Teaching English as a Foreign Language in Argentina without
reproducing hegemonic cultures
Mariana Noemí Freire
Instituto Superior Cem
Lengua y Cultura III
Professor María Marta Yedaide
Due date: 24th August 2018
​
Since the moment I got in touch with the English language at the age of 7, I have
always dreamt of travelling to London to see the Big Ben, the London Tower, the
Buckingham Palace, Oxford University, its bridges, museums and castles… Contrary to that,
it has never crossed my mind to make a trip to Tucumán to visit “La casita de Tucumán”.
How can I explain this fascination with English culture and the undesirability of learning
about Argentinian culture?
When I look back at my schooling years, I can immediately notice the influence of my
English teachers during primary school: the books we used and read, the narratives these
teachers decided to work on as basis for language teaching.... With a deeper look, I can also
find traces of what they omitted to transmit about my own country, my own culture, what
implications there were in looking up to another culture. I grew up with the idea that
Argentina was a third world country with fantastic natural resources that, luckily were not
owned by us, and luckily, they were owned by a first world country which, of course, was
much better civilized and educated than our own people and could manage them in a more
prosperous and successful way for “our” benefit.
According to Robert Phillipson (1992) in his book “Linguistic Imperialism”, he
defines the term as “the transfer of a dominant language to other people". Within this transfer,
there are aspects of the dominant culture which are also transferred along with the language
and it is considered to be a demonstration of hegemonic power —traditionally, military power
but also, in the modern world, economic power— over the dominated or oppressed peoples.
Anibal Quijano (2000) mentions the feeling of inferiority of the colonized that emerged from
the imposition of a dominant culture. Doesn’t it resemble the idea that lingered in my mind
while I was growing up?
Edgardo Lander (2000) defines this feeling as
The affliction because of the difference -the awkwardness of living in a
continent that is not white, urban, cosmopolitan and civilized- finds its best
expression in positivism. Sharing the main assumptions and prejudices of
nineteenth century European thought (scientific racism, patriarchy, the idea of
progress), positivism reaffirms the colonial discourse. The continent is
imagined from a single voice, with a single subject: white, masculine, urban,
cosmopolitan. The rest, the majority, is the “other”, barbarian, primitive, black,
indian, who has nothing to contribute to the future of these societies. It would
be imperative to whiten, westernize, or exterminate the majority.
The purpose of this essay is not to answer questions since I do not consider that I have
the answers, if there is an answer to be found. Instead, I have found myself motivated by this
topic to problematize and reflect upon the possibility of teaching English as a foreign
language without falling into the reproduction of the model of power brought to us by
coloniality in the first place, and by the dominant role of The United States of America after
both World Wars. I believe in the power of education to transmit values to create a better
society: an equal, diverse, dynamic, flexible, respectful, tolerant, fair and humanitarian one.
One of the main reasons that the UNESCO postulates as regards the importance of education
is connected to the granting of the same opportunities in the access to information and
knowledge for everyone no matter people’s social background. I agree with the importance
of teaching English to future generations as a tool for their development as citizens of the
world since English, today, is the Lingua Franca. It is a fact that most of the updated
information about any topic is mainly in English. It is also a fact that English has become a
global language and people from different parts of the world communicate with each other by
means of it. So it is clearly stated the value of learning this language. Where my doubts begin
is in the fact that at the moment of transmitting this language, can we do it without conveying
the idea of superiority-inferiority? I dare say that by teaching English, it is possible to
emancipate and gain freedom from the dominance of those powerful countries that have been
oppressing us since colonial times. I am convinced that by learning English students can be
empowered and their cultural dignity can be reinforced.
In what follows, I am going to explain why English has developed as a global
language and has become dominant around the globe, how it gradually became part of the
Argentinian educational curriculum and turned into a must in our educational system and
how it could be achievable to teach English without legitimizing or reproducing ideologies
and structures that have been used by dominant English speaking countries. My proposal
embraces some of Phillipsson’s ideas, aligns with the Dusselian goal of transmodernity and
agrees with the continuation of the decolonial turn (1).
