The three models of World Englishes

1. Models of World Englishes

2. MODELS OF ENGLISH
Three scholars came up with rather similar models which aimed to characterise World Englishes within one conceptual set.
Tom McArthur’s ‘wheel model’ appeared in English Today in July 1987.
McArthur’s wheel conceives of a central variety called ‘World Standard English’ which is obviously an idealisation, and perhaps best
represented as ‘written international English’, though there are slight differences between written British and American norms.
The next circle round the hub is made of regional standards or standards that are emerging.
Finally, the outer layer comprises localised varieties which may have similarities with the regional standards or emerging standards.
2

3. The model is neat, though -- not surprisingly -- it raises problems we have
cited before.
The second circle has geographic coherence but conflates three very
different types: ENL, ESL and EFL.
• Some of the ENLs have a crystallised norm (UK and USA), but others are ambivalent
between a local (endogenous) versus an externally based (exogenous) standard -- e.g.
South Africa and Australia.
• ESLs may have standard or emerging standard varieties, but these are grammatically
stigmatized than ENLs in South Africa and Australia.
• The main problem with this layer is whether EFLs can be said to have ‘standardising’
forms or not. (This recalls the distinction between ‘performance’ and ‘institutionalised’
varieties.)
3

4. Also missing in this layer are the multitude of Englishes in Europe, which with the rise of the
European Union (EU) are becoming more visible than they used to be (see Cenoz and Jessner 2000).
Finally, the outside layer includes pidgins, Creoles and L2 Englishes.
Most scholars would argue that English pidgins and Creoles do not belong unambiguously to
family: rather they have overlapping multiple memberships.
4

5. 5

6. MANFRED GORLACH’S CIRCLE MODEL OF ENGLISH (BASED ON ¨
GORLACH 1990)
Some of these criticisms are met, not necessarily intentionally, in a model (see
Figure 1.2) presented by Manfred Gorlach at about the ¨
same time (1988).
Gorlach’s and McArthur’s models are reasonably similar.
6

7. Both exclude English varieties in Europe.
As Gorlach does not include EFLs at all, his model is more consistent
(though less complete).
Outside the circle are mixed varieties (pidgins, Creoles and mixed
languages involving English), which we have argued are better
characterised as having partial membership in the ELC.
7

8. 8

9. Braj Kachru’s model (see Figure 1.3), which appeared in English Today in 1988, conceptualises
Englishes more broadly and differently.
The circles are no longer concentric; there is no centre holding it all together.
Inner Circle varieties come closest to constituting such a centre but are conceived of as non-
monolithic -- they are influential ENL which are ‘norm providing’.
The Outer Circle comprises ESLs which have their own spoken norms but tend to rely on the
Outer Circle for models of formal written English especially.
The Expanding Circle comprises EFLs which have not developed internal norms and accordingly
rely on external norms.
9

10. Whilst seeming to be based on geography, Kachru’s model is actually based on
history and politics. It has the advantage of not treating English in say the
Phillipines and the UK as ‘on the same layer’, which the other two models do
(Phillipines English -- an ESL falls within the second circle of both McArthur’s and
Gorlach’s models, as does ‘British English’).
However, this political ¨ explicitness comes at a cost, in so far as Kachru does not
overtly position social and ethnic varieties within ‘Inner Circle countries’. Where,
for example, does Chicano English of the USA fit? Although Kachru also avoids
placing Euro-Englishes within his framework, they would
10

12. 12