Rakuten Paper tommycap
-
Upload
vijay-prakash -
Category
Documents
-
view
61 -
download
5
description
Transcript of Rakuten Paper tommycap
School of Education
Language, Discourse and Society
Sociolinguistics
Various sociolinguistic perspectives surrounding English-only policy at
Rakuten
Tomomi (Tommy) Cope
University of Leicester
School of Education
MA Applied Linguistics and TESOL
(Published on February 8, 2013.)
1
Various Sociolinguistic Perspectives surrounding English-only Policy at Rakuten Tomomi (Tommy) Cope
Contents
Introduction 3
General expectations of Englishnization 4
Sociolinguistic features in Japanese and Englishnization 5
Major effects on Englishnization 10
Language-based disparity and TOEIC 10
Absence of authenticity and interpretability 11
Hegemony and Cultural Identity (CI) 16
Englishnization from globalisation to glocalisation 17
Conclusion 17
2
Various Sociolinguistic Perspectives surrounding English-only Policy at Rakuten Tomomi (Tommy) Cope
Introduction
Although Japan is a monolingual country, the English language is
compulsory in their schools (Sakamoto, 2012). Doyle (2010) asserts that “English is
used in Japan normally for communication with or from people outside Japan. For many
people it is not even a normal event in daily life” (2010, 87). Based on Kachru’s three
‘circles’ of English theory (Crystal, 2003), Japan is involved in the expanding circle,
where they do not have a history of colonization by members of the inner circle, nor
have they given English any special administrative status, but where the importance of
English as an international language is recognised (2003).
However, because “World English exists as a political and cultural reality”
(Crystal, 2003, xii), English education “[is] advocated as a socio-economic imperative
pressured by the forces of globalisation” (Rivers, 2012, 257) in Japan. Unfortunately,
Japanese GDP as a portion of global GDP has been predicted to shrink from 12 % in
2006 to 3 % by 2050 (Goldman Sachs, as cited in Yee, 2012). This, coupled with a
decreasing population, is scaring many Japanese businesses (Yee, 2012). The
aforementioned have propelled Rakuten, Japan’s largest online retailer, to decide to go
global to exploit the overseas market (2012), and a project called ‘Englishnization’ has
been launched (Mikitani, 2012).
3
Various Sociolinguistic Perspectives surrounding English-only Policy at Rakuten Tomomi (Tommy) Cope
‘Englishnization’ was created by Mikitani, the chairman and CEO of Rakuten,
as the means of shifting the official corporate language from Japanese to English
(Rowan, 2012) as Mikitani believes that global expansion means speaking English
(BBC, 2012). Mikitani thinks that Englishnization is also a challenge for the English
education in Japan; “3000 hours at school” is “a major waste of time” (Mikitani, as
cited in Matsutani, 2012), and “it is rare to find a Japanese student who, after six years
of English, is able to engage in even a marginal dialogue with a speaker of English”
(Martin, as cited in Gil, 2010, 53). In this paper, this Mikitani’s Englishnization project
is examined from the sociolinguistic views by referring the local issues and the cultural
value in Japan.
General expectations of Englishnization
As a businessman, Mikitani finds cooperative benefits in Englishnization.
One benefit is the creation of a powerful synergy within the whole group via English as
a global communication tool (Mikitani, 2012) which helps mitigate “the ethnocentrism
in Japan” (Akaha, 1999, 173). Another benefit is faster access to worldwide information
which in turn helps Rakuten thrive (Rao, 2001: Lerman, et al., 2012).
Rakuten has acquired many subsidiary internet companies from US, Canada,
France, Germany, UK, Taiwan, Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia and China (Rakuten,
4
Various Sociolinguistic Perspectives surrounding English-only Policy at Rakuten Tomomi (Tommy) Cope
2012), and Mikitani believes that the sharing the same official language removes the
segregated ‘glass ceiling’ (WSJ, 2010) perceptions among non-Japanese speaker
employees, creating an “international engagement”(Rivers, 2012, 258) within Rakuten
staff (Mikitani, 2012). Rivers (2012) explains “international engagement” is “the
position of English as a liberator of individual expression as well as a means of
engaging with the world as an imagined entity beyond Japan” (2012, 258). Mikitani
hopes that English will enable his Japanese staff to be more accessible to outsiders as
well as becoming more expressive to the world (Mikitani, cited as in Matsutani, 2012).
