Current Perspectives on Teaching World Englishes and English as a Lingua Franca

[...] There are three possible interpretations of the expression “World Englishes”. Firstly, it serves as an “umbrella label” covering all varieties of English worldwide and the different approaches used to describe and analyze them. Secondly, it is used in a narrower sense to refer to the so-called new Englishes in Africa, Asia, and the Caribbean (Kachru’s outer circle). [...] Thirdly, it is used to represent the pluricentric approach to the study of English associated with Kachru and his colleagues, and often referred to as the Kachruvian approach, although there is considerable overlap between this and the second interpretation of the term. The first use is also sometimes represented by other terms, including World English (i.e., in the singular), international English(es), and global English(es), while the second is in fact more commonly represented by the terms nativized, indigenized, institutionalized, and new Englishes or English as a second language. And still other terms are currently in circulation [...]. Despite the range of interpretations of the term “World Englishes” and its alternatives, the links between them are so strong, and the field now so well established, that there seems to be little confusion over the intended reference.

The same cannot be said, by contrast, for ELF, despite Larry Smith’s visionary work on English as an international language dating way back to the 1970s and 1980s. One complication for ELF is the fact that “International English” is sometimes used as shorthand for “English as an international language”, or EIL, itself an alternative term for ELF. Used in this way, it can be misleading because it suggests that there is one clearly distinguishable, codified, and unitary variety called International English, which is certainly not the case. “International English” is used to refer to the local Englishes of those non–mother tongue countries where it has an intranational institutionalized role, although some researchers also include the mother tongue English countries (Kachru’s inner circle) in their definitions. On the other hand, “International English” is also used in another sense to refer to the use of English as a means of international communication across national and linguistic boundaries (primarily, but not exclusively, across the countries of Kachru’s expanding circle). These two meanings, as Seidlhofer (2004) observes, are therefore in “complementary distribution”. It is because of the potential for confusion of the word “international” that ELF researchers prefer the term “English as a lingua franca” to “English as an international language”, although to add to the confusion, both terms are currently in use.

There is considerable overlap between ELF (English as a Lingua franca) users and EFL (English as a Foreign Language) learners, partly because many of those who start out thinking they are learning English as a foreign language end up using it as a lingua franca.

A further problem relates to the so-called phenomenon of “World Standard (Spoken) English” (W(S)SE). This is a hypothetical, monolithic form of English that scholars such as Crystal (e.g., 2003), Görlach (e.g., 1990), and McArthur (e.g., 1987, 1998) believe is developing of its own accord, although Crystal (2003) considers that US. English does seem likely to be the most influential in its development. This form recalls Quirk’s (1985) “single monochrome standard form”, based on the native speaker English that he advocates for nonnative speakers of English regardless of their communicative context [...].

Available in: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/255669551_Current_Perspectives_on_Teaching_World_Englishes_and_English_as_a_Lingua_Franca. Acess on: Feb. 3, 2026.

The text states that