sense that it enables one to achieve some distance from the polity (Turner,
2002). Such a disposition refuses any hegemonic or ethnocentric discourse that
imposes a set of virtues understood as universalising principles, whatever the
scope, as it presupposes the critical questioning of ones own and others
cultural traditions, values and attitudes, even an ironical posture towards them
all. If, on the one hand, national citizenship entails a sense of belonging and
therefore is political, then cosmopolitan citizenship is also political precisely
because it implies an undoing or, at least, a loosening of any previous ties.
However, both levels are not mutually exclusive. Nor are learning foreign
languages/cultures and developing ones home language(s)/culture(s) or
practising ones linguistic skills in English and, via that process, having the
opportunity to meet and deepen ones knowledge of other less powerful
languages/cultures. Neither is citizenship a monolithic structure with clearly
separate levels of identification. Besides, being an active cosmopolitan citizen
does not start only beyond national borders, nor does the fact that one is
bilingual or an expatriate make one a critical and active cosmopolitan citizen,
for this depends on the level of conscious awareness involved in acting
interculturally (Byram, 2003: 64). Here Byram (2003: 64
65) distinguishes
between being intercultural and acting intercultural stating that acting
interculturally involves a level of analytical awareness which does not
necessarily follow from being intercultural despite the fact that the condition
(being intercultural) may be a strong factor for the development of the capacity

Downloaded by [Central U Library of Bucharest] at 14:32 13 November 2012

82

Language and Intercultural Communication

to act according to that attitude (acting interculturally). Nevertheless, being

intercultural may also be viewed as an ontological-like quality through which
one sees the world (Phipps & Gonzalez, 2004). These authors, however,
envisage a critical cultural awareness and a disposition to act that is developed
through education.
Citizenship education in a plural society is one that prepares and stimulates
young citizens to interact with a variety of cultures that are mutually defining
each other and themselves, keeping in mind that every culture is itself an
interculture (Figueroa, 2000: 53). The notion of agency is an important one
when considering the idea of citizenship (Guilherme, 2002) and it corroborates
the reinforcement of the notion of participative democracy that is so central in
the WSF along with complementary, co-relational and proactive dimensions
such as solidarity and reciprocity within the basic concepts of human rights as
described by the European Convention on Human Rights.
Education for citizenship is ultimately geared to promoting a participation
that shapes the present in order to also shape the future. In addition, education
for cosmopolitan citizenship opens up the goal beyond territorial and ethnic
limits while striving to maintain ones cultural roots, and these mutually
reinforce one another. Therefore, cosmopolitanism does not mean to stand
nowhere, for this is impossible, nor is it an attempt to stand everywhere
tenable, for this is not recommendable (Figueroa, 2000: 55). Thus, education
for cosmopolitan citizenship carries the responsibility of simultaneously
promoting a shared identity, the appreciation of diversity, the respect for
difference, the pride in ones own identifications and the commitment to
taking action in the interest of the weaker members of our communities.
Language necessarily plays an important role in articulating and connecting
multiple experiences and identifications both individually and collectively.
How can teachers of EGL foster the accomplishment of such goals? How can
they connect, combine and incorporate the resources at hand?

Teachers Have Their Say

A study of the critical dimension in EFL education at upper secondary level
in state schools in mainland Portugal (10th, 11th and 12th forms) can provide
some illustrative examples of teachers opinions on the implementation of a
critical approach, bearing in mind its contribution to citizenship education at
its various levels.7 The case of Portuguese EFL teachers was particularly
interesting at this stage as those participating in this study were implementing
a national syllabus which required them to carry out a critical interpretation
of the English-speaking cultures while dealing explicitly with concepts/topics
such as identity and citizenship. The syllabus placed a strong emphasis on
citizenship issues in all their spheres, namely local, national, European and
global, both at an individual and collective level. This study was carried out
half way through this syllabus (1995
2003) and the data referred to below,
collected by questionnaire and focus-group interviews, are only a small part of
the whole study (Guilherme, 2000b).
The general aims of this research project were to find out if, why and how
the participants were approaching culture critically and what sort of teacher

