Native-Speakerism - a Myth or Reality. Some useful reads!

Dear all the Native Speakers:

Following is the list of a few research articles that unfold the "mystery" of native-speakerism. I hope you can get these articles.
I also hope that after reading these, you'll revisit your notion of native speakerism and try to rebuild a world that believes in coexistence and not coextinction. Regards.

Conklin, K., & Schmitt, N. (2008). Formulaic sequences: Are they processed more quickly than nonformulaic language by native and nonnative speakers? Applied Linguistics, 29(1), 72.

Holliday, A. (2006). Native-speakerism. ELT journal, 60(4), 385.

Love, N., & Ansaldo, U. (2010). The native speaker and the mother tongue. Language Sciences.

Kabel, A. (2009). Native-speakerism, stereotyping and the collusion of applied linguistics. System, 37(1), 12-22.

Ke, I. C. (2009). Haunting Native Speakerism? Students' Perceptions toward Native Speaking English Teachers. English Language Teaching, 2(3), P44.

Selvi, A. F. (2011). The non-native speaker teacher. ELT Journal, 65(2), 187.

Waters, A. (2009). Ideology in applied linguistics for language teaching. Applied Linguistics, 30(1), 138.

MeoKhan, you're a clueless idiot. Seriously, just STFU already. The majority of your posts are incoherent and senseless. You prove that your writing skills are miserable nearly every time you post.

Oh, by the way, are those articles based on the essay industry and the "professional" writers therein? No, they're not.

what do these articles mean?

You are not fooling anyone. You may not post meaningless gibberish just to receive PM privileges!

And you're the self-proclaimed queen of ES. Who has given you the authority to pass judgment on everything in the forum. Useless arrogance.

Without reading these articles, (I am sure you can't even access them :-D) you're making senseless gibberish yourself.
I will not answer any of your foolishly arrogant questions unless you're able to go through at least one of the articles.

You're so desperate now because these articles slap back in your face stating the arrogant falsification of native-speakerism.

Poor you!


These articles (written by native speakers of English), all in journals of high repute, center on one thing: the notion of native speakerism is false.

I will know on this forum no SUPERIOR arrogant soul has the heart to go through these because they don't want to get slapped!!!

Ah, so miserable.

Ah, so what you are asserting is that your grasp of the English language is as good as mine. Right.

Go f- yourself, cave-dweller.

You're trying to hide your embarrassment by again (as usual) using the language your parents have used with you.

I have ALREADY (everyone must witness) admitted that my grasp of English is not good. So nowhere I am claiming that.

These articles I have posted because Pheelyks has asked me to put some reads because I argued some about your false notion of native speaker arrogance.

Now, I know you won't bother to read any of these (you can't even access them) because these articles will slap in your face your under-nourished arrogance of being native-speakers of English: you the one who takes more pride in using swear words rather than talk sense and properly counter a rational argument.

How pathetic!

you're right, Meo: WB probably isn't going to read these articles. neither is anyone else, because they appear to be from password-protected, database-based, peer-reviewed journals. if you really want to confront the arrogance and ignorance of these clowns, you might try posting some quotations directly from the articles, and asking them to respond.

Editor75, you're right. I will do it asap. Let's see how these arrogant souls respond to their falsified notion of native-speakerism. I am sure all they will do is use the language their parent(s) have taught them from day one.

Conklin, K., & Schmitt, N. (2008). Formulaic sequences: Are they processed more quickly than nonformulaic language by native and nonnative speakers? Applied Linguistics, 29(1), 72.
This is an experimental research study that used groups of native and non-native speakers to determine whether "formulaic sentences" (what we might call idiomatic phrases like "take the bull by the horns") are processed faster than non-formulaic sentences (sentences of similar length and complexity that are understood word by word instead of as phrases). The different groups of speakers were used to show that "it is possible for learners to enjoy the same type of processing advantage as natives. " This study has nothing to do with whether or not native and non-native speakers of English have the same level of skill; it only demonstrates that certain language processing mechanisms don't appear to be language-specific.

Holliday, A. (2006). Native-speakerism. ELT journal, 60(4), 385.
This article is about English Language Teaching (ELT) and deals with the belief that native speakers make better teachers of English due to their supposed representation of Western culture. It has nothing to do with how native/non-native speakers actually use language or who is "better" when it comes to English proficiency.

Love, N., & Ansaldo, U. (2010). The native speaker and the mother tongue. Language Sciences.
"This [four page] article presents a historical account of the role and function in linguistic theorising of the concepts "native speaker" and "mother tongue", and serves to introduce a number of articles (Language Sciences vol. 32 no. 6) raising questions about various aspects of the idealised monolingualism that underlies much modern linguistics."

