Globalization of English and English Language Policies in East Asia: a Comparative Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The last decade has witnessed the ever rising realization of the significance of English, which triggered the booming concept of teaching English as an International Language (EIL). English as a lingua franca has been playing an important role in the whole world since the 1950s in the twentieth century. In order to compete with western rivals in the new century, East Asian countries and regions in the expanding circle of English have to respond positively to the globalization of English and make adjustments to their respective ELT policies. This paper tries to review the global spread of English and discusses world Englishes and varieties of English. Besides, it would also describe and analyze the corresponding English language policies in East Asian contexts through a comparative perspective. A description analysis of ELT policies in Japan, Korea, Chinese Taiwan and China’s Mainland would be presented. Key words: globalization; ELT policy; East Asia; comparative study Resume: La decennie derniere etait temoin de la realisation meme croissante de la signifiance de la langue anglaise, ce qui a declenche en plein essor le concept de l’enseignement de l’anglais comme une langue internationale.(EIL) L’anglais comme une lingua franca a joue un role important dans le monde depuis 1950s pendant le 21e siecle. Dans le but de rivaliser avec rivaux occidentaux pour le nouveau siecle, les pays et les regions asiatiques dans le cercle en expansion de la langue anglaise a a repondre positivement a la mondialisation de la langue anglaise et a mettre en ajustement leurs politiques respectives ELT. Cette memoire tente de revoir la diffusion mondiale de la langue anglaise et de discuter de l’anglais mondial et des varietes de l’anglais. D’ailleurs, elle decrira et analysera aussi la correspondance des politiques pour la langue anglaise dans le contextes des pays asiatiques par une perspective comparative. Une description et une analyse des politiques ELT au Japon, en Coree, a Taiwan et dans la Chine continentale sera presentee. Mots-Cles: mondialisation; politique ELT; asiatique; etude comparative
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".