Deconstructing 'Mono'-Lingualism: considerations of value for 'English' 'language' education in a global setting.

Traditionally, language speakers are categorised as mono-lingual, bilingual, or multilingual. It is traditionally assumed in English language education that the ‘lingual’ is something that can be ‘fixed’ in form, written down to be learnt, and taught. Accordingly, the ‘mono’-lingual will have a ‘fixed’ linguistic form. Such a ‘form’ differs according to a number of criteria or influences including region or ‘type’ of English (for example, World Englishes) but is nevertheless assumed to be a ‘form’. ‘Mono-lingualism’ is defined and believed, traditionally, to be ‘speaking one language’; wherever that language is; or whatever that language may be. In this chapter, grounded in an individual subjective philosophy of language, we question this traditional definition. Viewing language from the philosophical perspectives such as those of Bakhtin and Voloshinov, we argue that the prominence of ‘context’ and ‘consciousness’ in language means that to ‘fix’ the form of a language goes against the very spirit of how it is formed and used. We thus challenge the categorisation of ‘mono’-lingualism; proposing that such a categorisation is actually a category error, or a case ‘in which a property is ascribed to a thing that could not possibly have that property’ (Restivo, 2013, p. 175), in this case the property of ‘mono’. Using this proposition as a starting point, we suggest that more time be devoted to language in its context and as per its genuine use as a vehicle for consciousness. We theorise this can be done through a ‘literacy’ based approach which fronts the context of language use rather than the language itself. We outline how we envision this working for teachers, students and materials developers of English Language Education materials in a global setting. To do this we consider Scotland’s Curriculum for Excellence as an exemplar to promote conscious language use in context.

Writing disenchantment: British First World War Prose, 1914-30.

This book argues that disenchantment is not only a response to wartime experience, but a condition of modernity with a language that finds extreme expression in First World War literature. The objects of disenchantment are often the very same as the enchantments of scientific progress: bureaucracy, homogenisation and capitalism. Older beliefs such as religion, courage and honour are kept in view, and endure longer than often is realised. Social critics, theorists and commentators of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries provide a rich and previously unexplored context for wartime and post-war literature. The rise of the disenchanted narrative to its predominance in the War Books Boom of 1928 – 1930 is charted from the turn of the century in texts, archival material, sales and review data. Rarely-studied popular and middlebrow novels are analysed alongside well-known highbrow texts: D. H. Lawrence, Virginia Woolf, H. G. Wells and Rebecca West rub shoulders with forgotten figures such as Gilbert Frankau and Ernest Raymond. These sometimes jarring juxtapositions show the strained relationship between enchantment and disenchantment in the war and the post-war decade.