DEVELOPING INTERCULTURAL AWARENESS AND
CELEBRATING LINGUISTIC DIVERSITY IN EFL
Claire Bower
Kanda University of International Studies
ABSTRACTThis paper presents an overview of the aims and development of a CLIL-based
linguistics course taught over a fifteen-week semester at a Japanese university.
Particularly, this overview attempts to justify the use of British and American English
varieties to promote intercultural awareness and linguistic diversity in an English as
a foreign language (EFL) setting. By acknowledging the colonial undertones of thesetwo Englishes and using their ubiquitousness to highlight relationships with othervarieties, it is possible to accentuate the prevalence and distinct features of otherinner, outer, and expanding Englishes. In addition, the course is designed tofamiliarise students with some of the social issues that occur during interactions
between speakers of different dialects and varieties and provide them with aplatform to discuss these issues.
INTRODUCTION
Immersing oneself in a language entails more than mastery of grammatical rules and pronunciation
features. It also involves awareness of nuance, connotation, and perspective. Subjective concepts
such as these can vary greatly between national varieties of a language (or what Murphy (2018)refers to as “nationlects”) and then vary again within local dialects. This adds an extra layer ofchallenge for language learners, especially of English, as the dominant lingua franca. One language
does not equate to one culture, and recognising the geographical, social, and functional factorsthat affect meaning is crucial in successful cross-cultural communication. It makes sense, then, to
integrate this knowledge where viable in the language classroom.
This article describes the process of curriculum development and materials design for a linguistics
course taught over one semester at a language university in Japan. Titled The Relationship
Between British and American English, the course employs a content and language integrated
learning (CLIL) approach and is taught in an English-only environment. In this article, I will outline
the motivation and rationale behind the course development and explain the benefits to the learnerof scrutinising the differences and similarities between varieties of English. It will also provide
justification for focalising British and American English, the varieties which already receive themost attention in ELT, to promote intercultural awareness and celebrate linguistic diversity inlanguage learning.
WHAT IS INTERCULTURAL AWARENESS IN LANGUAGE LEARNING?
A successful CLIL methodology considers each of the four Cs: content, communication, cognitionand culture (Coyle, Hood & Marsh, 2010). As part of the fourth C, intercultural awareness is vital for
CLIL, and its importance is increasingly acknowledged elsewhere in the wider realm of EFL.
Korzilius et al. (2007) define intercultural awareness as the ability to effectively communicate witha cross-cultural interlocutor by understanding and adopting their perspective (p. 77). In recent
20years, greater attentiveness has been paid to increasing cultural sensitivity and removing bias,
discrimination, and prejudice from classrooms. Incidental opportunities for teaching interculturalawareness arise more often in multilingual environments, but it can and should also occur inmonolingual contexts. Fostering healthy intercultural relationships is important for successstudying abroad, in future careers, and for global citizenship in general.
RATIONALE FOR FOCUSING ON BRITISH AND AMERICAN ENGLISH
There is a famous quote, usually attributed to George Bernard Shaw, denoting England andAmerica as two countries divided by a common language (Marsh, 2010). This frequently refers toeasily resolved vocabulary confusions about “pants” or “chips.” Sometimes it concerns deeper
matters, such as accent or discourse conventions. However, such miscommunications are notlimited to England and America; they occur whenever people are faced with a different variety ofEnglish than that with which they are familiar. Furthermore, these miscommunications are notlimited to English. Most—likely all—languages contain standard and nonstandard dialects, andthus it correlates that they experience similar paradigms. However, British and American English
are both common models in EFL classrooms and textbooks. They are also prominent in many areasof popular culture and media, and are therefore a familiar point of reference for many English
learners. It therefore felt appropriate to use them to contextualise content that could later beapplied more widely to other English varieties and other languages.
English education in Japanese schools leans towards American English. According to a study by
Fukuda (2010), American English is also the preferred model for Japanese university students tolearn. This is perhaps unsurprising, considering the close economic and political ties between thetwo countries. Nevertheless, Japanese university students regularly demonstrate an appreciationand curiosity for other language varieties and cultures. In addition, they are often especiallyinterested to learn the similarities and differences between different dialects, and the social andhistorical dimensions that underpin them. Therefore, emphasising the diversity among English
varieties and dialects and their relationships with one another became a principal objective when
designing the course curriculum.
DEVELOPING THE CONTENT
Having grown up in southeastern England, I speak a form of what is regarded as standard British
English, also known as Received Pronunciation. My social environment and education shaped myearly attitudes about what constituted correct grammar or spelling, which later became more
descriptive when I started teaching. During my university studies, I gained considerable exposure
to Professor Lynne Murphy’s work. As an American lexicologist and professor of linguistics at auniversity in England, much of her research is aimed at dispelling judgments held about English, forexample, assumptions concerning lexical origins, dialect tropes, and nuance misunderstandings.
Her work, in particular The Prodigal Tongue (2018), has influenced my disinclination towards
considering English as consisting of prescribed types that exist within the boundaries of a country,
rather than a constantly evolving entity that moves and changes with political, cultural, and social
trends.
With limited prior experience in curriculum design, and none in CLIL, this was the first time to create
my own course from the ground up. The idea came to me while reading The Prodigal Tongue, whichmakes observations about British and American English and their relationship. As an English
teacher in Japan, frequent questions and comments made by my students about my pronunciation
21