Humans have shown how revolutionary technological advances are spread since their
origins, being the first one “Domestication”. Some scholars refer to the time around 10,000
B.C. as the “Neolithic Revolution”. It began sometime after 10,000 B.C. in western Asia and
by 5,000 B.C. agricultural settlements and pastoralists could be found throughout the Old
World. The importance of mentioning this first spreading worldwide wave lies in the fact that
humans tend to reproduce what they think can be productive in their own lives. However,
History has shown us that cultural reproduction has come not only from conscientious,
internal and thoughtful processes, but also from the imposition of dominant cultures. A few
thousands years later, at the time of Julius Caesar’s expeditions (55-54 B.C.), Romans
considered their right to expand their rule as a divine mission and felt entitled to conquer the
area of what nowadays is Britain and brought about their language and culture. This turning
point for the overwhelmingly Celtic population of the islands was imposed by a more
powerful army, a more “civilized” (Romans were already literate) and better organized
empire. Similarly, drawing a parallelism, we can agree that The British Empire considered
their right to expand their rule and felt entitled to conquer many parts of the world, naturally,
imposing their language and culture.
There is a saying that reads that English has achieved its global status because it was
“in the right place at the right moment” in history. David Crystal (2012) explains the
dominance of English as a consequence of power. According to him, the popularity and
success of a language is simple:
The history of a global language can be traced through the successful
expeditions of its soldiers/sailor speakers. And English… has been no
exception. But international language dominance is not solely the result of
military right. It may take a militarily powerful nation to establish a language,
but it takes an economically powerful one to maintain and expand it.
During the 17th century, there was a massive expansion of the British Empire. The
previous Industrial Revolution had given the Empire the economic advantage over other
european empires. Their fleets were enlarged and they started migrating and colonizing what
is now North America, Canada, some Caribbean countries, Australia and New Zealand.
Those immigrants took with them their language and culture and imposed them to the
colonized peoples. English settlers became the elite in those places and symbolized prestige
and evolution… the future. The oppressed peoples became exploited slaves and symbolized a
primitive and noncivilized human… the past. Consequently, English turned into the lingua
franca displacing and diminishing the previous languages spoken in those areas since the
administrative, military and commercial powers were held and administered by the Empire.
A second wave of expansion came in the 18th and 19th centuries to Africa and Asia
and even though there were not as many immigrants that settled as in the first wave, the ones
that remained in these new colonies were also in charge of the administration and the
military and commercial powers. It was established an international commercial net with all
the colonies of the Empire where again, English was the lingua franca. As David Crystal
states, there was an economically powerful nation to maintain the international language
dominance.
Another important factor that left Britain stood as the most fierceful conqueror during
those centuries was that other empires were struggling with inner social revolutions,
revolutions in their colonies, political instability and economic depressions, while the British
Empire was well established and strong. And, even though the American Revolution might
be seen as a heavy blow to the magnificence of the Empire, as regards language, the seed had
already been planted.
The emergence of the United States as a world economic and political power in the
20th century reinforced English as a global language. So, despite the fact that the British
Empire entered its decline, the United States rose. Both World Wars were won by English
speaking countries which gathered their military forces and once the wars finished, they
remained and left troops in European countries to supposedly help rebuilding those countries
that had been destroyed. It would probably be more accurate to suggest that their persistence
was more related to domination and gaining influence in those countries.
After the second world war, the American culture became popular around the world
due to the strength of the fourth state: media. Nobody wanted to align with powerless
countries and the USA, through mass media communication, exported internationally their
own American dream: their culture (neo capitalism, clothing, music, family values and
naturally, their language). At the end of the 20th century, the American power became
unstoppable after the collapse of the USSR, the only country that could have confronted them
with their communist ideas.
Last, but definitely not least in connection to its worldwide impact, the appearance of
electronic communication and information technology propelled the expansion of English as
a second language all over the world. Internet and the web developed into the perfect tool of
English distribution to all places in the world.
So, where does English stand now? Many intellectuals are discussing if the expansion
of English has been and is beneficial or not. The approaches they have and the analysis they
make are fairly dissimilar, however what they do agree upon is that English has grown into
the world dominant language. There is little doubt that the English language has a role in the
modern world quite unlike that of any other language. All the international organizations,
such as UN, NATO, EU, communicate in English; 80% of science and scientific journals are
written in English; international commerce, the film industry, air traffic control, electronic
communication are all in English; and international travellers from every corner of the world
communicate in English and use it as a Lingua Franca. English has prevailed and the fact that
it has rapidly become a global language may suggest that its spread is likely to continue.
