The Idea of English in Japan: Ideology and the Evolution of a Global Language by Philip Seargeant
The Idea of English in Japan: Ideology and the Evolution of a Global Language by Philip Seargeant
复制标题
日本的英语理念：意识形态与全球语言的演变作者：Philip Seargeant
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2010
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
G. P. Glasgow
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
G. P. Glasgow
提供英语语言的本体论以及它在外国是如何概念化的是一项雄心勃勃的事业;然而，菲利普·塞尔韦尔的《日本英语的理念：意识形态和全球语言的演变》一书通过仔细选择的案例研究和发人深省的分析，对这一问题进行了紧凑的人类学调查。这是一项特别令人耳目一新的研究，因为日本在世界英语文学中的代表性仍然相当不足。对于社会语言学家和日本学家一样，这本书是一个受欢迎的除了目前的文学语言和社会在日本。它果断地质疑语言意识形态是如何复制的，以及这些意识形态对全球如何看待英语的影响。这本书基本上是由几篇文章组成的，Searlett以前写过关于日本，全球化和英语意识形态的文章。本卷的理论和方法框架在导言中有详细说明。3-5），第2章，“英语作为一种全球语言的概念”（pp. 6-21）和第3章“语言意识形态和全球英语”（第21页）。22-42）。在第二章，在他以“语言不仅作为一种媒介，而且作为一种概念而存在”（第1页，斜体是我的）的命题开始他的导言之后，他仔细地回顾了世界英语中两个著名的思想流派，这两个流派将夸克的单一中心主义者对通用英语的取向与卡克鲁的更多元、更微妙的观点相对立，后者欣赏语言的多样性。Searlett巧妙地利用这场辩论作为跳板，他打算确定“特定背景的概念化”（第20页）的后果，就像日本发展理论方法一样。在第三章中，他选择了一个定性的语言意识形态框架来研究英语在日本社会中的定位，以及从这种定位中可以收集到关于英语的什么假设。他通过符号学，通过分析书面和视觉文本，以及进行小规模的采访来做到这一点，尽管他在后面的一章中承认，他倾向于主要从英语而不是日语中产生的书面文本中汲取有关英语的信息。第4章“英语在日本：当前的辩论形式”（第100页）。第五章“全球化：通过与其他文化的接触丰富日本文化”（第43-62页）。63-86），开始概念性案例研究，首先深入探讨教育中的语言政策问题。在他对日本英语教学和研究中的“决定论”的深刻批判中，他质疑了日本教育部在英语作为交流工具方面所采取的看似可疑的立场，强调日本和西方的“交流”可能是完全不同的概念。下一章探讨了全球化如何在
Providing an ontology of the English language and how it is conceptualized in a foreign country is an ambitious undertaking; however Philip Seargeant, with his volume The Idea of English in Japan: Ideology and the Evolution of a Global Language, provides a compact, anthropological investigation of this issue through a careful selection of case studies as well as thought-provoking analysis. It is a study particularly refreshing to see, as Japan is still fairly underrepresented in world Englishes literature. For sociolinguists and Japanologists alike, this book is a welcome addition to the current literature on language and society in Japan. It assertively questions how linguistic ideologies are reproduced and the implications these ideologies have on how English is viewed globally. The book is essentially comprised of several articles that Seargeant had previously written about Japan, globalization and the ideology of English. The theoretical and methodological frameworks in this volume are detailed in the Introduction (pp. 3–5), ch. 2, “The Concept of English as a global language” (pp. 6–21) and ch. 3 “Language ideology and global English” (pp. 22–42). In ch. 2, after he commences his introduction with the proposition that “language exists not only as a medium but also as a concept” (p. 1, italics mine), he carefully reviews two prominent schools of thought in world Englishes, which pit Quirk’s monocentrist orientations towards a universal English language against Kachru’s more pluricentric, nuanced outlook that appreciates linguistic variety. Seargeant deftly employs this debate as a springboard for his intentions to determine the ramifications that “contextspecific conceptualizations” (p. 20), like Japan has for the development of a theoretical approach. In ch. 3, Seargeant presents his choice of a qualitative, language ideologies framework in order to investigate how English is positioned within Japanese society, and what assumptions about the language can be gleaned from this positioning. He does this through semiosis, by analysing written and visual texts, as well as conducting small-scale interviews, though he concedes in a later chapter that he tends to draw predominantly from written text about English produced in the English language rather than in Japanese. Chapter 4, “English in Japan: The current shape of the debate” (pp. 43–62) and ch. 5, “Globalization: Enriching Japanese culture through contact with other cultures” (pp. 63– 86), begin the conceptual case studies that first delve into the issue of language-in-education policy. In his thoughtful critique of the ‘determinism’ that tends to be a feature of English language teaching and research in Japan, he interrogates the seemingly dubious positions taken by the Japanese ministry of education with respect to the English language as a tool for communication, highlighting that ‘communication’ in Japan and the West may be quite different concepts. The subsequent chapter approaches the issue of how globalization in