Downloaded by [Central U Library of Bucharest] at 14:32 13 November 2012

English as Education for Cosmopolitan Citizenship

83

development models they thought they needed (the analysis provided below
refers only to the how part of this process). The why part of the study had
shown evidence of a strong awareness amongst these EFL teachers of their role
as citizenship educators.8 This part of the study focused mainly on resources,
both human and material, on the interaction between human resources
(teachers and students) and the target cultures, according to the teachers
views, and on the procedures used to teach/learn English and Englishspeaking cultures that could best help develop critical cultural awareness, that
teachers had beforehand tried to define, bearing in mind citizenship education
(Guilherme, 2000b, 2002). Participants were asked a general question about the
main determinants of a critical attitude and questionnaire respondents were
asked to rate some of the elements provided from 1 (minimum) to 5
(maximum). For example, they rated the textbook (3.03) even lower than the
national syllabus (3.26) with respect to their roles in developing a critical
attitude. Comparatively, they placed greater emphasis on the teachers role by
rating not only her/his approach (3.03) but also her/his choice of materials
(3.53) and activities (3.98) higher, which gives consistency to this result. Focus
group participants didnt value the importance of the textbook for this purpose
either. However, the latter stressed that the topics included in the syllabus
could increase or decrease the possibility of taking a critical approach towards
the target cultures. For example, topics that relate to family, environment or
human rights issues generally raise students interest and, therefore, the
possibility of engaging in dialogue and of being critical. On the other hand,
topics such as the Victorian Age were demoralising and favoured a factual
approach rather than a critical one. Some participants remarked that most
topics in the syllabus did not relate to the students reality, despite the fact that
they used complementary material such as articles from newspapers or
magazines or recordings from cable television. The fact that a critical approach
had not been considered in the final/national exams was also pointed out by
group participants as a major impediment for teachers trying to apply such an
approach to cultural contents. With regard to textbooks, group participants
pointed out some of the limitations of textbook materials. Their complaints
were centred on the fact that the texts included did not, first of all, present a
critical perspective but they were rather expository and informative. However,
some group participants added that the textbook was just a basis for work
which is not the only one; it never should be the only one.
Therefore, human resources were those most valued by participants in the
study. Respondents to the questionnaire rated the approach suggested by the
teacher highest as a determinant of the development of a critical attitude
(4.31), which focus group members confirmed. Not surprisingly, teachers
expanded on their perceptions of their own role and, therefore, the data has
been enriched with their comments. It was common for them to view
themselves as mediators between native and target cultures, between
the knowledge/perceptions students already have of these cultures and the
borders they still have to cross. One participant perceived her/his role as one
of helping students find their own way in organising the amounts of
disorganised information they have access to.

Language and Intercultural Communication

Downloaded by [Central U Library of Bucharest] at 14:32 13 November 2012

84

There was a discussion in all groups about whether teachers should or

should not be impartial, neutral and/or objective. Although a small majority of
respondents to the questionnaire answered that they should listen to students
views and be impartial (54.5%), focus group members displayed much
disagreement on this matter. Some participants argued that the teacher should
adopt a critical position, meaning that the teacher should express her/his
opinion, as one aspect of a critical approach is precisely that the individual
affirms who s/he is and what s/he thinks. For the teacher cannot help the
student walk this path without having previously walked it her/himself, as
one group participant suggested when she said that first we must have our
own critical vision, and then we will be able to help students walk the same
path and find their own position.
Students were also acknowledged by group participants as the most
important resources, it depends mostly on students. . . in fact, our work can
be better or worse according to that resource. It depends on their curiosity,
their willingness to learn and their background knowledge, and these vary
mainly according to personality and family background. However, positive
and negative images of students critical capability varied from group to
group. Some teachers would argue that some/most students are critical about
their own environment while in other groups teachers would be unanimous in
complaining about their students lack of critical vision of their own culture, let
alone of foreign cultures.
With respect to teachers and students views of and interactions with
the target cultures, English-speaking cultures in this case, most participants
in the study considered culture to be dynamic and constantly changing. They
also viewed culture as complex and did not reduce it to factual data. However,
elsewhere in the study they rated the idea that cultural identities are
contradictory lower (2.54, on a 1
5 scale), which may imply that they
view cultures as evolving wholes, which however do not include dissonance
within themselves. The same idea about the constant evolution of culture
was also conveyed in group discussions where teachers seemed to be aware of
the need to constantly update their knowledge, a need which was also
acknowledged by questionnaire respondents who claimed that in order to
promote a critical view of the culture [they] teach, it seems important to
provide updated information (4.33, on a 1
5 scale). This was not viewed as a
burden by most participants, quite the contrary. The following excerpt from a
group discussion may reveal some of the feelings the participants displayed on
this matter:
A: In cultural matters, the more we think we know a little more, the more we
get the notion that we know very little. This is a continuous process, it is a
process that is always changing
G: And culture itself evolves, it is not static.
A: It is a continuum

...

