While education policymakers in Asian polities find it difficult to resist the English language which has attained a new status in “late capitalism”, prevailing policy-level perceptions also suggest that a ruthless adoption of English may undermine national languages, identities and cultures. Despite the heightened commercialisation of English as a global language this policy dilemma raises some critical questions. For example, how can individual entrepreneurs also acting as “language policy actors” effectively promote for-profit English teaching ventures without being accused of compromising national interests, identities and traditions? This article makes a modest attempt towards addressing these questions by conducting a critical analysis of Li Yang’s English teaching venture called “Crazy English” in China and its underlying discourses.
From a sample of English teaching resources available on its official website, this paper identifies and discusses four major discourses on the relationship between English and individual entrepreneurship in English on the one hand and Chinese and China’s national values and interests on the other.
This paper argues that collectively these discourses represent a model of “edu-business” in English language teaching that reconciles the dichotomies between nationalism and post-nationalism, individualism and collectivism and public and private interests in a neoliberal world.
With the onset of globalisation and its impact on all aspects of life including the economy, education and communication, there have been on-going debates on the emerging tensions between the nation-state and the forces of trans/post-nationalism, the latter being underpinned by neo-liberalism. These tensions have also been observed in the fields of English and English language education. While research has examined how macro-level policymakers respond to globalisation through their English language policies, there has been limited work on how individual language policy actors engaged in the commercialisation of English reconcile the apparently irreconcilable forces of nationalism and post-nationalism. The contribution of the present article lies in illustrating a case that seeks to reconcile these forces through discourses and discursive strategies.
