Antes de la reforma LO 6/2007

From the data it is clear that there is a tendency for respondents to categorise or classify people with whom they were involved organisationally in terms of three categories, those of native speaker of English, non-native speaker of English, and foreigners or consider people in terms of these categories. However, these categories also appear to have a temporal aspect, changing in application as respondents‟

progress through organisational experiences and roles.

There appears to be a tendency amongst those in training to consider all NSE one category with one language and culture, so called “English culture”, without any differentiation between nationalities. As noted in the section above on the theme of transformation, the relationship between adults returning to English language study and NSE is transformed as language skills develop. Prior to language study in an inner circle country there is an avoidance of any person considered a foreigner or a native speaker of English, even when opportunities are presented to communicate with them in a familiar environment, as the following expresses:“Also before I studied English, I couldn't greet them, and I couldn't have eye contact with them”(I 16). When in a situation in their home country where a NSE was present, for example at a meeting or when visiting their regional office, participants described how they experienced feelings of fear and as a result did not attempt to communicate, as indicated by I 12:

Before, if I met a native speaker, I was afraid and I didn't say anything. In my home country, at the regional office, there used to be some guests from

Results and discussion

160

other countries, but I didn't want to meet or talk with or communicate with them.

It appears that prior to learning English in another country their contact with NSE had been limited and there were those who appeared to be apprehensive about face to face contact with a native speaker of English. Speaking to native speaker of English made these respondents feel nervous as they lacked confidence in their English skills. At times, this apprehension or even fear of NSE, or fear of having to communicate with NSE, impeded the daily life of the NNSE, as the following illustrates: “I was afraid that if I met him I couldn't say anything, so I couldn't go out” (I 10). It is not clear from the data whether the feelings of apprehension were experienced to the same degree with or without a mediator present. These feelings of vulnerability threaten the self-concept of the ELL, as discussed with reference to Sorti (2001) and Foster (1997) in section 2.1 above.

To succeed in learning English, it was regarded as essential to have contact with native speakers of English and spending time in an inner circle country was regarded as preferable, “If I don't want to go, if I don't want to meet a native speaker, I can't learn English”( I 12). One advantage of studying English in an inner circle country is the access it gives to NSE, the perception being that, in an inner circle country, the ELL can practise with NSE as much as they require or desire. Language learners found beneficial both contact with native speakers of English indirectly, such as by being present in a context where English is being spoken, and directly, when practising their spoken English and listening skills with a NSE. In the inner circle country they developed confidence to speak to NSE and were able to understand more about their culture and lifestyle, making friendships possible. They found it helpful to speak to NSE and so to practise spoken English, particularly with those who understood their needs as L2 learners, and with those who responded to requests to adjust the speed at which they spoke or to communicate using simple sentences. There were those participants who found NSE easier to understand than NNSE from other countries, yet others found the opposite as they found that NSE tend not to articulate clearly. The data also revealed the desire of participants to work with and to be able to communicate well with NSE, some even expressing as their goal the achievement of native speaker like fluency.

Results and discussion

161

In addition to the transformational aspect of these relationships, over time there appear to be further changes indicated in the data in the nature of the relationships between the NSE and NNSE working for the WCHO. After some time in their COS, working as a NNSE in a multicultural team that includes NSE, changes in the way people from other nationalities were described emerge, as presented

diagrammatically in Figure 8 (below). There is a tendency to regard the composition of the team in terms of NSE and NNSE, two distinct groups, and with a subcategory labelled “English speaker”also delineated. There is a tendency also to differentiate between nationalities; team members and others are described not only as NSE or NNSE but are identified and categorised according to their nationality, for example, as Korean, Brazilian, or German. From the data, it is clear that there are those who are considered members of the NSE group within the team, were correspondingly further distinguished in terms of nationality, for example, the Americans or the Australians. The NNSE category was further described in two groups; the “beginner”and the “English speaker”, as identified in the following:

Actually there came the time when I realised that I have moved from a beginner who tries to understand native English speakers, to a place where I am looked on as the English speaker and try to understand where the other non-native speakers come from. (PW 14)

Figure 8. Categories of identification within COS.

„NSE‟ e.g. Australians Americans British New Zealanders „NNSE‟ e.g. Brazilians Germans Koreans (Beginners) „Beginners’ „English speakers’ Team within COS „Foreigners‟ Non team expatriates

Results and discussion

162

From the data it is acknowledged that difficulties arise between NSE and NNSE within team and organisational contexts, with particular contexts when difficulties are most likely to occur identified. Examples given were team meetings or at conferences when people are gathered in larger groups. In this type of context the NSE in the groups have a tendency to use idioms, metaphors and humour not easily understood by those from other cultures. These can only be understood by those with similar experiences; a shared knowledge of history or shared corpus of literature, art, or shared experiences of contemporary culture. However, for those who do not share these experiences, this can be an isolating experience, leaving the NNSE feeling disconnected from what is happening, feeling insecure and inferior. Although this may occur when any group of people with a shared language come together, it was regarded as inconsiderate to exclude others, as the following observes:

I remember a situation that happened after a team meeting when I suddenly seemed to be the only person who didn't understand what the others were talking about in their native tongue! It made me aware once again how important it is, not to say just a matter of courtesy, when together with friends to use a language that everybody is more or less familiar with. (PW 14) Those considered English speakers were identified as those who have been in their COS for a longer period of time and who have well developed English language skills. These participants regarded well developed English language skills as

advantageous but were still regarded as “one of them”; the NNSE group. They tend to assume unofficial roles as mediators between other NNSE, particularly those from their own country, and the NSE on the team, facilitating communication and

assisting in conflict resolution. They also perceive themselves as a type of

representative for the NNSE group at conferences, where they ask questions so as to seek clarification for the NNSE involved. As there are NNSE who find the English spoken by other NNSE easier to comprehend than that of NSE, the English speakers

can facilitate communication during meetings.

The use of the noun foreigner as applied to a group of people was notable. At times it was used by those who were studying English as a synonym for NSE of English. For

Results and discussion

163

some, their first contact with a foreigner, a person from another country, occurred during the period when they were learning English as an adult. The application of this label foreigner to include all people who are from another country continued in the inner circle country where they were learning English; they described the local people of the country as foreigners, rather than describing the people in terms of their nationality. Only one respondent of the eighteen interviewed used the term to refer to herself in the context of describing how it felt communicating in English: “I‟m

comfortable, I don't worry about my faults or if my grammar is not good, or if my pronunciation is not good... As a foreigner, I think I'm not Australian” (I 10). For those working in their COS, the term foreigner was utilised in a different manner by NNSE, differentiating between their team members and all other expatriates in their COS, as the following indicates:“But English was the language I communicated with my team mates and other foreigners working with us”(PW 14).

From the data it seems that NNSE seem to feel more comfortable when in the company of other NNSE, or when there are other NNSE present in meeting. When they are the only NNSE in a group they are aware of it and described feelings of insecurity when this occurs and, when the situation is ongoing, feelings of loneliness can be experienced, as PW 14 observes: “As the others were all native speakers there were times when I felt somewhat at a loss to explain or say what I really meant or misunderstood and there were feelings of loneliness”. It would seem important to minimise occasions that contribute to these feelings of otherness to maintain healthy self esteem amongst workers and to ensure that language divides do not become divisions in teams. In their COS, NNSE continued to seek NSE assistance correcting their English language in general but particularly their written communication in English.