T he t e a c hing of English in M oroc c o: t he pla c e of c ult ure Martin Hyde This article is the fruit of teaching English for two years in a Moroccan secondary school in the 1980s, and of attending the Moroccan Association of teachers of English (MATE) Xllth Annual Conference in December 1991, where one of the workshops raised the issue of ELT being used as a vehicle for cultural imperialism in Morocco. Several suggestions. were made for ways to contain the perceived threat from ELT to the national culture. This article considers why such situations arise, and looks at possible ways of responding to them, which I shall term ‘ESP’ and ‘nativization’, with their inherent shortcomings. I then argue for an alternative approach to the problem which makes the cultural content of foreign language learning explicit. Background Language use reflects culture and it is impossible to disassociate the two in any real sense (Fairclough 1992: 6), yet in Morocco there are educationalists who feel a need to disassociate the English language from the cultures of what Kachru (1985) terms the ‘centre circle’ of Englishspeaking countries. The language Because of the country’s complicated history of European colonization, the people of Morocco tend to be very aware of the issue of imperialism. The French and Spanish languages were forced upon them by colonial powers this century, adding to the linguistic complexity of a situation in which two standards of Arabic - Classical and Moroccan dialectical Arabic - have been imposed on the three major Berber language varieties also spoken in Morocco. One effect of such linguistic imposition has been to undermine and devalue native languages, especially when the imposed language fulfils the four functions outlined by Kachru (1983): the instrumental function (the medium of learning in the educational system); the regulative function (the legal and administrative systems); the interpersonal function (used as both an intra- and international link language); and finally, the imaginative/innovative function (used to develop a literature of the subjugated culture’s linguistic system). situation Linguistic domination In Morocco it has been felt necessary to learn another ‘imposed’ language: English. It can be argued that nowadays, in the ‘post-colonial’ period, physical domination and colonization have been replaced by ELT Journal Volume 48/4 October 1994 © Oxford University Press 1994 295 economic, technological, and linguistic domination (Phillipson 1992). Capitalism - linguistically spearheaded by the English language (Holly 1990), which presents and markets its products and images to the rest of the world - has led through the technological revolution to a new kind of colonization, in which cultures with fewer resources are undermined. At a supranational level, English can be viewed as becoming a new imposed language, gradually fulfilling Kachru’s four linguistic functions at world level. Language nowadays deals in image, and can be marketed and sold like any other product or service: ‘speaking English is the key to ‘speaking English joins you to the international employment’, community’, ‘speaking English makes for modernity’, and so forth. In underdeveloped countries, advertisements imply similar social benefits from smoking Western brands of cigarettes. The pressure to learn English may well be seen as an attempt at linguistic and social domination for economic ends by the English-speaking nations. Cultural deracination ESP: English functional as a Controlling use 296 tool The danger of the advertising and the symbolism behind it is that traditional cultures and their languages are, by implication, presented as backward and incapable of ‘modernity’. Cultural deracination - the erosion of belief in the ability of native culture and language to deal with the modem world leaves its victims at the mercy of culturally imperialistic and potentially dangerous forces such as, say, cigarette advertising, or ELT. Freire (1972), points to education as a way for people to make sense of and gain control over their lives. ELT which ignores the cultural implications of its content can be accused of doing the opposite. Instead of clarifying and empowering, it confuses and subjugates. One of the duties of formal education, and especially of foreign language teachers in countries such as Morocco, is to help students develop mental constructs with which to analyse their particular situation and defend themselves from potentially imperialistic forces. In Morocco there is a case for making pro-active strategies in ELT to protect the national culture and languages. There have been suggestions that English can be used as a purely instrumental tool, nothing more than a linguistic means to certain ends, such as fuller employment and a stronger economy, as in tourism, international banking, and higher education, and for access to texts. The belief behind this approach to ELT is that by teaching only the English language skills and content students will need after secondary school, the cultures behind the language can be ‘contained’, and the unwanted sideeffects of English language learning reduced. A salient comment made at the 1991 MATE conference was ‘Let us use English for our specific purposes, and not let English use us for its specific purposes.’ To the extent that General English may be a vehicle for the introduction of alien and harmful ideas, it must be controlled. Another argument says that if an attempt is made to control the target language in its functional uses to specific domains, students will be Martin Hyde encouraged to employ instrumental motivation rather than use the language in a way which might involve the student in identifying with the target language culture. To do so would require and encourage integrative motivation (see Gardner and Lambert, 1972). For language planners and teachers who feel a foreign language needs ‘strait-jacketing’, ESP is an attractive possible solution. This package, it is hoped, will hold the foreign language in check, reduce it to a tool for use, and emasculate its nefarious ability to serve as a vehicle for cultural imperialism. However, such a utilitarian, instrumental view of language is riddled with major problems. How are we to decide on classroom language content, or train teachers for this type of teaching, or define students’ future needs, given that the majority of students will probably not go on to further education, work with English, or quite possibly ever use English again after school? It is also evident that this censorial and authoritarian approach would require ‘guardians’ to choose between what is ‘useful’ and what is ‘harmful’ for the students to receive in the classroom. What learners may feel about the issue is not considered; some kind of censorial association would be needed, involving everyone from syllabus designers to teachers in the classroom, which would be responsible for extracting the ‘negative’ aspects of ELT. Deculturizing language A further problem is that stripping English of its cultural baggage would also strip students of invaluable knowledge. Zizi (1991) demonstrated that cultural as well as linguistic knowledge is indispensable for making sense of British and American advertisements. EFL educationalists, aware of the dangers of cultural imperialism in Kachru’s (1985) ‘expanding circle’ countries may argue for splitting language from culture (Alptekin and Alptekin 1984), but this solution fails to address the question as to why students are learning English in Morocco. The strongest argument against the censorial ESP approach is reflected in Figure 1, which shows that students are in any case increasingly in contact with Western influences and values. Moroccans, along with people all over the world, are living in an age in which a global information technology revolution is taking place. Information, mostly in English, is flooding the world, through advertisements, magazines, newspapers, books, instruction manuals, satellite television, films and rock music, videos, radio, telephones, the post, fax and telex machines, computers and information technology in general, tourism and migration for economic and educational reasons, and business relations. All of these make it very doubtful that the outside world could be kept out of Moroccan (or any other) society, so in many ways the ESP ‘solution’ as presented here is an impossibility, an attempt to have something and not have something at the same time, for the only way to stop students from coming into contact with what are considered harmful concepts would be not to teach them English at all. The place of culture in ELT in Morocco 297 Figure 1: The ‘censorship’ model Rejected cultural input and culture(s) Rejected cultural input However, the validity of ESP is very much governed by the methods employed to arrive at the specific purposes in mind. If the aim was to combat the linguistic and cultural dominance of English by attempting to deculturize the language, the approach becomes unrealistic and unmanageable. On the other hand, if it involves focusing student awareness on the ideology behind English discourse, by developing a critical language awareness in students (Fairclough 1992) it becomes more viable. The nativization solution functions of language 298 Another answer to the problem is afforded by the ‘nativization’ solution which we can find, for instance, in India or Singapore. The main tenet of the argument for nativization is that once a language is nativized it becomes independent of an external source and culture, and can reflect the local culture instead. As Phillipson (1992: 50) states: ‘Adherence to a British global norm is symptomatic of dependence rather than selfsufficiency.’ It is helpful at this point to consider the division between the two opposing functions of a language (see Widdowson 1982): between the communicative function used for the convergence of meaning between social groups, countries, and cultures (the co-operative imperative), and the identifying function of expressing and preserving intra-group identity (the territorial imperative). A consequence of attempting to indigenize English in Morocco is that the communicative function of the language becomes reduced as the identifying function increases. In psychological terms, the language is ‘possessed’ by its users, i.e. it is endo-normative Martin Hyde and no longer norm-dependent on a foreign power, i.e. exo-normative. Culturally it begins to reflect the local environment rather than an external one, and is therefore ideologically more under control. But the problem is that Morocco is an exo-normative, dependent country with respect to English, as this language does not have the historical and sociological link with Morocco as a language of colonialism in the same way as French or Spanish. On what basis, then, can a ‘Moroccan English’ be derived? The historical background is not in place for English to have developed, or to develop in the future, as it has done in ‘outer circle countries’ (Kachru 1985) such as India. Aims of English language learning The English language: friend or foe? It is important to consider the aims of English language learning in Morocco. Why use English, at great cost, to replace the functions of French or Arabic? Both of these are international languages, and their own basolects, mesolects, and acrolects are used effectively by many Moroccans to describe their own reality, so it would seem questionable to use English mainly to reflect Moroccan culture as a syllabus design option (see Askadou et al. 1990). English as a foreign language in Morocco is a means of learning about things outside Morocco. It would seem most appropriate for English in Morocco to perform its communicative function, and unrealistic to expect it to be used for its identifying function, (which could also be argued to be unnecessary). At this point it is necessary to describe the premises about language upon which this article is based. For instance, the idea that any particular language is intrinsically ‘good’ or ‘bad’ is discarded. Language is seen as a tool for communication, and as such is not to be confused with ideology, that is, the subject matter or specific messages that people choose to convey through the medium of that particular language. To believe that a language per se is dangerous is to hold a confused and ill-founded notion of language. The concept of linguistic relativity, that language actually shapes thought, has few adherents and is discounted here. This discounting of the strong version of the Sapir/Whorf hypothesis dismisses any concept of ‘original sin’ in a particular language (see Whorf 1958). However, not many people have a pragmatic, demystified view of language. Different languages, and indeed the dialects and accents of a language, are consigned to various functions in a society, and hold vastly varying statuses. Language in social and psychological terms is therefore value-laden, even if the pure linguist can argue that it should not be, or, indeed, that intrinsically it is not. Language is used as a symbol for status and power, and therefore influences and shapes people’s responses and values. With this in mind one may well feel that ELT in Morocco is accompanied by arguably undesirable perlocutionary effects (deracination, rejection of own culture, changed behaviour) and is not simply, as it is often dressed up to be (Phillipson 1992), an ‘innocent’ tool at the service of the nation, for its betterment and integration into the world’s information systems. The place of culture in ELT in Morocco 299 Although people are not necessarily prisoners of their language, it is undoubtedly true that the way a culture sees the world is reflected in its a zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA culture language (Valdes 1990) and especially in its discourse structures.1 Language dynamically reflects and its values Religious references Markers 300 of respect Harrell et al. (1965) inform us: ‘In English the word “God” is usually restricted to either oaths. both profane and serious, or to formally serious situations. Arabic, on the other hand, employs references to God, and to religion in general, in a wide variety of everyday situations.’ When the future tense is used by native speakers of English, the speakers do not feel a need to ‘soften their arrogant assumption’ that the future will occur, and appeal to the benevolence of God on such an occasion by adding ‘God willing’. It seems reasonable to state that discourse patterns grow out of and reflect the values and latent beliefs of a given society at a particular stage in its history. It therefore stands to reason that the ostensive lack of reverence and religion in modern English may cause confusion or a negative perception of English and the cultures it reflects for Moroccans, who are using a language where a religious view of life is axiomatic and integral to its discourse patterns. If language is value-laden at the level of its discourse patterns and grammatical exponents, as suggested in this article, then ELT in Morocco is not simply about learning a separate