B: And the fact that it [culture] is an unending, continuous process, has its
advantages too, because we always have something new, innovative,

English as Education for Cosmopolitan Citizenship

85

Downloaded by [Central U Library of Bucharest] at 14:32 13 November 2012

stimulating, we do not end up with something static, boring, we have new

materials and new ideas and we can always improve our lessons.
Despite expressing the idea that culture is a continuous flow, questionnaire
respondents, at least, did not make a strong statement on cultural diversity or
contradiction within it, as mentioned previously, as they did not find that the
fact that cultural identities are contradictory was an important principle to
keep in mind. In spite of finding that giv[ing] representation of various groups
within the culture was relatively important in order to promote a critical view
of the culture [they] teach (3.36 on a 1
5 scale), it was not given as much
importance as one might have thought. However, group participants in general
claimed that they focused more on diversity: I do not identify a culture with a
nation because there are, in fact, several cultures within a country.
Focus group participants revealed that they also displayed their own ideas
and preferences when teaching about English-speaking cultures. No matter
how impartial they tried to be they did not expect this to go unnoticed among
their students, although they did not expect them to share their views either.
Furthermore, one group participant remarked that it is important that they
understand that I have my own values and preferences. This leads us to
another issue, which is the role of history in EFL classes at an advanced level
and the possible perspectives of historical narratives. Although teachers
seemed to keep an open mind in relation to students response to materials,
which a group participant called perspective of discovery, the limits of such
an approach were, however, also evident. Clearly, such a perspective of
discovery is restricted by the schools organisation of time and space, and also
depends on both the students desire for discovery and the teachers
willingness to give up some control. On the other hand, the questionnaire
results show that participants do not rate such activities as gather[ing] data
(3.34 on a 1
5 scale), or collect[ing] information (3.03) very highly, within the
context of a critical approach, which obviously diminishes the scope for
students discovery.
In other words, a critical approach has to be rooted in students lives and
background knowledge and stimulate their intellectual curiosity and emotional involvement in order to lead them to further their knowledge about
alternatives found in different cultural frames. The importance of the affective
component in a critical approach was once again confirmed by the questionnaire results where a majority, although small, of the respondents
considered that in order to promote a critical view of the culture I teach it
seems important to raise feelings and emotions about that culture (66.3%).
This finding may account for other components of a critical approach that
were underlined by focus group participants such as the use of multimedia
materials, with recourse to music, theatre and film, and of different activities
that require a strong involvement on behalf of the student. To summarise,
questionnaire respondents rated procedures such as compar[ing]/
contrast[ing] (4.66, on a 1
5 scale), question[ing] (4.50), comment[ing]
(4.43) and recogniz[ing] positive and negative aspects (4.01) highly, and these
also demand personal involvement from the students.

