Abstract
The issue of language as it relates to the disciplines of politics, International Relations (IR) and Asian Studies has received insufficient attention in contemporary academic circles, in part because of the uncritical assumption that language is an unloaded and transparent system of signs that merely conveys the meanings in the mind of the subject. Some scholars argue, however, that using English is a contradiction for the narratives of non-Western political theories and critical Asian Studies because, these critics suggest, English is an exclusively Western language. Nevertheless, the main language in contemporary academia is English, which accounts for a great deal of the publications, particularly in the case of the disciplines noted above. Even though the argument against the use of English in non-Western intellectual activities seems to be reasonable at first glance, a thorough investigation of the language and the disciplines will reveal some hidden and unquestioned assumptions underlying contemporary academic life, particularly relating to subjectivity. This article strives to criticize this immature acceptance of a naive equation of English with the West. Moreover, it argues that English is no longer a Western-owned language and that diversifying the ownership of English will direct us to a more democratic intersubjectivity. However, for this very reason, we must be prepared to accept a hitherto undreamt of grammatical transformation of English.
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
References
Acharya, A. & Buzan, B. (2007). Why is there no non-Western international relations theory? An introduction. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, 7(3), 287–312.
Balakrishnan, K. S. (2009). International relations in Malaysia: Theories, history, memory, perception and context. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, 9(1), 107–130.
Brown, C. (2011). Development of international relations theory in the UK: Traditions, contemporary perspectives, and trajectories. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, 11(2), 309–330.
Chen, C. C. (2011). The absence of non-Western IR theory in Asia reconsidered. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, 11(1), 1–23.
Chew, P. G. L. (2010). From chaos to order: Language change, lingua francas and world Englishes. In M. Saxena, & T. Omoniyi (Eds), Contending with globalization in world Englishes (pp. 45–71). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Chong, A. & Hamilton-Hart, N. (2009). Teaching international relations in Southeast Asia: Historical memory, academic context, and politics—An introduction. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, 9(1), 1–18.
Dhillon, P. (2006). Colonial/postcolonial critique: The challenge from world Englishes. In B. B. Kachru, Y. Kachru, & C. L. Nelson (Eds), The handbook of world Englishes (pp. 529–544). Oxford: Blackwell.
Dissanayake, W. (2006). Cultural studies and discursive construction of world Englishes. In B. B. Kachru, Y. Kachru, & C. L. Nelson (Eds), The handbook of world Englishes (pp. 545–566). Oxford: Blackwell.
Friedrich, J. (2004). European approaches to international relations theory: A house with many mansions. London: Routledge.
Hadiwinata, B. S. (2009). International relations in Indonesia: Historical legacy, political intrusion, and commercialization International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, 9(1), 55–81.
Hamashita, T. (1990). Kindai chugoku no kokusaiteki keiki [The international turning point of modern China]. Tokyo: Tokyo University Press.
Hamashita, T. (1994). Shuhenkarano ajiashi [The Asian history from periphery]. In Y. Mizoguchi, T. Hamashita, N. Hiraishi, & H. Miyazaki (Eds), Shuhenkarano rekishi [The history from periphery] (pp. 1–14). Tokyo: Tokyo University Press.
Hamashita, T. (2003). Tribute and treaties: Maritime Asia and treaty port networks in the era of negotiation, 1880–1900. In G. Arrighi, T. Hamashita, & M. Selden (Eds), The resurgence of East Asia: 500, 150 and 50 year perspective (pp. 1–16). London: Routledge.
Higgins, C. (2003). Ownership of English in the outer circle: An alternative to the NS-NNS dichotomy. TESOL Quarterly, 37(4), 615–644.
Hoffman, S. (1977). An American social science: International relations. Daedalus, 106(3), 41–60.
Huntington, S. P. (1996). The clash of civilizations and the remaking of world order. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Imamura, H. (2008). Boryokuizen no chikara, boryoku no kongen [The power prior to violence, the origin of violence]. In T. Tani (Ed.), Boryoku to ningen sonzai [Violence and human existence] (pp. 70–86). Tokyo: Chikumashobo.
Inoguchi, T. (2007). Are there any theories of international relations in Japan? International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, 7(3), 369–390.