What I believe is not clear though, is which English variety will be disseminated, or if a
simpler English might gradually appear, such as Globish.
A question that might follow to a curious reader is: how is all this connected to
Argentina? How is it that a former Spanish colony has nowadays an enormous business
around English teaching as a second language? Or is it in fact English teaching as a foreign
language instead? How is it that English is the only language that is compulsory to study
from 4th year of primary school, through all secondary school and in most after-school
courses of studies?
In 2006, in a survey made by Quevedo and Bacman, 85.5% of the argentinian
respondents declared having some knowledge of English. Why is it that in a Spanish
speaking country where English is not used on everyday basis so many people possess some
knowledge of it? Basically, as a consequence of the linguistic policies that the Argentinian
government have been developing since our origins as an independent and free country.
English teaching has been bound to the political, economic and social project of ruling
sectors and the linguistic ideologies that align with an hegemonic project.
It is vital to mention that the constituents of the argentinian ruling class at the
beginning of the 19th century, even though they seeked independence from Spain, wished to
construct a nation with european character or culture. Indigenous peoples were considered
inferior and barbarian and consequently, excluded from the new project. So, the new leaders
of our country looked up to civilized European countries to follow their lead and became
interested in developing linguistic policies that could eventually open doors for future
generations. Some supporting examples that prove this interest were: in 1801 the members of
the Cabildo mentioned the usefulness of studying French in public schools, the first optional
chair in English was created at the University of Buenos Aires in 1827 and, towards the end
of the century, English and French were taught in non-compulsory secondary schools (these
secondary schools were not completely articulated in the educational system yet, but their
objective was being a preparation step to University and just for the “elite”).
During the last years of the 19th century almost 80% of the foreign investments in our
country were from British origin since our government was seeking to cut all the economic
attachments to the Spanish crown. Consequently, after these huge investments, being the
Argentinian railway network the most considerable, the British immigration was tripled.
Before that, only a few English speaking immigrants (British, Irish, Scottish and Welsh) had
arrived to our lands creating their own communities which were spread in different parts of
our country.
In this way, the British community grew in size and prestige not only for the
economic success they had been having but also for their ability to link Argentina with the
United Kingdom (the most powerful kingdom at the time). Some schools and institutions
were founded where English was the only language taught. They even brought their own
teachers from their lands and only proved English people and their offspring could attend
those schools. Along time, these institutions have changed and adapted to the Argentinian
society, but they have kept the prestige and nowadays, they are some of the most highly
distinguished and prominent middle and high class schools.
In the first quarter of the 20th century several historical institutions were created in
the city of Buenos Aires which encouraged and propagated the language, such as the British
Council, the Asociación Argentina de Cultura Inglesa, the British Arts Centre and the
Instituto Cultural Argentino Norteamericano (ICANA). However, it can not be established
that there was a direct political linguistic policy between Argentina and the United Kingdom
but what it did exist was a “Glotopolitica”(2) action through editorials and English dictionaries
which gave free educational material to teachers, granted scholarships to study abroad or
supported international conventions. Even more nonexistent was the linguistic policy with
the United States of America (USA). After turning into an hegemonic power at the end of the
Second World War, the USA became globally present in a different way: entertainment for
the masses. Their omnipresence in TV, sports, cinema, music, scientific literature, etc. was
their own propaganda, selling itself as the best, richest, most productive, powerful and
developed country in the world.
In regard to the schooling system, English and French were taught in public secondary
schools for the first half of the 20th century. During the presidency of Arturo Frondizi
(1958-1962), the school curriculum was changed with respect to methodology of foreign
languages. It was also created a teachers’ training course for primary schools and in 1959,
there was an experiment conducted in 15 primary schools in Buenos Aires which had English
as a subject. At the time, the President had been negotiating international loans with the USA,
Canada and the British Empire which eventually were granted. Also during his government,
private schools changed their dependency, from hinging on national institutions to the
Superintendencia Nacional de Educación Privada. The breach in the quality of education had
already started, but by this modification, it started growing even more.