Sociolinguistic features in Japanese and Englishnization
As Crystal (2003) notes that “[a] language is the repository of the history of a
people. It is their identity. […] It is their legacy to the rest of humanity” (2003
, 20), Japan possesses unique cultural values deeply associated with the Japanese
language (Haghirian, 2010), and it is a crucial factor for the Westerners to understand
these values when they work with traditional Japanese firms (2010).
Mikitani recognises English as a more suitable business language than
Japanese (Mikitani, 2012). Yee, the head of Englishnization project of Rakuten explains
[Mikitani] wants staff to understand that they can break down all
boundaries and barriers by using English, a language with very few
markers of underlying power relationships. There is a power dynamic
in the Japanese language that is immediately apparent. […] One of the
5
Various Sociolinguistic Perspectives surrounding English-only Policy at Rakuten Tomomi (Tommy) Cope
first gambits in a conversation is to ascertain the power relationship at
issue. First you have to clarify imply your age in a conversation;
second, you voice your academic background or your bloodline, and
because of that, the language in Japanese then shifts toward that
relationship. This is very apparent to Japanese people; they are very
conscious of it at all times. Moreover, Japanese business is
characterized by a very, very strong hierarchical structure that is
obvious in the language that is used (Yee, as cited in Neeley, 2011, 4).
As Yee asserts above, there are the varieties of honorific discourse depending on the
societal relationships among people (Moeran, 1988), and the implicit expressions are
distinctive features in Japanese (Haghirian, 2010), and these linguistic features provide
psychological restrictions to discourse (Midooka, 1990).
1. Keigo (honorifics)
Japanese possesses degrees of the linguistic expressions based on societal
relationship between the speaker and listener (Fujiwara, 2004). When people talk to
their superiors, they use Keigo, a language difference from that which they use to
communicate with those in equivalent or lower ranks (Midooka, 1990: De Mente, cited
as Haghilian, 2010). Keigo refers to the distinctive style or speech or writing used to
show respect to persons, and it is further divided into three categories: sonkei-go
(respectful words), kenjo-go (humble words), and teinei-go (polite words) (Haghilian,
2010).
Fukushima (2007) says the correct use of keigo is vital to a reputation of an
6
Various Sociolinguistic Perspectives surrounding English-only Policy at Rakuten Tomomi (Tommy) Cope
individual and their organisation (2007). Basically, if someone wishes to start
conversing in Japanese, they need to gauge the societal position of their listener quickly
and utilize the appropriate level of honorific language. Misuse of honorific language can
be fatal in anyone’s relationship, as someone who feels slighted may respond ‘Kuchi-no
kikikata wo shiranai’ ([he] does not know how to talk to other people) (Seward, 1992).
Tameguchi (Okamoto, 2011), an alternative style of discourse which ignores
traditional honorific language in Japanese, is very popular among younger generations.
As Tameguchi ignores the honorific rules of Japanese, it is considered unprofessional
and unacceptable in the business world. Japanese discourse has such a strict restriction
of honorific rules, and in this respect, fair, non-hierarchically biased discourse is hardly
established.
2. Avoidance of the First name
Mikitani also orders all staff to wear a name tag with only their first name
written on it and to call each other by their first names only at work (Mikitani, 2012).
The aim of this is to remove the hierarchical markings of Japanese (2012). The summon
style shifts depending on the power relationships between the speaker and the listener in
Japanese (Midooka, 1990).
At a traditional Japanese workplace, a superior can call a subordinate by his
7
Various Sociolinguistic Perspectives surrounding English-only Policy at Rakuten Tomomi (Tommy) Cope
or her surname e.g. Suzuki-san (Mr. Suzuki). However, when someone uses a superior’s
surname, they either attach the superior’s occupational title after it, e.g. Suzuki Kacho
(Suzuki, Section-manager) or the subordinate completely omits the personal name of
the superior, calling them by their occupational title, e.g. Kacho (Section manager)
(Midooka, 1990).