linguistic code (no matter how much it may be ‘sanitized’) but brings students into direct contact with non-Moroccan cultural attitudes. An example from personal experience of how this can affect the Moroccan EFL classroom is the use of the respectful marker ‘mister’ (probably a lexical translation of the French ‘monsieur’) used by students when addressing the teacher, and often inserted mid-sentence into their speech. An attempt by a teacher to correct this discoursal anomaly challenges the very social structure and discourse patterns that Moroccan students expect to operate in a classroom. A teacher who does so is asking students to use linguistically less respectful language than they may feel is required by the situation. Not surprisingly, correction without explanation can lead to confusion. Teachers who ignore the social dimension of ELT, or who do not research the cultures behind the native languages in which the students operate, and behind the target language they are teaching, may not be aware of such issues, and will not be able to explain the differences to their students but may lead them into confusion. Realization of the origin of the problem is the first step towards developing a rationale upon which to implement the teaching process. Is the teacher to accept the Moroccan discourse pattern in the target language? Or is he or she to teach the culture of the target language, explaining that ‘mister’ should be ‘sir’ and that its overuse may have a negative effect on the addressee if that person is not versed in the cultural background of the speaker. ? A teacher needs to know what model of English he or she is teaching, since this will in turn affect the linguistic content taught and the classroom methodology. In this article my argument is in favour of bringing such issues to light in the classroom. Martin Hyde Student valuation of linguistic codes In my experience, students in the Moroccan EFL classroom used translation for the respectful marker ‘mister’, but code-switched to Arabic for religious purposes. English may be deemed an acceptable code for politeness, but not for religion. English in Morocco is a performance variety (a foreign language), and a language without an institutionalized status ‘has a highly restricted functional range in specific contexts’. (Kachru 1983: 38). Religion is outside the restricted range of English in Morocco, and the reason for this is probably the Moroccan students’ value-laden view of language codes (Cortazzi 1990: 60). The resulting student utterances as described above cannot be treated as errors because their origin lies in psycholinguistics: they are a largely subconscious creative construct. Interpreting pragmatic force Arabic discourse patterns are often not transferable to standard British or American English, so students need to be instructed about target cultures if they are to be able to use target language discourse patterns, and especially if they are expected to listen to and interpret the real pragmatic force of non-indigenized English discourse. This does not mean that students should experience an assault on their identity when learning English, but they do need to be trained in what Smith (1987: 3) terms ‘the sense of the other’. They need to know about the discourse strategies of the prospective others with whom they will communicate, and this means they need to learn about the others’ cultures. Other Englishes need to be seen as separate discourse systems reflecting cultures and values different to those of Morocco, and these values need to be made explicit. Emphasis must be placed scientifically on distinctiveness, and refraining from value judgements is essential. In this very sensitive and difficult area (an area in which teachers need training), the foreign language and its cultures should not be presented in terms of superiority or inferiority.2 Whilst learning English in Morocco the students’ views of the world may well be directly challenged; the skill of the teacher is to make sure that this does not undermine the students’ view of their own language and culture, or lead them to adopt the defensive mechanism of rejecting the foreign language. If the teacher does not take active steps to avoid either of these outcomes, there is a risk of a hidden curriculum beginning to operate in the language classroom (Byram 1989). Implications for teaching The challenge in teaching a foreign language which reflects a different level of technological advancement, general material wealth, and a separate system of social organization that is often at considerable variance on a political and moral level with the Moroccan one, is to do so without encouraging students to draw negative conclusions about their own culture (Holly 1990) or reject the painful intrusion of the target language and cultures. There are two paths to take at this juncture: one is the ‘censorship’ path discussed above, the other is the ‘analytical’ path. This faces the true nature of the problem by making the cultural content of the language learning process