The first three articles don't really appear to have anything to do with the point you've been trying to make. Unless you provide some evidence otherwise, I'm going to stop wasting my time and assume that your other sources are equally irrelevant. Did you bother to read any of these articles' abstracts before you posted them?


You're a sad, sad little man. The abstracts for all of these articles are available through Google scholar--freely available to anyone with an open Internet connection. I also have access to most of the major academic databases through my university affiliations, had google scholar failed me (which it clearly didn't).

First quotation from Holliday (2006):

The impact of native-speakerism can be seen in many aspects of professional life, from employment policy to the presentation of language. An underlying theme is the 'othering' of students and colleagues from outside the English-speaking West (p. 385).

2nd from the same source:

Such a perspective is native-speakerist because it negatively and confiningly labels what are in effect 'non-native speaker' 'cultures' as 'dependent', 'hierarchical', 'collectivist', 'reticent', 'indirect', 'passive', 'docile', 'lacking in self esteem' 'reluctant to challenge authority', 'easily dominated', 'undemocratic', or 'traditional' and, in effect, uncritical and unthinking (Holliday 2005: 19, Pennycook 2002, Kubota 2001). (pp. 385-386).

3rd from the same source:

The undoing of native-speakerism requires a type of thinking that promotes new relationships. This is already evident in discussions concerning the ownership of English and the reassessment of who we are after 9/11.1 It is argued in the conclusion to Holliday (2005) that native-speakerism needs to be addressed at the level of the prejudices embedded in everyday practice, and that dominant professional discourses must be put aside if the meanings and realities of students and colleagues from outside the English-speaking West are to be understood (p. 386).


You will never want to let your arrogance go! However, if you have access to these, I hope your posts will show a different tone from now on. Let's see.


I am waiting for the critical feedback from my "superior" native-speaker colleagues here. Any takers?


I am so sorry Pheelyks; you failed your own arrogance so mercilessly. First you hailed the fact that you had access to all of them (that you did NOT) and then you pasted extracts from a few abstracts (not the articles - poor guy).

Now, read my excerpts from Holliday (2006), and like a good guy let me have your feedback. I hope you and others (claiming their native-speakerism) would sure do. Let's see.

Your quotes all support the idea that "native-speakerism" is detrimental in English Language Teaching settings, insofar as "native-speakerism" is defined as a negative view of non-native-speaking cultures as "dependent', 'hierarchical', 'collectivist', 'reticent', 'indirect', 'passive', 'docile', 'lacking in self esteem' 'reluctant to challenge authority', 'easily dominated', 'undemocratic', or 'traditional' and, in effect, uncritical and unthinking." This isn't something anyone here is arguing.

Our point is that non-native speakers that have not reached native fluency should be honest about this fact with their customers, because their writing is very recognizable as non-native. This has nothing to do with culture, race, or anything else--it has to do with English skill. Your articles do not address this fact, which is the only relevant one to the discussion.

For you, there is not simply a language barrier, but a problem when it comes to intelligence. You don't even understand the argument you are in or the evidence you chose to back yourself up.

I think this is the quote that needs addressed; the others are slightly off-topic.

WB, are the words too big for you? is the sentence up there too long?

I addressed this quote by defining "native-speakerism" as it is defined in the article from whence this quote comes. The author (Holliday) is arguing that a prejudice towards Western culture and thus native speakers of English in the field of English language education needs to be done away with in order to create truly effective ELT programs. That is, he asserts that a prejudice towards native speakers is detrimental to teaching non-native speakers English. This has nothing to do with non-native writers attempting to work in an industry where native-level fluency is expected and demanded. None of the articles MeoKhan posted address this point.

If you read again, my argument is very much alive.

I am going to post some more material soon.

Further evidence of the falsified notion of native speakerism:

Standard English

Source: Farrell, T. S. C., & Martin, S. (2009). To Teach Standard English or World Englishes? A Balanced Approach to Instruction. ET FORUM (Vol. 47, pp. 2-7).

I am waiting for your native-speakerist views.... OMG!


Thanks. At least someone understands the validity of my argument without being prejudiced.

Whether or not native and non-native speakers should be honest with customers about their language proficiency has nothing to do with trying to understand the "meanings and realities of students and colleagues from outside the English-speaking West." Your argument might be alive, but it has absolutely no relevance here.