Jenkins, J. (2003). World Englishes: A resource book for students. London: Routledge.
Kachru, B. B. (1992), The other tongue: English across cultures. Urabana: University of Illinois Press.
Kachru, B. B. (2006). World Englishes and culture wars. In B. B. Kachru, Y. Kachru, & C. L. Nelson (Eds), The handbook of world Englishes (pp. 446–471). Oxford: Blackwell.
Kachru, B. B., Kachru, Y., & Nelson, C. L. (Eds) (2006). The handbook of world Englishes. Oxford: Blackwell.
Kachru, Y., & Smith, L. E. (Eds) (2008). Cultures, contexts and world Englishes. New York: Routledge.
Modiano, M. (2006). Euro-Englishes. In B. B. Kachru, Y. Kachru, & C. L. Nelson (Eds), The handbook of world Englishes (pp. 223–239). Oxford: Blackwell.
Nishida, K. (1947). Zen no Kenkyu [An inquiry into the good]. In Nishida Kitaro zenshu [Collected works of Nishida Kitaro] (Vol. 1, pp. 3–200). Tokyo: Iwanami.
Nishida, K. (1949). Baho [The place]. In Nishida Kitaro zenshu [Collected works of Nishida Kitaro] (Vol. 4, pp. 208–289). Tokyo: Iwanami.
Nishida, K. (1965). Zettai mujunteki jiko doitsu [The absolute contradictory self-identity]. In Nishida Kitaro zenshu [Collected works of Nishida Kitaro] (Vol. 4, pp. 147–222). Tokyo: Iwanami.
Omar, A. H. (1996). Imperial English in Malaysia. In J. A. Fishman, A. W. Conrad, & A. Rubal-Lopez (Eds), Post-Imperial English: Status change in former British and American colonies1940–1990 (pp. 513–533). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Pennycook, A. (2003). Global Englishes, rip slyme, and performativity. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 7(4), 513–515.
Prasirtsuk, K. (2007). Teaching international relations in Thailand: Status and prospects. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, 9(1), 83–105.
Quirk, R. (2003). From Latin to English. The Use of English, 55(1), 7–15.
Said, E. (1978). Orientalism, New York: Vintage.
Seidlhofer, B. (2001). Closing a conceptual gap: The case for a description of English as a lingua franca. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 133–156.
Shambaugh, D. (2011). International relations studies in China: History, trends, and prospects. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, 11(3), 339–372.
Shani, G. (2007). “Provincializing” critical theory: Islam, Sikhism and international relations theory. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 20, 417–433.
Shani, G. (2008). Towards a post-Western IR: The Umma, Khalsa Panth, and critical international relations theory. International Studies Review, 10, 722–734.
Shih, C. Y. (2012). Civilization, nation and modernity in East Asia. London: Routledge.
Shih, C. Y. (2013, March). Balance of relationships: A Confucian route for international relations system. Paper presented at the International Symposium on English School. Ritsumeikan University, Kyoto.
Shilliam, R. (2010). International relations and non-Western thought: Imperialism, colonialism and investigations of global modernity. London: Routledge.
Shimizu, K. (2011). Nishida Kitaro and Japan’s inter-war foreign policy: War involvement and culturalist political discourse. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, 11(1), 157–183.
Spivak, G. C. (1988). Can the subaltern speak? In C. Nelson & L. Grossberg (Eds), Marxism and the interpretation of culture (pp. 271–313). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Wæver, O. (1998). Sociology of a not so international discipline: American and European developments in international relations. International Organization, 52(4), 687–727.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
This chapter is published under an open access license. Please check the 'Copyright Information' section either on this page or in the PDF for details of this license and what re-use is permitted. If your intended use exceeds what is permitted by the license or if you are unable to locate the licence and re-use information, please contact the Rights and Permissions team.
Copyright information
© 2014 Kosuke Shimizu
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Shimizu, K. (2014). Who Owns Our Tongue? English, Academic Life, and Subjectivity. In: Shimizu, K., Bradley, W.S. (eds) Multiculturalism and Conflict Reconciliation in the Asia-Pacific. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-40360-5_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-40360-5_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-137-46462-0
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-40360-5
eBook Packages: Palgrave Intern. Relations & Development CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)