explicit, and drawing students’ attention to The place of culture in ELT in Morocco 301 their own history and culture, as well as to those of the target language, in order to explain and contrast the differences: in effect, facing up to the true political nature of language teaching. Language teaching needs to encompass the three interwoven strands of language use: awareness of the nature of language, and the understanding of both the foreign zyxwvutsrqponm and the native culture (Byram 1989: 23). Arguments of the censorship variety only posit the first and perhaps the second of these strands. An alternative solution thinking Perhaps a solution to the problem can be found by looking at the role of the teacher as that of a catalyst for analytical thinking. If the young, and indeed all disempowered, fragmented groups of people, are gullible, and susceptible to advertising, fashion, and other forms of social and political pressure, (sometimes beneficial, sometimes nefarious) it follows that the teacher has a responsibility to equip younger students, in particular, with the means to defend themselves from such pressures. The choice open to the teacher is to censor (by filtering the information language students receive) or to expose (by allowing students to come into contact with all the information/language available). The teacher who takes the first option avoids the responsibility of giving students the means to defend themselves from possibly harmful concepts and pressures. Askadou et al. (1990) suggest that knowledge of Western culture will lead to student discontent with their own culture, possibly corrupting them, and introducing them to patterns of behaviour most Moroccans would prefer not to see as models for their young people. This view is expressed as the justification to censor aspects of Western culture from the syllabus of a secondary English course for Moroccan students. Critical language awareness Yet the question that needs to be asked is whether the only contact that Moroccan youth will have with Western culture is likely to be through the medium of a school textbook. If, on the other hand, an uncensored view of the target language and the cultures that it represents is presented to students, a teacher’s energies can be concentrated not on the increasingly impossible task of censorship, but on developing analytical tools for his or her students, such as critical language awareness (Fairclough 1992). This will equip them with a mental construct through introspection, analysis, and investigation with which to be able to respond adequately and confidently to the pressures of the external cultures and its language. (See Figure 2). Prodromou (1988: 83) backs this view by stating that the teaching of English should become ‘a process of devolving selfawareness of the world outside the classroom’. Analytical 302 I would argue against those EFL educationalists who wish only to impart a narrow instrumental English to their students, and who unrealistically dream of English becoming a second language in Morocco. The problem must be faced in another way: the ideological nature of language teaching needs to be confronted, not avoided. If this is done then a different strategy for dealing with ELT can be developed. Martin Hyde Figure 2: The ‘analytical’ Confident responses Focusing on the learner not the language Understanding Analysed responses There is a strong case for focusing on the learner as an integrated. whole person in the Moroccan school system. A bottom-up view of the realistic present and future needs of students would, I believe, lead one to the conclusion that in the modem world, in which countries are becoming more and more interconnected through economic forces and the media, students need to develop strategies in the classroom for dealing with the confusing and often overwhelming cultural pressures exerted by powerful Western nations. This is very different from the top-down ESP needs analysis approach, which would suggest that students only need to learn language specific to certain areas of academic study, or for certain professions. Without being equipped to deal with the cultural and ideological pressures from the outside world, most students will have wasted much of their time in the EFL classroom on a linguistic code they will never use. To be able to select, accept, or reject ideas, concepts, and pressures, especially those emanating from other and dominant cultures, people have to be equipped with a good knowledge of their own culture and history. This provides the bedrock upon which to judge. Establishing this bedrock in students should be a cross-curricular goal. English is situated at the interface of foreign and native cultural values to a greater extent than any other language because of its greater use around the world, and because it is the linguistic vehicle of the dominant twentieth-century culture. Instead of being taught in isolation from other subjects in the curriculum, as I experienced it in Morocco, English should be part of an integrated curriculum. EFL