and vocabulary usage mean I sometimes find my British English perceived as marked. This bothamuses and interests me, as I come from a linguistic background where I am generally considered
an archetype of my demographic. Hence, I noticed parallels between points raised in the text andmy own experiences and discerned an opportunity to combine this with my students' desire forknowledge. Using a CLIL-based framework, I sought to merge my interest in pragmatics with thechance to promote cultural and linguistic diversity awareness in the classroom.
COURSE DESIGN
The course is divided into four units and subsequent weekly topics:
Table 1. Course Units and Topics
Unit
Weekly Topics
1
Influence & Attitudes
history of English, attitudes to American English, attitudes
to British English
2

Phonology & Dialect

standard dialects, non-standard British dialects, nonstandard American dialects, linguistic stereotypes

3

Vocabulary & Semantics

lexical innovation, swearing and taboo language, slang
and colloquial language

4

Pragmatics & Culture

politeness, communication style, irony and humour

Unit 1 Influence and Attitudes
In Unit 1, students begin by examining the history of English, and in particular, how it evolved into
today’s British and American varieties. In the activity An Invasion of Americanisms, learners analyse,
evaluate, and question the “anti-Americanism-ism” (Murphy, 2018) views communicated in a radio
broadcast by British writer Matthew Engel (2011). Next, they unpack Murphy’s claim about
America’s “verbal inferiority complex” (2018), which she says often occurs simultaneously with anappreciation of sophisticated British accents and phrases. The goal is to engage the students in a
critical mindset from the start by presenting controversial viewpoints grounded in research andencouraging reaction and discussion. Although some students find creating their own discussion
questions challenging at this early stage, this unit familiarises them with the general lesson format
and sets the tone for the weeks to come.
Unit 2 Phonology and Dialect
Unit 2 looks closely at accent and pronunciation and how they interweave with social issues likeclass and race. The unit opens by contrasting the standard British and American accents, thenconsiders other nonstandard dialects in both countries. Students first gain exposure to features ofregional British accents and the concepts of social stratification and classism. Then, they learn
about racial problems faced by African American Vernacular English users in the US, and consider
how these two topics reflect one another. As well as fine tuning their ability to distinguish phonetic
features of an interlocutor’s accent, the students participate in a dialogue about linguistic identity,
discrimination, and stereotyping. They continue to use the questioning mindset established in Unit
1 to apply the content outside of the British/American context. Ultimately, they reflect on their own
linguistic identity as both Japanese and English speakers.
22