Toyama (1992) notes this omission originates from fear of a superior
existence which possesses some power that is very similar to the ‘fear of god’ (1992,
169). People sense the power of person A over B if person A calls person B’s first name
instead of surname. That is the reason why Japanese people do not use the first names in
business. In Japan, generally calling someone’s first name implies a special, intimate
relationship between the caller and the receiver (1992), or the indication of some
overwhelming power over the receiver’s first name. Thus, people’s first names are not
used at work, a stark contrast with the use of first names in Britain. Therefore,
Mikitani’s ‘first names’ directive had a direct impact on employee relationships
(Mikitani, 2012).
3. Wa and implicitness in Japanese language
Hall and Hall (cited as Haghirian, 2010) defines the indirect expressions of
Japanese language as a high-context communication, which comes from the idea of Wa,
8
Various Sociolinguistic Perspectives surrounding English-only Policy at Rakuten Tomomi (Tommy) Cope
meaning “keeping peaceful relations with others” (Midooka, 1990). Midooka explains
Wa is the idea the Japanese give the highest priority comparative with Westerners
(1990). The high-context communication means that Japanese communication is
considered to be highly dependent on contexts: every message is surrounded by some
unspoken information that both communicators are supposed to understand (Hall and
Hall, cited as in Haghirian, 2010). The message can only be correctly understood if both
communicators share a context and know or sense what the other person intends to say
(Kachru, 2008: Haghirian, 2010). A Japanese speaker’s ‘maybe’ comment can be
interpreted as ‘no’, as he expressed his feelings with honorific ‘no’ in a less direct
manner (Kameda, 2001: Haghirian, 2010).
Conversely, Western communication is considered low context as the
content is the exact message and there is no invisible message beyond the words
exchanged (Haghirian, 2010: Stadler, 2013), such as ‘no’ is always ‘no’ to Westerners.
In accordance with a low context style, Rakuten monitors the Japanese employees’
talking strategies by using a checklist (See Appendix 1) during an in-house meeting in
English to eliminate the ambiguous expressions, as this feature can be observed even
when they speak English (Fujiwara, 2004).
9
Various Sociolinguistic Perspectives surrounding English-only Policy at Rakuten Tomomi (Tommy) Cope
Major effects on Englishnization
1. Language-based social disparity and TOEIC assessment
Although Japanese hierarchical markings may have been eliminated as
intended, a new hierarchy comes instead: the hierarchy based on English proficiency.
Englishnization means Japanese language ban to many native Japanese speakers in
Rakuten (Matsutani, 2010). Tsuda (as cited in Rivers, 2012, 256) complains that “what
greater anomaly is there than to be unable to communicate in your native tongue in your
own country?” Englishnization surely makes Rakuten a more attractive company to
‘global talents’(Yee, 2012) who have no difficulty speaking English, but, in return,
Englishnization risks putting non-native English employees in more disadvantageous
situations at work just because they are less expressive than before.
However, the new hierarchism is not just based on the inferior feelings
(Rivers, 2012) among people who think they are not very English literate. The disparity
comes from the TOEIC scores (ETS, 2013). Rakuten has introduced the TOEIC testing
system to assess the employees’ English proficiency (Matsutani, 2010: Rakuten, 2012;
See Appendix 2). It is literary the key for the survival at Rakuten, as they need to mark a
certain score for a certain position, and you need higher TOEIC scores to get promoted.
Additionally, you may be demoted if you attain low scores.
10
Various Sociolinguistic Perspectives surrounding English-only Policy at Rakuten Tomomi (Tommy) Cope
The use of TOEIC is also controversial as there are arguments that TOEIC is
not comprehensive as a measurement of English proficiency (Chapman and Newfields,
2008). The scores are the result of the entire multiple-choice formatted test, and over
half the questions in this test are focused on the sentence-level comprehension rather
than the discourse-level (2008).
2. Absence of authenticity and interpretability
The environmental difference between Englishnization and a historical
colonization (Crystal, 2003) is a lack of exposures versus constant exposures.
