about learning the local language. Attitudes to learning the local language reflected commitment to staying in the country – the investment (Norton Peirce, 1995) the teacher was willing to make; attitudes towards the local culture – the degree to which the teacher chose to assimilate or integrate into the culture (Berry, 1997); and the struggle the teacher had in reconciling incongruous aspects of their selves (Ochs & Capps, 1996).
At its most basic, learning the local language reflected the commitment teachers had to staying in the country. None of the English teachers in Korea was currently studying Korean, or planned to improve their Korean ability – with excuses ranging from lack of time due to family commitments, and also lack of ability (Lackey), the lack of necessity because of Korean speaking family members (James and Gabriel) or because they were leaving the country (Beth), while all four teachers in Japan were committed to continuing to work on improving their Japanese: Simon and Zahava because they felt it would improve their chances of promotion at work,
162
Arielle because she felt Japanese, having lived in the country for more than 20 years, and John because he was determined to live in Japan for as long as possible.
Arielle and Simon conducted their daily lives in Japanese. It was the language spoken in the home, and often the language spoken when they went out, said Simon. Arielle’s husband and daughter didn’t speak English well, so the family communicated in Japanese. For Zahava, learning Japanese met her need to be independent. Despite using Japanese daily, the three still felt that they didn’t speak it fluently. Each of them admitted to not reading or writing the language well, but they spoke it well enough for day-to-day interactions.
Maria: How well do you speak Japanese?
Arielle: Not as well as I’d like but yeah ... at home our language is Japanese.
Simon: I don’t want to say that I’ve mastered Japanese or anything like that because I ... couldn’t say that, but ... I speak Japanese at home um much of my social life happens in Japanese
Zahava: I studied it when I was in Kyoto. Cos I was – I just couldn’t stand being illiterate.
The fourth teacher in Japan was John. He was studying Japanese and explained the difference between learning Korean and learning Japanese thus:
Well, I didn’t learn Korean, I picked up some Korean, big difference ... When I came over to Japan, ... I got my hands on a couple of textbooks and I put in more effort, ...cos I tell you at 42, even now, I’m studying harder and more consistently than I did at 30
The teachers living in Japan saw language learning as a marker of professionalism (Simon), and as a choice that would help them advance in their profession, because they would be treated with more respect by work colleagues and would be able to participate more fully in the academic life of the university (Simon, Zahava). As Simon said,
I know lots of people don’t (choose to learn Japanese when living in Japan), but I never thought about it as an option, it just always seemed like self-evident that if you’re living here, you should speak
163
John, who had worked in both South Korea and Japan, expressed this difference in terms of EFL teachers’ attitudes to learning Korean and Japanese:
I have found anybody who’s been here a month speaks some Japanese, you know, it’s hard to find somebody who hasn’t learned the alphabet, you know, who can’t conduct themselves pretty well, whereas, I find in Korea, if you find a native speaker who speaks Korean – I mean a native English speaker who speaks Korean, it’s like wow! How did you do that?
Language learning was also a reflection of attitudes towards the local cultures. This was most evident in John, who had worked in both Korea and Japan. He did not have happy memories of Korea, and did not speak fondly of Korean people and culture, whereas he thought Americans could learn a lot from Japanese culture. This admiration for the politeness, getting along, friendliness, orderliness, good service in restaurants translated into “hey, we (Americans) could learn something from this country”. In contrast, Korea was more insecure and self-centred:
I get to Korea, and it’s just like oh you gotta drop the nationalism, drop the jingoism, drop the fantasies about how you know the IMF undermined your economy ... and these other conspiracies, ... the rudeness, the people breaking in front of you in line, pushing and spitting inside of buildings, the public urination, the the national inability to drive
James echoed what John had said: he spoke Japanese better than his other languages because he spent a long time in the country, and was committed to learning the language, whereas, in Korea, where he lived at the time of the interview, he did not speak the language as well, in part because he lived in an English ghetto, with over 100 native speaker English teachers working in his university – which means he had no real need to speak Korean, and mainly because he had a Korean wife, who spoke both Korean and English fluently (the implication being that he could speak English with her, and she handled all interactions that required Korean).
To Lackey, his family came first: “we’re a family of four, you know, we speak English to each other and family comes first”. Beth said simply, when asked about learning Korean, that she chose not to learn it, because “when I leave Korea I’m not
164
likely to need Korean again”. She was quite clear that Korea was not someplace she would have stayed for a long time.