Downloaded by [Central U Library of Bucharest] at 14:32 13 November 2012

86

Language and Intercultural Communication

Finally, while discussing whether developing critical cultural awareness

was more an individual or a collective enterprise, a group participant said
that it can be prompted in a group but the maturation process implies
individual endeavour. Participants emphasised the importance of critical
reflection and a critical analysis of culture through individual work.
Nonetheless, groupwork was considered by focus-group participants the
most important way to stimulate a critical attitude since, as one participant
added, when they work together they become aware of their own
weaknesses and learn through their colleagues work. Therefore, the
development of communication skills, for the purpose of both groupwork
and classwork, was a main concern for many participants. But they also
mentioned having to deal with students with strong convictions, an
incapacity to communicate, serious family problems, who defended totalitarian regimes or openly admitted and maintained their prejudices, racial ones
for example, as pointed out by one of the groups. In sum, as one group
participant put it, being a critical educator is a risky profession because we
deal with people.
We may conclude from the excerpt of the study presented above that the
participants vision of their own role and performance contributes to the
arguments introduced here. Considering that these secondary school teachers
of English as a Foreign Language were required to follow a national syllabus,
which demanded that they carry out, with their students, both a reflection on
identity and citizenship issues while studying English and a critical
interpretation of English-speaking cultures, although these were restricted
to the UK and the USA, it is evident that they do, although timidly, suggest
some responses and hints to our initial questions. By emphasising the role of
the teacher, his/her choice of materials and a critical interpretation of the
English-speaking cultures neither the syllabus nor the teachers implementing
it start from the principle that their object of study, English, is a lingua franca
in the sense of it being an empty vessel, a self-evident tool which everyone
can use as a culture-free vehicle for words and ideas. Furthermore, they are
aware that their object of study is dynamic, fragmented, contradictory,
complex and, therefore, we cannot easily use it for our immediate purposes
or to translate our cultures, equally dynamic and complex, into it in a
straightforward manner. On the other hand, they are committed to helping
their students negotiate their identity and citizenship levels while studying
this powerful global language which may add to their opportunities not only
in the job market but also in the exercise of an emancipatory citizenship.
Nevertheless, they promote a critical approach by implementing a perspective of discovery, a questioning stance and an emotional involvement, as well
as by allowing for dissonance, which may contribute towards the preparation of critical global citizens. On the one hand, they express their intention
not to abdicate their, or their students, cultural backgrounds but, on the
other hand, to be open to learning and ready to expand their horizons and
their commitments while interacting with their interlocutors through the
medium of English.

English as Education for Cosmopolitan Citizenship

87

Downloaded by [Central U Library of Bucharest] at 14:32 13 November 2012

Conclusion
Many possibilities have been pointed out for the teaching/learning of EGL,
understood either as the language of the English tradition and of American
modernity, or as a lingua franca for business, science and tourism. However,
considering that EGL is a loaded language that is manipulated everyday
mainly by those world citizens who have greater access to power and
affluence, and that it is itself a powerful vehicle for the exercise of a global
citizenship, in the cosmopolitan sense, defined above, a critical pedagogy of it
is something which deserves to be fully explored. Technology, both in the field
of communication and of transportation, is enabling school populations in
developed countries, whatever their origin and in spite of their different
material conditions, to interact more closely and intensely with one another
and also to make contact, although not extensively, with those in the so-called
underdeveloped countries. This calls for a critical and conscious use of
common linguistic tools and offers plentiful opportunities for critical active
cosmopolitan citizenship while also making room for expansive linguistic and
(cross- and inter-) cultural knowledge. The critical use of EGL, as that of any
language, although more emphatically in this case due to its prevalence in
contemporary societies, goes beyond the acquisition of linguistic skills and
cultural information into the sphere of languaging, defined as a life skill, by
conveying the possibility of entering the languaging of others and re-entering
our own languaging (Phipps & Gonzalez, 2004). EGL is a powerful medium
for educational systems to engage in the preparation of critical and active
cosmopolitan citizens through their teachers and students (viewed as their
main resources, as proved by the data examined above). This can be achieved
by opening up their horizons and by making them aware of their rights and
obligations as individuals and as members of various communities, whether
more immediate or remote. The intercultural dimension of EGL education is,
as mentioned above, an important element in order to achieve the intercultural
freedom which is the basis of cosmopolitan citizenship. Developing intercultural freedom not only entails the physical capacity to move or the
intellectual capacity to speak and understand various languages, but also
the control of the fear of the unknown (at the emotional level), the promotion
of a critical outlook (at the cognitive level), as well as the enhancement of selfdevelopment (at the experiential level).
Correspondence
Any correspondence should be directed to Dr Manuela Guilherme, Centro
De Estudos Sociais, Universidade De Coimbra, Colegio de S. Jeronimo,
Apartado 3087, Coimbra P-3001-401, Portugal (mmdg@fe.uc.pt).
Notes
1.

The notion of citizenship that is dealt with in this paper is one that departs from the
legal, political and cultural relationship between the individual and the nationstate(s) and goes beyond it into a multilayered conception of its nature, in the sense
that it connects with multiple points of reference. The individual develops multiple
identifications, that can also be formal (legal and political) or informal (social and
cultural), throughout his/her lifetime with different communities on a trans- and

Language and Intercultural Communication

88

2.

3.