Unit 3 Vocabulary and Semantics
Unit 3 covers lexical matters: wordplay, swearing, and slang. In an OpenLearn from the Open
University video (2018), the students listen to linguistics professor Jean-Marc Dewaele contrast
multilingual swearing habits and gain insight into how and why English swear words are used indifferent geographical and social contexts. Also, after researching examples of new words thathave emerged from different Englishes around the world, they observe how similar word formation
processes are employed in slang creation.
Slang and profanity are popular topics among language learners, but instructors rarely broachthem in traditional classrooms. Their divergence from the norm, potential for offence, and constantflux in form and usage, make them risky content. However, this raises a learning opportunity topromote intercultural communicative competence. The aim of this unit is to highlight the disparity
in colloquial language use around the world, and the importance of continually assessing the
linguistic environment we find ourselves in.
Unit 4 Pragmatics and Culture
Unit 4 is concerned with academic theories of politeness and culture. In a TEDx Talk (2012),
students listen to Professor Murphy attempt to debunk the “polite British” vs. “rude American”
stereotype and explain how politeness norms in different societies can cause miscommunication.
An introduction to Edward T Hall’s (1976) low and high context culture theory follows, and thelearners compare the theories with their own successful and unsuccessful communication
experiences. Finally, the unit ends with some time spent analysing types of humour and discussing
cross-cultural attitudes to jokes and irony. All three of these topics have a wide scope in terms ofintercultural relevance and applicability but are also the most cognitively demanding. They occur
at the end of the course so that the students have time to build their confidence and develop theirknowledge sufficiently to handle them.
COURSE ASSESSMENT
Reflection and Vocabulary Journal
As well as classwork activities and occasional pre-lesson homework tasks (which are usually towatch a short YouTube video and complete an accompanying handout), students write a reflection
and vocabulary journal over the semester as part of their assessment. They choose any threemoments from the course to reflect on, and complete three journal entries based on Rolfe et al.’s
What? So what? Now what? reflective model (2001). They also record 15 new vocabulary items,
including the parts of speech, definitions, example sentences and any appropriate collocations. The
aims of the journal assessment are twofold. Firstly, it is intended to help them process the content
and encourage independence in learning. Secondly, it is a useful tool for me to survey the students’takeaways from the course and assess whether there are any areas that need addressing.
Final Research ProjectAt the end of the course, students use the content discussed over the past 12 weeks to create a
research presentation on an individual's idiolect and present their findings and conclusions to theclass. They may choose any proficient English user, regardless of English variety or first language.
Ideally, they will interview a friend, family member, or teacher first-hand, but they also have theoption to use online sources to research a famous person if preferred. They are free to focus theirpresentation on whichever linguistic elements they wish, but I scaffold the task with somesuggested interview questions, research topic areas, and an example slides framework for support.
Some past example presentation topics are outlined in Table 1 below.
23

Table 2. Sample Research Presentation Topics
Research subject

L1

Research topics

Hugh Lawrie (actor)

British English/Received
Pronunciation

Use of irony and humour/code switching
dialects

Student’s teacher

AmericanEnglish/Southern

Swearing/negative attitudes received
from standard variety speakers

Student’s girlfriend

French

L1 influence on pronunciation/swearing

The research presentation requires significant planning and preparation and utilises higher level
thinking skills, which makes it a demanding yet appropriate activity to end the semester. The
presenters have to select two or three salient aspects that emerge from their investigations, andthey must explicitly outline the connections they have made between the course topics and theirown research subject, justifying their analysis with specific examples and evidence. It is a daunting
task for them when first introduced, but the overall quality of the finished products has shown it to
be a successful final assessment.
CONSIDERATIONSAs mentioned briefly in the introduction, the American and British nationlects are the most globally
influential forms in the English language learning field. To reduce the sense of British and American
linguistic imperialism, I make an effort to regularly draw attention to the prevalence and merits ofother inner, outer, and expanding circle Englishes throughout the duration of the course. For
instance, in Unit 2, when discussing standard English varieties, students participate in a listening
activity that compares and contrasts authentic sample utterances from five different speakers,
including Japanese, Australian, and New Zealand English. Also, in Unit 3, the students read about
innovative vocabulary coined in non-inner circle Englishes; such as Singapore, Nigeria, and India;
and later do their own research to find more examples.
In addition to promoting awareness of linguistic diversity in English, another aim of the course is toprovide an opportunity for students to consider how the topics apply on a wider scale to Japan, theJapanese language, and themselves. As Clark (2017) points out, othered portrayals of Japan are
persistent. These cultural portrayals exist both externally from Western media and internally fromthe Nihonjinron genre, which focuses on Japan’s cultural uniqueness. Thus, there may be atemptation for some Japanese learners to initially view the issues raised as isolated to Englishspeaking cultures. To avoid this, I incorporate Japan-related questions in the discussion that occurs
at the end of every weekly topic, examples of which are shown in Table 2 below.