Ummm....yeah. This is the problem. "Standard English" in American universities is set by the American community, whereas "Standard English" in former parts of the British Empire--like your native Pakistan--are set by those communities. This means that writers from countries other than the US have a different idea of what "Standard English" is, and while this version is acceptable and even perhaps preferred in those other countries, it is NOT preferred in American universities. Thus, you need to be honest with customers about your country of origin, because it has an effect on your English proficiency. You're arguing our side now.


Exactly. Many second language learners will never attain full native fluency. Again, you're making our point.


At American universities, yes, it is inferior. It does not mean that this code is less valuable for transmitting information than any other code, but it explicitly and directly means that a different set of rules are being followed than those expected and graded in an objective manner by professors/TAs. Your "evidence" really doesn;t mean what you think it means.


When the employment doesn't depend upon written English skills, sure. When the service being provided is wholly a matter of language use and skill, however, this is a more than reasonable hiring criteria. It isn't about race, it's about language use; I don't think anyone would mind hiring Salman Rushdie to write papers in English.


That's called an ad hominem attack. By dismissing me as automatically "native-speakerist," you're insulating yourself and pretending you don't even have to consider my points. This is why you fail, yet again.

I am happy to see your tone change. Now note this point you have made. I am very soon going to quote some interesting material of how US Unis deal with Standard English.


You're very stubbornly decontextualizing the entire reality which must have kept you wondering now. Ah me. But the readers on this forum must get it as a whole.


This is your first, explicit acceptance of ESL garbage being meaningful. Thank you Pheelyks: You do have a critical mind, that has started thinking in a different way.

It's clear that there is nothing like Standard English....! My quotations show the this concept is flawed.

Now there are 2 points left.

1- What it has to do with the writing industry (or our essay writing industry).
2- How do US Unis deal with the matter of meaning.

Get ready. I have surprising material to quote.

Big words are great when they actually make sense, but considering you have trouble expressing yourself clearly even in simple terms, I would veer away from them.


I haven't said anything that differs from my previous assertions and beliefs. The fact that you misinterpreted what I and others have said about non-native speakers and companies in this industry is an exaple of either your general lack o intelligence your lack of English proficiency--take your pick.


no one ever said anything like this.


you don't even understand what your quotes show.


Yeah. I can hardly wait.

BINGO. Debate over. (There never really was a debate at all.)

It's much simpler than the ESL defenders make it out. If no American reading your writing would ever even suspect that it might not have been written by a native speaker, there's no issue and nobody really cares where you're from or where and when you learned English. The fact of the matter is that most of the people defending ESLs who don't think they need to disclose that they're non-natives before they take money for writing for U.S. customers can't even write an Internet forum post, let alone a thesis, without sounding obviously like an ESL to any native English speaker.

Some of you are just totally delusional about this: I couldn't even imagine writing or speaking in Chinese and then arguing with a native Chinese speaker who told me that my Chinese was "good for an American" but that it was still obviously CSL to any native Chinese speaker.

Customers only care because there's usually a huge difference and that's why you ESLs need to just be honest about it instead of telling people that you're an American located in the U.S. They may even still choose to use you if you give them a good price, but they have a right to know in advance.

Arrogance, sheer arrogance. I am busy; will get back to you guys soon.


I am so sorry to have you read all this (if you unfortunately have). You didn't expect such a blow! Ah, me... "Native" English speaking Americans...........


Hey dude! Welcome to the debate. You know nothing about what is actually going on and have just jumped in. You should have bothered to read a bit before making throwing your arrogant verdicts.

However, I will address your views a bit later. Adios!

Arguments. Reasoned arguments. Did you read anything that was posted?


I got pretty much what I expected, and you haven't responded to a single thing of substance that's been said. You're ridiculous.


You do realize that the entire forum remains publicly readable, right? It's not like there's much to catch up on in this argument, especially if you've been on the forum for awhile. And his points are directly on topic.

Says the idiot who just joined this forum where this same argument's been going on for at least 2 years.

You're right-I didn't expect you to blow me.

Idiot.

(Oh, and before Editor75 jumps at the opportunity to claim that I am a man simply because I made this joke, "blow me" has become a fairly popular-albeit humorous-saying amongst women.)

I wasn't going to say anything, but now that you mention it, "edited by WritersBeware,"


this pathetic attempt at a cover-up is just begging for a comment. so, in the interest of making you a better internet transvestite, I invite you to prove your assertion, as you so often invite others to prove theirs. personally, I've hung out with a fair number of women, mostly friends of girlfriends, and I've heard it a total of once. and she was wasted, and pretending to have a pe**s.

your move, sir.

pheelyks, you poor twit... I really feel sorry for you. you're so attention starved... but this isn't the way. all you're going to get being a snooty jerk is negative attention. what you want is positive attention. you get that by being decent, and acting like an adult. you'll figure it out eventually, I'm sure. you're not as bad as WB yet, but I see you going down a bad road. watch whom you emulate.

methinks the lady doth protest too much...

