RUNNING HEAD: Non-native Literatures in English as a Resource for Language Teaching
Critique on Non-native Literatures in English as a
Resource for Language Teaching
By Prof. Jonathan Acua Solano Sunday, June 7, 2015 Twitter: @jonacuso Post 174
Brumfit (1986) describes an attempt to reject set books approach to teaching
literature and suggests to develop with students an attitude to works of literature. The problem with Brumfits idea is that, though he wants to give learners freedom of choice when it comes to selecting literary pieces, he continues to circumscribe students within the idea that we should teach real English literature (Kachru, 1980), an idea that many literature instructors hold. However, Kachru (1986) proposes a very different way of dealing with literary studies: the use of non-native English texts in the classroom. What are the benefits of using a corpus of literary works that include non-native English texts? For Kachru (1980), the inclusion of non-native texts imply relevant areas Prof. Jonathan Acua Solano
RUNNING HEAD: Non-native Literatures in English as a Resource for Language Teaching
of ethnography of communication, language pragmatics, and the sociology of language.
In the eyes of Kachru (1980), nativization or the use of English by non-native speakers to write literature can also expose non- and native readers to lexical innovations,
translation equivalences, contextual redefinition, and rhetorical and functional styles.
The use of such non-native literary texts, then, provides a challenge not only to the nonnative teachers and learners, but also to teachers and learners who use English as their native language (Kachru, 1980).
If non-native literary texts were included in a course syllabus or school curricula,
would it have an impactful effect? The imminent result of the use of this kind of literatures is that learners can also be trained cross-culturally or even intra-culturally. In the case of the Costa Rican teaching context, several pieces have been written by members of the Afro-Costa Rican community that can enrich our mestizaje heritage. For example, Dixon (2004) focuses on the literary contributions of Afro-Costa Rican writers and how their treatment of place, language and nation configure a cultural identity that is no longer West Indian and is in contestation with the dominant Europeanized culture of Costa Rica. The promising of using non-native literary texts is immense and potentially fruitful in many senses. As Kachru (1980) concludes, the use of this kind of literatures provides learners, a repertoire of resources for providing linguistic and cross-cultural explanations. Students can then be exposed to how English is modified, innovation in writing styles and its effect on comprehension, and what is meant by acculturation on English in nonEnglish social and cultural contexts (Kachru, 1980).
Prof. Jonathan Acua Solano
RUNNING HEAD: Non-native Literatures in English as a Resource for Language Teaching
Brumfit, C. (1986). Wider Reading for Better Reading: An alternative approach to
teaching literature. Literature and Language Teaching. Edited by Brumfit & Carter. Oxford: OUP Dixon, K. (2004). Mestizaje and Racial Categories as Hegemonic Forms of Representation in Costa Rican Literature. A Contra Corriente. Spring 2004 at http://www.ncsu.edu/acontracorriente/spring_04/Dixon.pdf Kachru, B. (1980). Non-native Literatures in English as a Resource for Language Teaching. RELC Journal December 1980 11: 1-9, doi:10.1177/003368828001100201