Downloaded by [Central U Library of Bucharest] at 14:32 13 November 2012

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

intranational basis. This notion has in mind that the perception of citizenship varies
according to factors and circumstances deeply related to cultural frameworks and
historical contexts, but it firmly relies on the conception of participatory democracy
and on the citizens critical engagement with society in general.
A critical pedagogy of foreign languages/cultures includes a Human Rights and
Citizenship Education framework, adopts a multiple and interdisciplinary
perspective and is based upon critical reflection and critical dialogue mainly about
the power relations between and within different cultures.
Glocalism here is used in connection with the phenomenon of Glocalisation
described by Robertson as the simultaneity and the interpenetration of what are
conventionally called the global and the local, or
in more abstract vein
the
universal and the particular (Robertson, 1995: 30).
For the British Council the precise way [they] define this group [the target
audience] varies a little from country to country to take account of local factors, but
it may be generally understood as men and women, aged between twenty-four
and thirty-five, well educated, with above-average incomes, and likely to rise to
positions of influence in their society. . . The research looks at twenty-eight
countries selected on the basis of their importance to the British Council (The
British Council, 2000: 1).
Cultural learning means that it focuses on one culture. Cross-cultural learning
focuses on how cultures compare and contrast, e.g. native versus foreign culture,
whereas intercultural learning focuses on how different cultures relate and interact
with each other.
Santos identifies five ecologies: (1) the ecology of knowledge ; (2) the ecology of
temporalities , taking into account different conceptions of time; (3) the ecology of
recognitions , confronting the social hierarchies based on criteria established by
Western societies; (4) the ecology of trans-scales , questioning the logic of global scale;
and (5) the ecology of productivities , validating alternative systems of production
(Santos, 2003).
I endorse Giddens definition of education in citizenship as education of critical
spirit: a critical engagement with ones own position in society. The aims of
education in citizenship, in the perspective and within the scope of this text, are
mainly to develop critical cultural awareness towards ones native and other
cultures, to promote a discussion about intercultural power relations and to foster
solid democratic behaviour.
Both quantitative (questionnaires) and qualitative methods (focus group interviews) were applied in this case study and data analysis was carried out separately
and, eventually, compared and integrated as shown below. The internal consistency of the instruments, the correlation between both instruments, the size and
geographical distribution of the samples, and the triangulation of methods allowed
for the repetition of patterns of thought in different situations and with various
participants.

References
Adejunmobi, M. (2004) Vernacular Palaver: Imaginations of the Local and Non-native
Languages in West Africa . Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Alpektin, C. (2002) Towards intercultural communicative competence in ELT. ELT
Journal 56 (1), 57
64.
Bakhtin, M.M. (1929/1977) Le Marxisme et la philosophie du langage [Markszism i filosofija
jazyka ]. (M. Yaguello, trans.) Paris: Les Editions de Minuit.
Bauman, Z. (1998) Globalization: The Human Consequences . Cambridge: Polity Press.
Beck, U. (2002) The cosmopolitan society and its enemies. Theory, Culture & Society 19
(1
2), 17
44.
Byram, M. (2003) On being bicultural and intercultural. In G. Alred, M. Byram and M.
Fleming (eds) Intercultural Experience and Education . Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Downloaded by [Central U Library of Bucharest] at 14:32 13 November 2012