• 
  blow me!
  

I post in a forum that is devoted to the industry in which I work. You come here and troll despite having no connection to the industry. Who's attention starved?


If by negative attention you mean a bunch of people emailing me offering me money for my services, then you're absolutely correct. The people that give me negative attention, other than you, are MeoKhan, somewriter, and (usually) stu4. What nice company for you.

I'm still waiting for that proof that saying "blow me" is all the rage among females, WB. I can only assume by your silence that you're out gathering it, leaving me here to deal with your sorry little lap-dog and his bunch of excuses.

"Excuses" that you have yet to counter with anything rational.

You lot are always in conflict - statement or question?

I'm guessing you are all writers and consider each other to be 'the' competition. Why do you all care sooo much about being definitively right? ( that's impossible right?)

I have had experiences with writers and it is this attitude that puts customers off and then leads to negative buzz. Can't you absorb and remember what it was like to learn? Agility and diplomacy must surely lead to a happier disposition for all, no? It has been interesting reading through your posts none the less. Thank you! Read them back and be honest with yourselves; all of you! Answer to no one but yourself on the matter but seriously reflect honestly.

I see so much potential for this market but a culture seems to have developed both in the community and in business that is so ugly that it can surely only lead to extinction.

Hope your days are happier (y)

I have nothing to prove. If you were at all in tune with pop culture, you would have heard women make that statement in movies and television. Alas, you are some backroads hick who's completely out-of-touch with anything post-1985. I'm not going to waste any more of my time educating your dumb a##-been there, done that too many times already. You probably still have one of those wood grain televisions with rabbit ears.

hey-- you're the one who keeps bringing it up.


haha. I can only hope that, now that you're on guard, you'll be less unnecessarily vulgar in the future, and make this place a little brighter. in other words, dude, act like a lady.


your subjective concept of rationality is something you apply outwards without checking to see that it applies inwards, just like your mentor WB's concept of fraud.


"developed?" wtf do you expect-- this is an industry based on helping kids cheat their way through school. it's ugly because the moral high ground everyone here is scrambling to occupy doesn't exist.

If you don't like it, get the F!*K out, pansy. Again, why do you spend so much time in a forum that you do not like, interacting with people you don't like? You do realize that you prove yourself to be a complete loser every time you post, right?


"On guard"? Really? You are truly one of the most unapologetic idiots with whom I've ever had the distinct displeasure to interact. You don't even recognize when someone is making a fool out of you.


SAME POST:

yep-- you're the one who edited your own post out of the fear that I would see through your language use, which just drew more attention to it.

speaking of which,


I've certainly heard females tell me to get the **** out before, but "pansy" is a new one.

you seriously need some acting lessons, sir.

Am I surprised that you have no answers to questions or responses to your blatant hypocrisy? NOPE.

Are you capable of answering a single challenge, you pansy-ass coward? Again, let me play devil's advocate and assume that your asinine accusation that I am a man is true. AND? You repeatedly fail to step up to the plate and explain how my gender would-in ANY WAY WHATSOEVER-make my substantive assertions any less true, valid, and verifiable.

1. Explain how/why many gender makes a difference.
2. Quote a SINGLE substantive claim that I have made that is false.

If you fail to successfully address both, you will have proven, once again, that you are a useless, know-nothing, ignorant, uneducated, little b**-h.

Wow! What about the citations I have made above? Yes, it's nothing of sort for you because it blows you out, LOL.

However, every single viewer can read and understand my point - it is another thing if their reasoning is clouded by their hollow arrogance.

Secondly, I am going to post on two points: How US universities treat ESL writing (you have already stated - inferior). I will also discuss how it is all (the flawed concept of native speakerism) related to the essay writing industry - so wait my dear.

Most "viewers" do not understand you. Your broken, Pakistani English-infested with awkward and incorrect word use-is literally nauseating.

Editor and WB: Guys forgive me but your fight has changed the real essence of my post; however, it's interesting to read your aggressive posts. Keep up the good work!

Hm, again the community-based flawed standards that can make only you happy. It's like you see your face in the mirror and praise your beauty which others hardly see. LOL.

Actually, I know you have been raised by your parent(s) to fight and they have taught you swear words to do so. So, you need someone to fight with be it Editor or anyone. However, I am from a different culture where respecting people (and showing it with a formal set of words) is the most important thing.

I also don't have time to waste to response to your posts that have the language of your home. So do not expect the same from me. Sorry dude!