Autonomous correction by noticing which happens during natural interactions between
native speakers (Tudini, 2003) is missing. Additionally, members who share the same
cultural values mainly interact in the same language which therefore does not raise the
awareness of interpretability (Katchru, 2008) at all.
In Rakuten’s case, some sections have native English speakers, but many
sections do not, especially the sections which are dealing with domestic issues
(Matsutani, 2010). They consist mainly of native Japanese only and the absence of
native English speakers creates the output-only situation with lacks authenticity.
Considering the linguistic environment in Rakuten’s case, interaction practices are
limited among non-native Japanese speakers which share the same cultural value, and
11
Various Sociolinguistic Perspectives surrounding English-only Policy at Rakuten Tomomi (Tommy) Cope
implementation is carrying on without much exposure of the’ inner-circle’(Crystal,
2003) English speaker. Consequently, the lack of authenticity affects the whole level of
Smith’s definition of ‘Intelligibility’ (Smith, as cited in Kachru, 2008), especially on the
level of interpretability (Kachru, 2008). Under these circumstances, interpretability, the
highest level of ‘Intelligibility’, is difficult to improve as it relates to inter-cultural
communication (2008).
Toyoda and Harrison (as cited in Tudini, 2003) observed the nine categories
of the cause of difficulty in communication between Japanese native speakers (NS) and
non-native speakers (NNS): “recognition of new word, misuse of word, pronunciation
error, grammatical error, inappropriate segmentation, abbreviated sentence, sudden topic
change, slow response, and inter-cultural communication gap” (Toyoda and Harrison, as
cited in Tudini, 2003, 152). Smith (as cited in Kachru, 2008) defines interpretability as
the highest components of ‘Intelligibility’ followed by intelligibility as the lowest level
and comprehensibility as the next higher level (See figure 1).
Kachru (2008) explains three levels of ‘Intelligibility’. The first two,
intelligibility and comprehensibility refer to the level of “sound and parsing of
utterances into recognizable or plausible words, phrases, sentences, etc” (2008, 310).
Level 1, intelligibility, is being able to approximate a representation of sounds heard by
12
Various Sociolinguistic Perspectives surrounding English-only Policy at Rakuten Tomomi (Tommy) Cope
writing them down. Level 2, comprehensibility involves assigning meaning to
utterances, and parsing what one hears into words, phrases, sentences, etc. It is also the
level of verbal interaction that leads to difficulties in conversations when someone
suddenly uses a word in an unexpected context. Kachru shows an example of a ‘blue
seal’ as the collocation itself is intelligible, but the sentence ‘His parents disapprove of
his blue seal’ is a case of high intelligibility, low comprehensibility. In this case, ‘blue
seal’ means a foreign friend in Philippine English.
Level 3, Interpretability is the level of “a matter of construction that can be
put upon verbal acts by interlocutors in social interaction” (Kachru, 2008, 311). Kachru
explains the highest level, interpretability as
Beyond recognition of the medium and its elements (intelligibility)
and recognition of meanings that may reasonably be assigned to
words, phrases, and sentences (comprehensibility) within a specific
context, addresses perceive the purpose and intent of an utterance
(Kachru, 2008, 310).
Kachru quotes the phrase “Dinner is ready”, and the child comes in, washes her hands,
and sits down the dinner table as a clear indication she has interpreted “the intent and
purpose of her mother’s utterance correctly” (Kachru, 2008, 311). This is about
interpretability. Culture can be defined as “shared knowledge” (2008, 311), i.e. what
people “must know in order to act as they do, make the things they make, and interpret
their experience in the distinctive way they do” (Quinn and Holland, as cited in Kachru,
13
Various Sociolinguistic Perspectives surrounding English-only Policy at Rakuten Tomomi (Tommy) Cope
2008, 311). As figure 1 suggests, the greater the sociocultural difference between two
people is, the lower the Intelligibility level score reaches.