should have a role as part of general The place of culture in ELT in Morocco 303 education. For their students to be able to cope with ever-increasing foreign cultural pressures, teachers of Arabic, French, history, geography, and philosophy in particular, and no doubt of other subjects in Moroccan secondary schools, need to adopt this interdisciplinary approach. It must be stressed that this article is very much a personal reaction to some ideas in ELT. I recognize the common sense of arguments that state, for instance, that Moroccan students do not need to know culturally unnecessary and perplexing details of the British class system, or the rules of cricket (Alptekin 1993). At the same time, arguments for deculturation of the target language may well be based on censorial rather than pedagogical motives. I see a danger, an absurdity, and an impossibility, in pursuing this approach to the point where the English language is only used to reflect what the student already knows. If this is done then a learning opportunity is lost. A student, for instance, whose English course has nothing to do with Britain or the USA, and has Moroccans speaking English to each other in Morocco, would find it both absurd and disappointing. If the same logic were then applied to learning French, Spanish. Chinese. or any other language I can imagine the student developing a sense of extreme claustrophobia, and of having been cheated. Clearly, this is not the road to travel down. The other option, of explicitly confronting the foreign culture in the classroom, may require new skills for teachers, but appears to be to be the saner and ultimately the safer road to take. Received July 1993 Notes 1 The English language is used to reflect many different cultures. 2 It is cultural difference that needs to be emphasized, not the spurious notion of cultural superiority/inferiority. Arguments that posit the latter notion (Barrow 1990) should have no place in ELT. References Alptekin, C. and M. Alptekin. 1984. ‘The question of culture: EFL teaching in non-English speaking countries’. ELT Journal 38/1: 3-10. Alptekin, C. 1993. ‘Target-language culture in EFL materials’. ELT Journal 47/2: 136-43. Askadou, K., D. Britten and B. Fahsi. 1990. ‘Designer decisions on the cultural content of a secondary English course for Morocco’. ELT Journal 44/1: 3-10. Barrow, R. 1990. Culture, values and the language classroom’ in Harrison. Byram, M. 1989. Cultural Studies in Foreign 304 Martin Hyde Language Education. Clevedon, Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters. Cortazzi, M. 1990. ‘Cultural and educational expectations in the language classroom’ in Harrison. Fairclough, N. 1992. Critical Language Awareness. New York: Longman. Freire, P. 1972. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. London: Penguin. Gardner, R. C. and W. E. Lambert. 1972. Attitudes and Motivation in Second Language Learning. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House. Harrell, S. R. et al. 1965. A Basic Course in Moroccan Arabic. Washington: Georgetown University Press. Harrison, B. (ed.). 1990. Culture and the Language Classroom. ELT Documents 132. London: The British Council: Macmillan. Holly, D. 1990. ‘The unspoken curriculum, or how language teaching carries cultural and ideological messages’ in Harrison. Kachru, B. B. (ed.). 1983. The Other Tongue: English Across Cultures. Oxford: Pergamon. Whorf, B. L. 1958. Language, Thought and Reality. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Kachru, B. B. 1985. ‘Standards, codification and Widdowson, H. G. 1982. ‘English as an international sociolinguistic realism: the English language in the language II: What do we mean by ‘International outer circle’ in Quirk and Widdowson. Language?’ in C. Brumfit (ed.) English for Phillipson, R. 1992. Linguistic Imperialism. Oxford: International Communication. Oxford: Pergamon. Oxford University Press. Zizi, K. 1991. ‘What every Moroccan EFL learner Prodromou, L. 1988. ‘English as cultural action’. zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONM needs to know in order to understand ads’. Paper ELT Journal 42/2: 73-88. given at the Moroccan Association of English Prodromou, L. 1992. ‘What culture? Which culture’? Teachers XIIth Annual Conference, Tetovan, Cross-cultural factors in language learning’. ELT Journal 46/1 : 39-50. Morocco. Quirk, R. and H. G. Widdowson (eds.). 1985. English in the World: Teaching and Learning the Language and Literatures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Smith, L. E. (ed.) 1987. Discourse Across Cultures. The author Strategies in World Englishes. Hemel Hempstead: Martin Hyde is an EFL lecturer in the Language Prentice Hall. Studies Department of Canterbury Christ Church Valdes, J. 1990. ‘The inevitability of teaching and College. He has an MA in TEFL and is interested in learning culture in a foreign language course’ in cross-cultural issues. He has taught in Spain, Morocco, Harrison. and the Dominican Republic, and is a keen linguist. The place of culture in ELT in Morocco 305