The military dictatorship between 1976 and 1983 emphasized the preference for
English learning in accordance with their economic orientation and subordination to the
USA.
There is some evidence that points to the USA as the economic patron of the military coup
and also some cooperation from the Spanish King has been found.
Fortunately, the dictatorship finished and a democratic president, Raúl Alfonsín
(1983-1989), took the lead of our country. In 1988, a pedagogy convention was held that
established a unique foreign language as subject during the five years of secondary school.
Gradually, most schools showed a tendency to choose English over other languages. This
decision was based on the emphasis given to the usefulness of English with reference to
science, technology, technical advances, the political-ideological affinity with English
speaking countries, the influence of those countries in our school curriculum and even
argentinian parents’ pressures over this curriculum, particularly middle and high class
families.
When explaining the growth of these expanding language, I can not omit mentioning
the increasing number of private institutions that have been promoting and disseminating the
language throughout the country. English teaching has come to be a massive business: “In
this changeable, competitive and difficult world, if you want to be successful, you need to
learn English.” This could be the slogan in any private institution trying to gain more
students.
​
Entering the 21st century, our new education legislation instituted a foreign language
as a compulsory subject in all schools since 4th grade onwards (for 9 years). Even though it
did not mention English as the chosen language, its predominance has been evident. At the
same time, this federal law highlighted the prominent role of the English since it has become
the “lingua franca” which is omnipresent around the globe. Therefore, most of the schools in
our country have opted for English over any other language. ​
In 2010, the governor of Buenos Aires attended to the First Provincial Convention of
Foreign Languages (Primer Encuentro Provincial de Lenguas Extranjeras), where he stated
that the British Council and the province government were going to work conjointly in the
design of English projects and plans to foster this language.
​
To bring this section to an end, I must conclude by suggesting that the expansion and
primacy of English in our country has not only been determined by immigration. Our
different governments have issued linguistic policies which probably have been encouraged
by powerful English speaking countries as well. Their hegemony is connected to power: they
are the ones who set the rules because they have the money (economic power) and the guns
(military power). So the asymmetry is established in relation to these powers in an extremely
capitalistic world. So basically, to keep the peace and live in harmony, we accept that
decisions are not 100% ours. We accept that they have a superior culture, hence, ours is
inferior. We are raised and raise others in a country with a blurred identity admiring and
envying what they are. Paula Moya (2011) defines identity not as a prison, but as “a point of
departure that allows us to observe, understand, and question particular aspects of life.” As an
English language educator, I believe that English can be used to promote a creative critical
pedagogy, encouraging students to take a step out of the prison and deconstruct the imposed
hegemonic points of view in order to become decolonized.
​
David Crystal (2012) ratifies many times along his book that “there is the closest of
links between language dominance and economic, technological, and cultural power”. How
was it that Greek became a language of international communication in the Middle East over
2,000 years ago? The answer lies in Alexander the Great’s military power. What about Latin?
Latin became an international language throughout the Roman Empire because Romans were
simply more powerful. Years later, when their power declined, Latin remained for a thousand
years as the international language of education, due to a different source of power: the
ecclesiastical Roman Catholicism. Why did Spanish, Portuguese, and French became the
spoken languages of America, Africa and the Far East? By paying attention to the colonial
policies of the Renaissance western monarchies and how these policies were mercilessly
implemented we can find an explanation. Single narratives were spread worldwide along the
history of humanity and repercussions of these narratives can be traced to modern times.
In Chimmamanda Ngozi Adichie`s TEDGlobal talk (2009), she remarks the dangers
of transmitting a single story: “Single stories make one story become the only truth”. I do not
agree with the idea that there is a single point of view. Hegemonic points of view are the
imposition of a specific idea, and the expression of a particular identity that harmfully, has
the snobbery and hypocrisy of representing all ideas. Our world is in constant change, a few
years ago the idea of homosexual marriages or an abortion law in Argentina could not be
even considered by many. However, the first one is already legal and the second one is on the
way to. After a couple thousands years from the origin of Christianity, some Christian values
are not acknowledged as the hegemonic ones. So, who knows what will happen in the years
to come? We are now living in a transitional time, as a teacher (because I consider myself
first as a teacher than an English language teacher) I feel the responsibility of helping my
students open their minds, think in different alternatives, be critical to what is established to
them and believe in the power of education as a liberating tool. The question is… how? How,
when teaching an hegemonic and imperialistic language, can I help them achieve those goals?
