Challenging Native-Speakerism in Academic Discourse: A Cor-pusBased Critical Discourse Analysis of Language Education Research
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61100/tacit.v4i2.365Keywords:
Native-Speakerism, Corpus-Based Critical Discourse Analysis, Academic Discourse, Language Education, Global EnglishesAbstract
This study examines the representation of NS/NNS terminology in language education research using a corpus-based critical discourse analysis. The corpus consisted of 94 English-language journal articles published between 1994 and 2026. Quantitative corpus techniques, including frequency, collocation, concordance, and semantic prosody analyses, were integrated with Fairclough's three-dimensional critical discourse analysis framework. The findings reveal four major patterns. First, over 70% of native speaker occurrences are used descriptively without conceptual clarification, indicating their naturalization within academic writing. Second, only 3.1% of the occurrences explicitly challenge the traditional NS/NNS dichotomy. Third, a clear contradiction exists between researchers' critical perspectives on native-speakerism and their continued use of conventional terminology in empirical reporting. Finally, only around 10% of the analyzed articles adopt alternative conceptual frameworks, demonstrating that conceptual transformation remains limited. These findings indicate that academic discourse functions not only as a site of critical reflection but also as a mechanism for reproducing native-speakerist ideology. The study highlights the need for greater critical language awareness, more inclusive terminology, and institutional support to advance the decolonization of English language education.
References
Baker, P., & Levon, E. (2015). Picking the right cherries? A comparison of corpus-based and qualitative anal-yses of news articles about masculinity. Discourse & Communication, 9(2), 221–236. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750481314568542
Biber, D. (1994). Representativeness in Corpus Design. In Current Issues in Computational Linguistics: In Honour of Don Walker (pp. 377–407). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-585-35958-8_20
Brown, K. (2025). Discourse Theory, Critical Discourse Studies and Corpus Linguistics. Springer Nature Switzer-land. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-98952-0
Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing Discourse Textual Analysis for Social Research. Routledge.
Guo, Y. (2024). The Prevailing Issue of Native Speakerism: A Critical Discourse Analysis of ELT Institutions’ Websites. Journal of Modern Languages, 34(1), 78–97. https://doi.org/10.22452/jml.vol34no1.5
Hiratsuka, T. (2025). Native-speakerism and trans-speakerism in ELT: Interpretations, manifestations, and ramifications. System, 128, 103543. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2024.103543
Holliday, A. (2006). Native-speakerism. ELT Journal, 60(4), 385–387. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccl030
Holliday, A. (2015). Native-speakerism: Taking the Concept Forward and Achieving Cultural Belief. In (En)Countering Native-speakerism (pp. 11–25). Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137463500_2
Holliday, A. (2018). Native‐Speakerism. In The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching (pp. 1–7). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118784235.eelt0027
Jenkins, J. (2006). The spread of EIL: a testing time for testers. ELT Journal, 60(1), 42–50. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/cci080
Jeong, H., Lindemann, S., & Forsberg, J. (2022). English Phonology in a Globalized World: Challenging Native Speakerism through Listener Training in Universities in Sweden and the US. Recherches Anglaises et Nord-Américaines, 55, 135–153. https://doi.org/10.4000/ranam.951
Khany, R., Mofrad, K. K., Barzan, P., & Samaie, M. (2024). Native-Speakerism in Favor of Target Culture: Fair-clough’s Practical Reasoning Framework. Applied Linguistics Inquiry, 2(1), 75–88.
Krippendorff, K. (2019). Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology. SAGE Publications, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781071878781
Luo, Y., Friginal, E., & Wu, P. (2026). Challenging or reinforcing the “native speaker” divide? A corpus-informed critical discourse study of linguistic identity in language education journal articles. Linguistics and Education, 94, 101559. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2026.101559
Marino, F. (2026). “We don’t say ‘To-r Ó-nto. We say ‘To-r Ó-no.” Language ideologies on TikTok. System, 136, 103897. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2025.103897
Nigar, N., Kostogriz, A., & Hossain, I. (2025). Hybrid professional identities: exploring non-native English-speaking teachers’ lived experiences through the Cyborg Manifesto. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 33(5), 1745–1767. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681366.2024.2409731
Ortega, L. (2014). Understanding Second Language Acquisition. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203777282
Sameephet, B. (2025). Decolonising the TESOL Curriculum in Thailand through Global Englishes: A Wake-up Call. LEARN Journal: Language Education and Acquisition Research Network, 18(2), 594–632. https://doi.org/10.70730/OONQ6505
Swartz, J. J. (2013). J.C. Richards and T.S. Rodgers: Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching: A de-scription and analysis. Per Linguam, 3(2). https://doi.org/10.5785/3-2-474
Tupas, R. (2022). The coloniality of native speakerism. Asian Englishes, 24(2), 147–159. https://doi.org/10.1080/13488678.2022.2056797
Xiao, Y. (2011). Academic Discourse: English in a Global Context. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 10(3), 198–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2010.02.009
Yazan, B., & Rudolph, N. (2018). Criticality, Teacher Identity, and (In)equity in English Language Teaching (B. Yazan & N. Rudolph, Eds.; Vol. 35). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-72920-6
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Technology and Society Perspectives (TACIT)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