Interpretability is also a degree which indicates a different sociocultural
expectation of what is appropriate behaviour in the situation (Kachru, 2008) between
person A and person B. Interpretability depends on interaction, as less exposure to
different sociocultural expectations reduces the degree of interpretability;
smal
Figure 1: Three levels of “Intelligibility”
(Smith, 1992, as cited in Kach
(Smith, Smith and Nelson, as cited in Kachru, 2008)
Fig.1: The relationship between Socio-cultural differences and Intelligibility
In Rakuten’s case, TOEIC may improve some intelligibility and
comprehensibility to a certain extent, but as the test is not interactive, and the
negotiation skills are not gained by the one-way input and without exposure of the
Level 1: intelligibility
Level 2: comprehensibility
Level 3:
Interpretability
Socio-cultural difference
14
Various Sociolinguistic Perspectives surrounding English-only Policy at Rakuten Tomomi (Tommy) Cope
people who possess different sociocultural values, improving the higher level,
interpretability, which is associated with inter-cultural communication, is very difficult
to achieve.
One example observed at the cafeteria of Rakuten is “Rice corner: Sorry,
another serving is not accepted” (WSJ, 2010; See Appendix 3a). The intelligibility and
comprehensibility are high, but the expression resembles the discourse at bank, ‘this
card is not accepted’. Native English speakers could come up with a better expression,
such as ‘One portion per person only’. This discourse proves the case of lack of
authenticity.
Another signboard for milk in Rakuten’s cafeteria demonstrates an instance
where interpretability is low: “Milk: ¥80: What a great calcium-rich milk: Strengthen
bones. Eliminating annoying. How do you like it with bread?? ” ( WSJ, 2010; See
Appendix 3b) Kachru explains that “the discourse sounds like English, so its
intelligibility is high; but some of the information is difficult to recover, and therefore its
comprehensibility is low” (Kachru, 2008, 310). They would like to appeal the nutritious
benefits of milk to recommend that people to drink it, but this discourse is peculiar.
However, if translated back into Japanese, this sentence starts making sense instantly, as
a typical Japanese discourse style: ‘Karushium tappuri no miruku desu.(=This milk
15
Various Sociolinguistic Perspectives surrounding English-only Policy at Rakuten Tomomi (Tommy) Cope
contains a lot of calcium.) [If you drink this, it makes] Honebuto.(=[your] bone
strong).[and] Iraira kaisyou.(= it calms you down). Pan to issho ni ikaga desuka.(=
Why you are not trying this milk with bread?)’ This proves that this discourse was
uttered initially in Japanese, as Kachru (2008) notes “in Japanese cultural values and
conventions of polite behaviour that manifest themselves in the verbal exchange” (2008,
316). Very low interpretability like this also proves the lack of authenticity.
Mikitani’s statement “we are not requiring native level, but the courage to
express what they want to say ”(Matsutani, 2012) is questionable, even though he made
this comment to relieve the pressure of Englishnization, as this ‘advice’ does not
contribute to interpretability among his Japanese employees. Additionally, his comment
is not relevant to the actual workplace. Rakuten, as an internet retailer requires “the
language-centered work process with a high degree of complexity” (McAll, 2003, 238).
3. Hegemony and Cultural Identity (CI)
Another issue is the fear of “squandering of human resources” as “they
heighten the likelihood that people who can’t do their jobs, but speak English would be
given higher evaluations than people who can do their jobs but can’t speak English”
(Botting, as cited in Rivers, 2012, 7). Englishnization establishes a new hegemony
(Friedman, 2000: Gotti, 2007) at the workplace and threatens the non-native English
16
Various Sociolinguistic Perspectives surrounding English-only Policy at Rakuten Tomomi (Tommy) Cope
speakers’ Cultural Identity (CI) ( Tsuda, as cited in Rivers, 2012).
A diagram which contrasts hegemony versus homogeny as cultural
‘homogeneity’ (Friedman, 2000, 38) in Rakuten’s case is shown in Appendix 4.
Englishnization as the denial of multilingualism risks establishing the monolinguistic
view (Crystal, 2003: Gil, 2010), and places Japanese people in a difficult position as
they struggle to maintain a sense of ‘Japanesness’ and their CI (Kobayashi, as cited in
Rivers, 2012, 265).