24

Table 3. Sample Japan-centred Discussion Questions
Unit

Topic

Question

1

Influence of and attitudes to
British English

What reactions or attitudes to different dialects ofJapanese (or other language you speak) have you evernoticed or experienced? Explain.

2

Non-standard British dialects

How do you think the idea of class applies to Japanesesociety?

4

Communication style

What communication advice would you give an
American friend coming to work or study in Japan?

Students’ backgrounds and prior knowledge make some issues easier to discuss than others. For
example, when discussing attitudes toward standard and non-standard dialects, having a mix ofindividuals from different areas in Japan helps to facilitate very meaningful, lively discussions
because all the participants can personally relate in different ways. On the other hand, talking
about matters like social class is more challenging, partly as the concept of social class is not as
easily transferable to Japanese culture as dialect attitudes, but also because the learners have hadless interaction with the construct. Nevertheless, with appropriate scaffolding before thediscussion, they are capable of engaging in purposeful conversation about more arduous topics,
and become comfortable sharing their opinions. This is commonly demonstrated during postdiscussion feedback, when group members report original ideas that they credit having learned
from their partner.
DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS
The overall reception to the course has been consistently favourable; there is always a positive
attitude in the classroom, the attendance rate is high, and I have received second-hand comments
about learner enjoyment from colleagues with whom I share the same students. Nevertheless, as
an educator, I believe it is important to continually evaluate and work on my teaching where
possible, so at the end of each programme I send out a voluntary survey requesting feedback onwhat the students enjoyed most and inquiring about any potential areas for improvement.
In every semester to date, swearing has emerged as the favourite topic, followed by equal
preference for slang, UK and US accent differences, and linguistic stereotypes. The reasons
supplied for all of these topics concern their practical usefulness or their influence on the students’beliefs or assumptions. For example, a frequent reaction to slang and swearing was satisfaction inbetter understanding how widely profanity can vary in offensiveness depending on the word andsituation. Despite familiarity with common slang and swear words gained from TV and social
media, most of the learners admitted they were unsure of how to use them and were unaware of
the origins or nuances. Similarly, respondents who enjoyed the pronunciation-focused lessons
noted that they can now more easily differentiate English speaker accents, and in one specific case,asserted that their listening comprehension had improved when watching dramas that contain25

characters with British accents. In addition to these specific topics, another frequent student
response was that everything was enjoyable, as they could see how all the content could be usefulin their present and post-university lives, which was reassuring to hear.
Most of the constructive feedback responses pertain to practical aspects of the lesson (such as thebest strategy for group discussion) rather than content. However, the Pragmatics and Culture unit
tends to be described as difficult more often than the others, the politeness section in particular.
This is to be expected, as there is limited time available to dedicate to some linguistically andconceptually advanced topics that are new to much of the class. Despite this difficulty, all three ofthe topics covered in this unit have been addressed in final research presentations by several
stronger students, with communication style being the most frequent. In addition, topics from thisunit are also commonly cited in many of the reflection journals, regardless of student level. This
demonstrates that, while there is certainly room to improve topic accessibility for lower-level
students, which could be achieved by increased differentiation in support materials, covering theseadvanced subjects has value for all the course participants.
The reflection journals are another source of feedback I have been able to learn from. While
moments from a core selection of topics appear frequently (namely, linguistic stereotypes,
swearing, and communication style), the overall content of the journals varies widely, with all the
topics receiving at least one mention. This is useful because it suggests the content is both relevantto the students and valid for inclusion on the curriculum. There is some fluctuation in the depth of
the So what? and Now what? journal sections, but this is common in student reflective writing
tasks, as it is a skill that takes time and practice to master. To help resolve this, in more recent
undertakings of the course I provided sample reflections from previous students (with theirpermission). This has made a difference, but perhaps giving a more structured template using
sentence starters or more specific reflection questions would be helpful for lower level students infuture.
A salient feature of the deeper reflections is a natural tendency to relate the subject matter to theirnative culture, even without any explicit instructions to do so. For example, one student
contemplated the benefits of implementing a British-style watershed in Japan. In other words, shethought that allowing profanity to be broadcast after a certain time might increase Japanesepeople’s understanding of swearing language and subsequently help to avoid inappropriate usage
and misunderstandings. Comments like this indicate that students are independently applying theissues outside of the lesson, and that the cross-cultural mindset aims of the lesson are taking effect.
Another characteristic that has emerged from the journals is a deepened awareness andappreciation for diversity in language and culture. This is commonly expressed in reactions to the
Phonology and Dialect unit, in response to social issues of class, race, and stereotyping. It also
arises in entries about politeness and communication style, and in one student’s journal, touchingly
manifested as an increased sense of self-worth. She reported that hearing foreign teachers andfriends express the trope that Japanese people lack an opinion had affected her confidence, but
after learning about the intricacies of high and low context culture, she understood that theJapanese simply say more with fewer words, and she now has pride in that rather than shame.
These kinds of accounts suggest that the intercultural awareness aims of the course are being met,
and they positively affect not only the students’ knowledge, but perhaps also their morale.
CONCLUSION

