English Language Teaching in its Social Context
English Language Teaching in its Social Context
English Language Teaching in its Social Context
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
118 CELIA ROBERTSa conventional rem<strong>in</strong>der, like a knot <strong>in</strong> a handkerchief, where the content of the memois <strong>in</strong>fcrcntially determ<strong>in</strong>ed. Thus thc ‘CUC’ cannot bc said to cncode or dircctly <strong>in</strong>vokcthe <strong>in</strong>terpretive background, it’s simply a nudge to the <strong>in</strong>ferential process . . . The<strong>in</strong>terpretive process may be guided by general pragmatic pr<strong>in</strong>ciples of a Gricean sort,and thus be <strong>in</strong> many ways universal <strong>in</strong> character: but the ‘cues’ are anyth<strong>in</strong>g butuniversal, <strong>in</strong>deed tend<strong>in</strong>g towards sub-cultural differentiation. (p. 29).There are several problems here for m<strong>in</strong>ority language speakers. Firstly, they have toidentify that thcrc is a CUC (for example a particular prosodic feature may have conventionalsignificance <strong>in</strong> one language or variety and not <strong>in</strong> another). Secondly, as Lev<strong>in</strong>son (1997)suggests, the socio-cultural background is not directly <strong>in</strong>voked by a particular CUC. It setsoff the <strong>in</strong>ferential process but unless <strong>in</strong>teractants share <strong>in</strong>terpretative procedures, there isno know<strong>in</strong>g what particular aspects of background knowledge may be called up. Thirdly,there is the fact that contextualisation cues arc reflexive. <strong>Language</strong> shapes context as muchas contcxt shapes language. So the majority and m<strong>in</strong>ority <strong>in</strong>terlocutors may make differ<strong>in</strong>gsituated judgements both l<strong>in</strong>guistically and contextually moment by momcnt <strong>in</strong> the<strong>in</strong>teraction: a misread prosodic cue can <strong>in</strong>dex a sct of pre-suppositions about speakerperspcctivc, for example, which creates a new <strong>in</strong>terprctativc contcxt and sets the <strong>in</strong>teractionon a different foot<strong>in</strong>g.These iqsues are central to an understand<strong>in</strong>g of what it might mean to be socialised <strong>in</strong>toa second language.The mean<strong>in</strong>g of contextualisation cues can only be learnt by the l<strong>in</strong>guisticm<strong>in</strong>ority speaker if there is extended cxposurc to thc communicative practices of the groupor nctwork from which the majority languagc spcakcr comes.It is long-term exposurc to . . . communicative experience <strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutionalisednctworks of relationship and not language or community membership as suchthat lics at thc root of shared culture and shared <strong>in</strong>ferential practices. (Gumperz, 1997,p. 15)The need for this long cxposurc or immersion is that, as I have said, the relationshipbetween cue and context is <strong>in</strong>dircct. Cues function relationally, that is <strong>in</strong> contrast to whathas not been said, just been said and so on (Gumperz, 1992). Also many of the formalproperties of contextualisation cues are difficult to process, for cxamplc aspects of prosody.F<strong>in</strong>ally, they are about <strong>in</strong>vok<strong>in</strong>g context more than message and yet thc learner is orientatedtowards process<strong>in</strong>g thc message. In sum, contextualisation cues are slippery featurcs.Equally important is thc fact that contextual cues arc <strong>in</strong>dcxical markers of membcrshipof a particular group. Know<strong>in</strong>g how to use and <strong>in</strong>tcrpret a particular cue mcans at least forthat <strong>in</strong>teractional moment that you are a ‘belonger’. And <strong>in</strong> contrast, the failure to pickup on a cue not only creates misunderstand<strong>in</strong>g but scts the m<strong>in</strong>ority l<strong>in</strong>guistic speakerapart. She is not <strong>in</strong> that <strong>in</strong>teractional moment an emergent member of the same communicativecommunity. As a result, small <strong>in</strong>teractive differences can contribute to largesocial consequences both for the <strong>in</strong>dividual, for example, <strong>in</strong> fail<strong>in</strong>g to be allocated a houscor get a job and, <strong>in</strong> terms of the social order, feed<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>to the structur<strong>in</strong>g of ethnic relations<strong>in</strong> a multil<strong>in</strong>gual society.<strong>Context</strong>ualisation, therefore, functions at the micro lcvel, both guid<strong>in</strong>g (or not) m<strong>in</strong>uteby m<strong>in</strong>ute <strong>in</strong>terpretative processes and also <strong>in</strong>dexes “those implicit values of relationalidentity and power that . . . go by the namc of culture” (Silverste<strong>in</strong>, 1992, p. 57) at thcmacro level. Local situated mcan<strong>in</strong>g and wider ideological concerns are caught up togcther.It is not simply a case of pragmatic failure or evcn of socialisation <strong>in</strong>to some stable body of