On the other hand, Korea “has a special place in my heart” said Gabriel. He described his relationship with the country using the Korean term “jeong,” which, roughly translated, would mean something like ‘a feeling of connection with a place or person (or an inanimate object), this is sometimes love, sometimes hate, but the connection is always there and undeniable.’ He felt like a visitor in Japan, but at home in Korea. This connection to the countries was reflected in his language learning – in the interview, he rated himself at a pre-intermediate level of proficiency in Korean, but at elementary level in Japanese, stating that he was never motivated to learn Japanese.
Finally, language learning was a site for identity formation and change, affecting the individual’s investment in their social identity (Norton Peirce, 1995). Beth made explicit this struggle with identity in talking about not learning Korean. She offered several reasons for not learning Korean: illness, her workload, tiredness after the length of her workday. Then, she said:
another piece though is, I discovered that although it’s not smooth, you can survive here without it - I mean at least particularly in a big city like Seoul, and when I leave Korea I’m not likely to need Korean again, but I feel more like I wish I had learned more because it would have made life easier and my experience less isolating and I wouldn’t have felt quite so much like an ugly American you know assuming that the rest of the world should cater to us and speak English and do everything in English you know, but then we’re willing to meet people half way you know
The conflict she faced in reconciling who she thought she was (not an ‘ugly American’) with the reality of not having learnt Korean led her to “cultivate a dialogue between diverse understandings” (Ochs and Capps, 1996, p.32): to try out different explanations of why she had not learnt it. (1) She was “not likely to need Korean” once she left Korea –justifying and rationalising her decision not to learn the language. (2) This conflicted with the isolation she mentioned she had felt, and she reflected that learning the language would have helped her be less isolated and “made life easier.” (3) Not learning the language had made her feel like “an ugly
165
American” – she referred to the stereotype of Americans not attempting to fit in to the cultures they visited, and expecting those other cultures to speak to them in English. This did not resonate with her sense of self. Yet the characterization of Americans as unwilling to adapt also caused her problems, and this led her to the next step in the dialogue: (4) defending and justifying American behaviour by pointing out that they were adaptable and flexible “we’re willing to meet people halfway you know”.
5.2.8 The importance given to learning the local language
The eight teachers all thought it was important to learn the local language – but modified this by admitting that they did not feel that they had learnt the local language well enough. Their reasons for learning the local language focused on easing their adaptation to the new country, instead of on classroom or professional development centred reasons (see Table 5.8).
In talking about how learning the local language would facilitate their lives in that country, the teachers talked about changing how they were perceived by the locals, and how their own perceptions of the local people could be modified. Among the reasons given for learning the language were, to give them greater independence in living in the country (5 teachers), and to enable them to enter more fully into the life of the community (4 teachers). Three teachers thought that learning the local language would help them understand the local culture, while two teachers focused on how NES EFL teachers might be viewed, and said it was important for the teacher to make a good impression.
Beth, with only a week to go before she left Korea, and, presumably, reflecting on her time in Korea, was the only one to offer answers that focused solely on living in the country. The other teachers generally gave answers that reflected a focus on both the classroom and on their lives outside the classroom and university. Simon and Zahava both also thought learning Japanese would facilitate their professional life (which they saw as being in Japan).
School or teaching centred reasons were mostly passive: understanding the students’ experience, or the linguistic differences between the languages, or modifying teaching to meet students’ needs – without speaking the language with the students. The reasons included emotional factors, such as bonding with the students,
166
intangibles such as setting an example for the students, and understanding the students’ language learning experiences, as well as using one’s knowledge of the language to understand the problems the students were having, by listening to them talk, and modifying teaching, lesson plans, or class activities accordingly.
Table 5.8: Reasons to learn the local language.
Ar ielle B eth Gab riel Jame s Joh n L ac k ey S imon Z ah ava M ar ia Student/teaching-centred reasons
1. Bonding with the students X X
2. Facilitating student learning X X
3. Modifying teaching after
overhearing students talking about problems
X X
4. Setting an example for the students X X
5. Understanding linguistic
differences between the languages, and addressing these
X X X
6. Understanding the students’ language learning experience
X X X X
Focused on working in the other country
Facilitating one’s professional life X X X
Focused on living in the other country 1. Entering more fully into the life of the community
X X X X X
2. Greater independence in living in the country
X X X X X X
3. Understanding the culture X X X X
4. Creating a good impression of the foreign language teacher
X X
Gabriel was the only person to suggest that the teacher’s problems with learning the local language might not be beneficial to either the students or the teacher. If a NES teacher spoke Korean well, it could lead them to show off their language skills, or lead them to erroneously attribute errors in the L1 to interference from the L2.
167
5.2.9 Summarizing the themes in teachers’ stories regarding living in other