On the native/nonnative speaker notion and World Englishes: Debating with K. Rajagopalan

Resumen

In a series of three articles published in the Journal of Pragmatics (1995, henceforth JP), the purpose of the papers is to question the division of English spoken in the world into, on one hand, “native” varieties (British English, American English. Australian English) and, on the other, “new/ nonnative” varieties (Indian English, Singaporean English, Nigerian English). The JP articles are indeed groundbreaking for they mark one of the fi rst interactions among scholars from the East with researchers in the West with regard to the growth and spread of the language as well as the roles English is made to play by its impressive number of users. The privileged position of prestige and power attributed to the inner circle varieties (USA, UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand) is questioned. Rajagopalan (1997, motivated by his reading of the JP papers, adds another dimension to this questioning by pointing to the racial and discriminatory stance underlying the notions “native speaker” and “nonnative speaker” (henceforth, respectively NS and NNS). Rajagopalan has written extensively on the issue of nativity or “nativeness”; over the years, Schmitz has also written on the same topic. There appears, in some cases, to be a number of divergent views with regard to subject on hand on the part of both authors. The purpose of this article is to engage in a respectful debate to uncover misreading and possible misunderstanding on the part of Schmitz. Listening to one another and learning from each another are essential in all academic endeavors.