26

The design of this course shows how I have attempted to use the relationship between British andAmerican English to raise students’ awareness of the linguistic diversity in Englishes around theworld and call attention to some of the social issues that exist within. Moreover, I have strived tohighlight how being interculturally aware pertains to language, as well as habits and customs. The
use of authentic materials throughout the programme and inclusion of several new or unfamiliar
concepts make this a challenging course at times, even for high-level participants. Certainly,
improvements can be made to make some topics (most notably in Unit 4) more accessible forlower-level attendees via increased scaffolding and differentiation of materials. That said, student
testimonies show that overall satisfaction with the course is high, and the objectives are achieved,
despite the difficulties. Much can be learned by examining attitudes to language use, both our own
and other people’s. Indeed, as Murphy (2018) remarks, “scratch a prejudice, and you can usuallyfind a fear” (p. 10). A healthy attitude to language learning is a positive step towards achieving
tolerance in the classroom, and it is my hope that cultivating students’ interest in linguistic diversity
may encourage them to continue seeking out the underlying issues and connections between
language dialects and varieties in their post-university lives.

REFERENCES
Clark, L. E. (2017, November 7). The lost in translation problem: Intercultural engagement and thedangers of othering. The Tokyo Foundation for Policy Research.
https://www.tkfd.or.jp/en/research/detail.php?id=637
Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL: Content and language integrated learning.
Cambridge University Press.
Engel, M. (2011, July 16). An invasion of Americans [Radio broadcast]. BBC.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01292gl
Fukuda, T. (2010). Japanese students’ perception of American English. In A. M. Stoke (Ed.),
JALT2009 Conference Proceedings. Tokyo: JALT. https://jaltpublications.org/archive/proceedings/2009/E128.pdf
Hall, E. T. (1976). Beyond culture. Anchor Books.
Korzilius, H., Van hooft, A., & Planken, B. (2007). A longitudinal study on intercultural awarenessand foreign language acquisition in the Netherlands. Journal of Intercultural Communication, 76105.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/241880883_A_longitudinal_study_on_intercultural_awareness_and_foreign_language_acquisition_in_the_Netherlands
Marsh, D. (2010, November 26). Lickety splits: two nations divided by a common language. The
Guardian.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/mind-your-language/2010/nov/26/americanisms-englishmind-your-language
Murphy, L. M. (2018). The Prodigal Tongue. Penguin
27OpenLearn from the Open University. (2018, July 5). Why do we swear? Swearing in different
cultures (1/4) [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HgV4MZUH6FI
Rolfe, G., Freshwater, D., & Jasper, M. (2001). Critical reflection in nursing and the helping
professions: A user's guide. Palgrave Macmillan.
TEDx Talks. (2012, August 6). TEDxSussexUniversity - Lynne Murphy - American and British
politeness [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbu-eMcEF3s&t=98s

28