Englishnization from globalisation to glocalisation
In the long term, the role of English is expected to play not only within the
‘global’ context, but also the ‘glocal’ context (Rivers, 2012, 263) meaning “English
language skills will be highly valued within the ‘domestic context’” (2012, 263). In
other words, Rakuten’s experiment (Mikitani, 2012) would be a “worthwhile exercise in
increasing awareness of rapidity by which the forces of globalization are influencing
domestic workplace environments”(Rivers, 2012, 263). Rakuten English is developing
in Rakuten’s local context (Stephens, 2011), and “more autonomous or self-focused
identities” (Jensen, et al., 2011, 297) are challenging to Rakuten people.
Conclusion
Rakuten’s Englishnization is conducted according to the need to thrive as an
17
Various Sociolinguistic Perspectives surrounding English-only Policy at Rakuten Tomomi (Tommy) Cope
internet business which is a part of ‘going global’ trend. The project also aims to break
the traditional Japanese ethno-central customaries and the hierarchical boundaries which
are deeply associated with Japanese language itself. However, it raises new issues, such
as interpretability issues as a result of the forced implementation of English which
ignores the real circumstances within the workplace. The assessment of TOEIC scores
creates a new hierarchy based on English literacy and the new standard threatens
people’s CI. In the long term, Englishnization will be transformed from globalisation to
glocalisation. The establishment of autonomous and self-focused identity will be
expected by people in the workplace. More empirical research is needed to ascertain the
benefits and deficits.
Word: 3,269.
18
Various Sociolinguistic Perspectives surrounding English-only Policy at Rakuten Tomomi (Tommy) Cope
References
Akaha, T. (1999) Three Faces of Japan: Nationalist, Regionalist, Globalist Futures. In
Y. Yamamoto, Globalism, Regionalism and Nationalism, Oxford: Blackwell.
BBC (2012) Japanese online retailer Rakuten to compete globally. In BBC News,
Business, October 24, 2012. Accessed from
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-20053030.
Chapman, M. & Newfields, T. (2008) The ‘New’ TOEIC. Shiken: JALT Testing &
Evaluation SIG Newsletter, Vol.12/2, Apr. 2008, 32-37. JALT.
Crystal, D. (2003) English as a Global Language. 2nd
Ed., Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Doyle, H. (2010) English as Pidgin or Creole: one guise of English in the world.
Kokusai Shakai Bunka Kenkyu, Vol.11, 71-96, Research reports of Department of
International Studies, Faculty of Humanities and Economics, Kochi University.
Retrieved on January 5, 2013, from
https://ir.kochi-u.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/10126/5058/1/11-4howard.pdf
ETS (2013) TOEIC. Accessed January 10, 2013 from http://www.ets.org/toeic/.
Fujiwara, Y. (2004) An Intercultural Pragmatics Study on Japanese Resistivitiy and
American Acceptability in Refusals. Intercultural Communication Studies, XIII, 2,
19
Various Sociolinguistic Perspectives surrounding English-only Policy at Rakuten Tomomi (Tommy) Cope
75-99.
Friedman, J. (2000) General historical and culturally specific properties of global
systems. In Cultural Identity & Global Process, 15-41. London: Sage Publications
Ltd.
Fukushima, T. (2007) Simulation in JFL: Business writing. Simulation & Gaming.
Gil, J. (2010) The double danger of English as a global language. English Today 101,
Vol.26/1. 51-56. Cambridge University Press.
Gotti, M. (2007) Globalisation and Discursive Changes in Specialised Contexts. In N.
Fairclough, G. Cortese & P. Ardizzone (eds.), Discourse and contemporary social
change, 143- 172, Bern: Peter Lang AG.
Haghirian, P. (2010) Succeeding as a foreign manage in a Japanese firm. In
Understanding Japanese management practices, New York: Business Expert Press,
125-135.
Jensen, L., Arnett, J. & McKenzie, J. (2011) Globalization and Cultural Identity. In
Handbook of Identity theory and Research, S.J. Schwartz et al.(eds). Springer
Science and Business Media. 285-301. Retrieved January 12, 2013 from
http://www. springerlink.com/index/V8K8143J53450X02.pdf.