English as Education for Cosmopolitan Citizenship

89

Byram, M. and Guilherme, M. (2000) Human rights, cultures and language teaching. In
A. Osler (ed.) Citizenship and Democracy in Schools: Diversity, Identity, Equality. Stoke
on Trent, Sterling: Trendham Books Ltd.
Canagarajah, A.S. (1999) Resisting Linguistic Imperialism in English Teaching . Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Canagarajah, A.S. (2005) Accommodating tensions in language-in-education policies:
An afterword. In A.M.Y. Lin and P. Martin (eds) Decolonisation and Globalisation:
Language-in-education Policy and Practice (pp. 194
201). Clevedon: Multilingual
Matters.
Corbett, J. (2003) An Intercultural Approach to English Language Teaching . Clevedon:
Multilingual Matters.
Crawford, L.M. and McLaren, P. (1998) A critical perspective on culture in the second
language classroom. In D.L. Lange, C.A. Klee, R.M. Paige and Y.A. Yershova (eds)
Culture as the Core: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Culture Teaching and Learning in the
Language Curriculum . Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition
(CARLA), Working Paper Series, University of Minnesota.
Falk, R. (2000) The decline of citizenship in an era of globalization. Citizenship Studies 4
(1), 3
17.
Figueroa, P. (2000) Citizenship education for a plural society. In A. Osler (ed.) Citizenship
and Democracy in Schools: Diversity, Identity, Equality. Stoke on Trent, Sterling:
Trendham Books Ltd.
Giddens, A. (2000) Citizenship education in the global era. In N. Pearce and
J. Hallgarten (eds) Tomorrows Citizens . London: Institute for Public Policy Research.
Guilherme, M. (2000a) Intercultural competence. In M. Byram (ed.) Encyclopaedia of
Language Teaching and Learning. London: Routledge.
Guilherme, M. (2000b) Critical cultural awareness: The critical dimension in foreign
culture education. Unpublished PhD dissertation, School of Education, University of
Durham.
Guilherme, M. (2001) The critical study of a foreign culture and citizenship education.
Anglo-Saxonica 2, 14
15.
Guilherme, M. (2002) Critical Citizens for an Intercultural World: Foreign Language
Education as Cultural Politics . Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Guilherme, M. (2003) Re-visioning Britishness: The teaching of democracy in British
schools today. Anglo-Saxonica 19, 199
205.
Guilherme, M. (2004) The role of intercultural communication and interaction in
modern language departments. Anglo-Saxonica 2 (21), 119
138.
Guilherme, M. (2006) Is there a role for critical pedagogy in language/culture studies?
An Interview with Henry Giroux. Language and Intercultural Communication 6 (2),
163
175.
Hall, S. (2000) Multicultural citizens, monocultural citizenship? In N. Pearce and J.
Hallgarten (eds) Tomorrows Citizens: Critical Debates in Citizenship and Education (pp.
43
51). London: Institute for Public Policy Research.
Herder, J.G. (1982) Briefe zur Beforderung der Humanitat. Herders Werke. Berlin:
Bibliotehek Deutscher Klassiker (1st edn. 1793
1797).
Kachru, B.B. (1986) The Alchemy of English: The Spread, Functions and Models of Non-native
Englishes . Oxford: Pergamon.
Mazrui, A.M. (2004) English in Africa after the Cold War. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Pennycook, A. (1994) English as an International Language . London: Longman.
Phillipson, R. (1992) Linguistic Imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Phillipson, R. (2001) English for globalisation or for the worlds people? International
Review of Education 47 (3
4), 185
200.
Phipps, A. and Gonzalez, M. (2004) Modern Languages: Learning and Teaching in an
Intercultural Field . London: Sage.
Phipps, A. and Guilherme, M. (2004) Critical Pedagogy: Political Approaches to Language
and Intercultural Communication . Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Downloaded by [Central U Library of Bucharest] at 14:32 13 November 2012

90

Language and Intercultural Communication

Robertson, R. (1995) Glocalization: Time-space and homogeneity
heterogeneity.

In M. Featherstone, S. Lash and R. Robertson (eds) Global Modernities (pp. 25
44).
London: Sage.
Santos, B. de S. (1999) Towards a multicultural conception of human rights.
In M. Featherstone (ed.) Spaces of Culture: City, Nation, World . London: Sage.
Santos, B. de S. (2003) The World Social Forum: Toward a Counter-hegemonic Globalization .
On WWW at www.ces.fe.uc.pt/bss/documentos/wsf.pdf. Accessed 1.04.
Shohamy, E. (2006) Language Policy: Hidden Agendas and New Approaches . London:
Routledge.
Skutnabb-Kangas, T. (2000a) Linguistic Genocide in Education
or Worldwide Diversity and
Human Rights? London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Skutnabb-Kangas, T. (2000b) Linguistic human rights and teachers of English.
In J.K. Hall and W.G. Eggington (eds) The Sociopolitics of English Language Teaching
(pp. 22
44). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
The British Council (1999) Through Other Eyes: How the World Sees the United Kingdom .
The British Council (2000) Through Other Eyes 2: How the World Sees the United Kingdom .
Turner, B.S. (2002) Cosmopolitan virtue, globalization and patriotism. Theory, Culture &
Society 19 (1
2), 45
63.
Vygostky, L. (1939/1986) Thought and Language [Myshlenie I rech ]. (A. Kozulin, (trans./
ed.) Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Young, I. (1998) Polity and group difference: A critique of the ideal of universal
citizenship. In G. Shafir (ed.) The Citizenship Debates (pp. 263
290). Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press.