According to Robert Phillipson (1992), linguistic imperialism “refers to a particular
theory for analysing relations between dominant and dominated cultures and specifically the
way English language learning has been promoted.” From his viewpoint, language is one of
many structures by which communities can be categorised and discriminated against, similar
to gender, age and race, and while language does not in itself effect inequality it is “a
construct exploited by politico-economic structures to carry out their agenda of dominance.”
He states that the English Language Teaching (ELT) industry and ELT pedagogy are not
innocent bystanders in the rise of English language hegemony but are accomplices in a
neo-colonial agenda that has taken English to its current position.
I definitely agree with his idea and he introduces one of the first problems that need to
be tackled: ELT resources. As mentioned before, even though there have not been written
linguistic policies in Argentina concerning the spreading of the English language, publishing
companies have been producing free ELT resources for teachers that we have found to be
invaluable. It is a fact that in order to make a living on this profession, we need to take a lot
of classes, work long hours and work even more preparing those classes in advance. If we
prepare all of our own material for all our students, it would be a time consuming activity that
would not leave time to do anything else.
From 2001 to 2006, I lived in Valencia, Spain. While living there, I worked in two
different private institutes and in a school. One of the things that called my attention at the
time, was that the books they used had texts, pictures and listening comprehension activities
with information from different parts of the world. Before going to Spain, I had worked in the
Cultural Inglesa of Buenos Aires for a couple of years, and we used the same books… Well,
the cover was the same, the grammar and vocabulary contents were the same but the texts,
pictures and listening comprehension activities were all very British. My argentinian students
could not find any resemblance or identify themselves with any of the pictures, but still,
loved and admired that culture that seemed so perfect and polite, and, undoubtedly,
impossible to achieve by barbarian argentinians. These books emphasized how different we
were rather than how similar. Those books, consciously, fostered intellectual colonialism,
marginal feelings and imprisoning ideas. I was really young at the time and it was my first
real “teaching job”, it never crossed my mind how damaging these books could be as regards
self-identity. I am older now, some would say wiser, but I do not really believe that. I am still
learning the “how” of the profession I love.
I think that if we take a risk, which also means becoming more involved, self-aware
and committed to our jobs, we might find the time to prepare different resources. Resources
by which we teach about different cultures and that actually follow the “multicultural”
approach that our present education law specifies. Publishing companies work on demand, if
many teachers decide against acquiring their books, they will probably become interested in
the reason. Our answers might be a first step towards changing the contents of these books.
One more time, who knows what will happen in the years to come?
For the last 9 years, I have worked in a bilingual school attended by students whose
parents can afford an expensive monthly fee, and most of them have chosen this particular
school because of its English project. I was a fifth grade teacher for 4 years and I have been
in charge of second grade since 2014. I spend with my students around 15 hours a week
which allows me to know them and love them.
Part of my syllabus is teaching “food” vocabulary, meals of the day and healthy and
unhealthy food. This year, trying to adjust the syllabus to the “multicultural approach”, I
designed an investigation activity in which my students had to research about breakfasts
around the world within their families, relatives and friends. Part of the instruction was that
they did not have to google the information, we talked about other ways of investigating such
as “I can send a whatsapp to my uncle who lives in Japan” (8-year-old student) or “I can ask
my mom” (7-year-old student whose mum is Chinese) or “My grandpa” (this student’s
grandfather is from Italy). I allotted 30 minutes every day for a week to share the information,
some of them brought the vocabulary in English, some in Spanish, some in Chinese and one
student even in Italian. They shared the vocabulary orally in front of the class, if they did not
know the word in English, one of them was in charge of looking it up online and looking for
images to see how that item of food looks like. The second part of the project was classifying
these breakfasts as healthy or unhealthy and we realized, all together, that argentinian
breakfasts are usually healthier than many others around the world. We clapped ourselves for
our eating habits and felt conjointly proud of being argentinian. Short and sweet: simply
feeling dignity of our identity. The time that I devoted at home for the preparation of the
activity: one dream… I woke up in the middle of the night thinking about this project.
