Suresh Canagarajah encourages instructors to challenge linguistic hierarchies by outlining several ways to accommodate diverse varieties of English from across the globe into their classroom’s academic writing practices. So-called “native” varieties of English, which he calls Metropolitan Englishes (MEs) and that are typically spoken by communities that claimed ownership over English (i.e. England, The United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand) have generally been privileged over “World Englishes” (WEs), which evolved within communities that had English imposed on them through colonization (p. 588). However, with the number of multilingual English speakers now exceeding ‘native’ speakers, English has increasingly become a language used primarily in multilingual contexts worldwide (p. 589). Canagarajah argues that this development should compel instructors to treat English as a multinational language that embodies multiple norms and standards. These varieties of English belong to diverse communities, not just metropolitan communities (MEs) (p. 589) and may be used on their own or through code-meshing practices.
Canagarajah contends that “English varieties shouldn’t be treated as relevant and functional only within their respective communities of origination—i.e., Indian English for India, and Nigerian English for Nigeria” (p. 590). To be functional global citizens within these increasingly transnational contexts, students must also learn how to be proficient in and utilize a vast repertoire of WEs (p. 591). Thus, Canagarajah advocates for shifting away from helping students master a single “target language” (via the application of normative grammatical rules) and towards teaching students communicative strategies that allow them to negotiate the linguistic norms across diverse contexts, shuttle between different speech communities and develop their own repertoires of English varieties (pp. 592–593).
Allowing students to meaningfully incorporate their own varieties into their academic work where it is relevant, appropriate, and strategically beneficial not only values and validates those varieties but also lessens their personal inhibitions against the dominant codes of Standard Written English (SWE, traditionally associated with MEs). This also makes it easier for students to learn and improve both their SWE and other English varieties (pp. 592–593). The strategic combination of multiple varieties of English is called code-meshing (p. 598), and it is a discursive practice that allows students to actively participate in the process of challenging, deconstructing, demystifying and gradually changing the norms that determine what forms of communication are considered legitimate (pp. 599–601).
Canagarajah, A. S. (2006). The place of world Englishes in composition: Pluralization continued. College Composition and Communication, 57(4), 586–619.