Making a comparison to how I was taught breakfast food, the differences I can find
are these: first, the picture that my book had showed: coffee, orange juice, bacon, eggs and
sausages. I remember it as if it was yesterday. Second, my teacher saying: “Breakfast food
includes bacon and eggs.” Last, my thoughts at the time: “I have never eaten bacon and eggs
for breakfasts, am I weird? Is my family weird? Should we eat bacon and eggs? Is that better
than what I have every morning?” My teacher’s unique story was incomplete and in myself,
the feeling of awkwardness was unconsciously stored in my memory.
Phillipson also affirms that linguistic imperialism and ELT deprives the prestige of
other languages since there is a language myth that is transmitted from mouth to mouth and
even from parents to children which is: “English is the only thing you need to have success in
the modern world”. I partially agree with this since, in the first place, a language is not
intrinsically good or bad. In the second place, learning English as a foreign language does not
imply not learning your own mother tongue. Last, my philosophical question would be: what
is success in the modern world? Is there a sole answer to that question? It is true that some
aspects of the dominant culture are transferred along with the language. But I also believe
that by raising awareness of these facts to students, they can critically analyze them and
construct their own answers, which not necessarily have to be my answers or Philipsson’s
answers. There is not just one truth, that would be as falling again into the hegemonic fallacy.
We should share with students experiences so that they learn to be critical in the first place
and creative in the second so as to find their own paths.
Not teaching English just because it comes from dominant countries sounds
patronizing and carries the implication that non- English speakers do not know what is in
their interest... Has English contributed to social justice? Probably not. Has it helped to
reproduce unequal division of power and resources and legitimate ideologies and structures?
Possibly… Should we, therefore, embrace English with no choice? Not necessarily…
Nevertheless, by teaching students this language we are also empowering them to choose
freely. It is not the scholars’ choice, it is not the teachers’ choice, it is not the parents’
choice… It is our students’ future choice that matters and our job is giving them possible
tools for an uncertain future that they have not decided yet.
Enrique Dussel (2012) has a constructive perspective as regards transmodernity. For
him, it represents the horizon of a possible decolonized world. The Dusselian conception of
transmodernity is about the transgression and transcendence of modernity, understood as a
system premised on colonizing ideas, institutions, and practices. The concept invites critical
and creative appropriations of selected modern ideas, along with multiple other conceptual
frameworks that can contribute to forge a less oppressive future. In this line of thought,
Canagarajah (1999) proposes an approach to teaching and learning that acknowledges the
imperialist roots of ELT but which empowers learners to “appropriate the language in their
own terms, according to their needs, values and aspirations.” From his point of view, learners
do not have to simply reproduce the language of the imperialist oppressor while accepting the
values imported with it disregarding their own roots and culture. Contrary to that, they can
turn the language to their own needs. By learning the language, they can displace themselves
to use English “not as slaves, but as agents; to use English not mechanically and diffidently,
but creatively and critically”.
It is doubtless that we need to make use, to aid our research (a rational study
of existent beings), of the investigations carried out by all those who
preceded us [i.e., the Greeks] [...] It would be useful for us to lay our
hands on the books of those philosophers, so that, if we find everything they
say therein to be reasonable, we accept it, but if there is something
unreasonable, it can serve us as a precaution and warning.
Mohamed Abed Al-Yabri. Crítica (2001)
I am convinced that by learning English we can learn about ourselves, and other
peoples. We can read about others, listen to different perspectives, speak about our own ideas
and write to others from remote places. This language is a link to communicate and share…
Therefore, we can learn about other cultures by means of our own glasses and not somebody
else’s views. Nonetheless, it is important to understand what paved our ways, how our
meaning construction was developed, so as to critically analyze it and creatively construct our
personal values.
To finish I would like to tell an anecdote. Two months ago, we were working with
plants, their parts, their uses in everyday life. My students are curious by nature and eager to
learn so, I try to encourage it, and even if they speak in Spanish, I let them ask questions as
regards the topic without restricting their inquiries. One of my students asked where the first
plant-seed came from. I looked around and nobody would answer. Deliberately, I
reformulated the question in English and then in Spanish, louder and clearer. Hands started
shaking and wiggling. Each student had something to say on the topic and suddenly, there
was an open discussion on different points of view. Some of them are Christians and
expressed that God had been the creator. Non-Christians postulated the Big-bang theory, the
aliens theory (some aliens came to our planet and set everything into motion), one of them
said that the first human planted the first seed (which obviously brought about many other
questions as where the first human came from, if dinosaurs existed first of after humans, etc,
etc). They talked for more than half an hour and my only intervention was related to order,
listening to each other and avoiding interruptions. After so many opinions, one of the girls
asked me: “What is the truth?” I took a couple of seconds to think about the answer…
Finally, I looked at her and replied: “Is it possible to have more than a unique story?”
NOTES
(1)​ The decolonial turn, according to Walter Mignolo (2000), has existed since the beginning of colonization, but it has become
massive, profound and still unfinished since the 20th century. It is connected to the emancipation and decolonization of
knowledge, power and identity of the colonized peoples. This movement encompasses self-awareness of the oppressed and
production of political, intellectual and artistic expressions.
(2)​ “Glotopolitica” is a term with no translation to English. According to Roberto Bein ( 2012), this concept proposed by Guespin
and Marcellesi (1986) incorporates all the actions over a language of all the actors, not only the ones related to the governmental
or political sphere such as teachers’ epi linguistics, editorials’ linguistic agreements, linguistic pressure by the media, etc.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Riz Khan. (2010). Linguistic Imperialism? Interview.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3TJe4jnqFo
Phillipsson, R. (2013). Linguistic Imperialism and ELT. Talk.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jfFGnAbXBI
http://www.unesco.org/new/en/communication-and-information/unesco-and-wsis/implementa
tion-and-follow-up/unesco-and-wsis-action-lines/c3-access-to-information-and-knowle
dge/
http://www.argentina-rree.com/13/13-025.htm
Mauceri, M.L. and Ruiz, G. (2009). La finalización de la educación primaria nacional. Los
últimos años de la acción directa del Estado nacional en la educación primaria. Período
1961-1978. Retrieved from
http://www.scielo.org.ar/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2313-9277200900010000
7
Bein, R. (2012). La política lingüística respecto de las lenguas extranjeras en la Argentina a
partir de 1993. Dissertation and thesis. Wien.
Narvaja de Arnoux, E. and del Valle, J. (2010). Las representaciones ideologicas del lenguaje:
Discurso glotopolitico y panhispanismo. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Crystal, D. (2012). English as a Global Language. Cambridge University Press.
Moya, P. M. (2011). Who We Are and From Where We Speak. Transmodernity: Journal of
Peripheral Cultural Production of the Luso-Hispanic World, 1(2). Retrieved from
https://escholarship.org/uc/item/2md416qv
Miller, S. (1997). Mastering Modern European History, First Edition. Palgrave Master Series.
Dussel, E. (2011). From Critical Theory to the Philosophy of Liberation: Some Themes for
Dialogue. Transmodernity: Journal of Peripheral Cultural Production of the
Luso-Hispanic World, 1(2). Retrieved from https://escholarship.org/uc/item/59m869d2
Dussel, E. D. (2012). Transmodernity and Interculturality: An Interpretation from the
Perspective of Philosophy of Liberation. Transmodernity: Journal of Peripheral Cultural
Production of the Luso-Hispanic World, 1(3). Retrieved from
https://escholarship.org/uc/item/6591j76r
Pozzo, M.I. (2009). La enseñanza de las lenguas extranjeras en Argentina. Diàlogos
Latinoamericanos 15. Aarhus Universitet. Denmark. Retrieved from:
http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=16220868002
Maldonado Torres, N. (2012) Transmodernity. Thinking through the Decolonial Turn:
Post-continental Interventions in Theory, Philosophy, and Critique.
Noble et al. (1994). Western Civilization. The continuing experiment. Houghton Mifflin
Company.