Kachru, Y. (2008) Cultures, contexts, and interpretablility. World Englishes, Vol.27,
20
Various Sociolinguistic Perspectives surrounding English-only Policy at Rakuten Tomomi (Tommy) Cope
No.3/4, 309-318.
Kameda, N. (2001) The implication of language style in business communication: focus
on English versus Japanese, Corporate Communications: An International Journal,
Vol.6/3, 144-149.
Lerman,K, Ghosh, R. & Surachawala, T. (2012) Social contagion: An empirical study
of information spread on Digg and Twitter follower graphs. USC Information
Sciences Institute, Marina Del Rey, CA, USA & Computer Science Dept.,
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA, arXiv:1202.3162.
retrieved from
http://arxiv.org/abs/1202.3162.
Matsutani, M. (2010) Rakuten forces all workers to speak English by 2012. The
University Times, Vol.3, August, 2010. Retrieved January 10, 2013 from
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/u_times/pdf/vol_03/ut_vol_03.pdf.
Matsutani, M. (2012) Rakuten’s English drive ready to take full effect, chief says. In the
Japan Times on line, June 30, 2012. Accessed January 10, 2013 from
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/text/nn20120630a7.html.
McAll, C. (2003) Language Dynamics in the Bi-and Mutilingual Workplace. In R.
Bayley & S. Schecter (eds.), Language Socialization in Bilingual and Multilingual
Societies, Clevedon : Multilingual Matters, Ltd.
21
Various Sociolinguistic Perspectives surrounding English-only Policy at Rakuten Tomomi (Tommy) Cope
Midooka, K. (1990) Characteristics of Japanese-style communication, Media, Culture &
Society, Vol.12/4, 477-489.
Mikitani, H. (2012) Takaga Eigo (Just English): Englishnization. Tokyo: Kodansya.
Moeran, B. (1988) Japanese language and society: An anthropological approach.
Journal of Pragmatics, Vol.12/4, 427 – 443.
Neeley, T. (2011) Language and Globalization: “Englishnization” at Rakuten. Harvard
Business School, 9-412-002, Rev.: October 11, 2011.
Okamoto, S. (2011) The use of interpretation of addressee honorifics and plain forms in
Japanese: Diversity, multiplicity, and ambiguity. Journal of Pragmatics, Vol.43,
3673-3688.
Rakuten, Inc. (2012) Rakuten Worldwide, Global Services. November 26,2012.
Accessed January 15, 2013 from
http://global.rakuten.com/corp/worldwide/global.html.
Rao, P. (2001) The ICT revolution, internationalization of technological activity, and
the emerging economies: implications for global marketing. International Business
Review, Vol.10/5, 571-596. Seward, J.(1992) Outrageous Japanese: slang, curses &
epithets. Tokyo:C.E.Tuttle.
Rivers, D.J. (2012) Modelling the perceived value of compulsory English language
22
Various Sociolinguistic Perspectives surrounding English-only Policy at Rakuten Tomomi (Tommy) Cope
education in undergraduate non-language majors of Japanese nationality. Journal of
Multilingual and Multicultural Development, Vol.33/3, 251-267.
Rowan, D. (2012) From Pinterest to Kobo, how Japan's Rakuten is building a global
internet giant. Magazine, Wired.co.uk, August 22, 2012. Retrieved on January 5,
2013, from
http://www.wired.co.uk/magazine/archive/2012/09/features/man-on-a-mission?page
=all&utm_source=buffer&buffer_share=447b2
Sakamoto, M. (2012) Moving towards effective English language teaching in Japan:
issues and challenges. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development,
Vol.33/4, 409-420
Saw, M. (2010) Interview. In English 101, Courtesy of Rakuten. August, 6. The Wall
Street Journal, Japan. [video clip.] from 3.15 to 3.29 accessed January 16, 2013
from
tp://bloas.wsj.com/japanrealtime/2010/08/06/english-101-courtesy-of-rakuten/
Seward, J. (1992) Outrageous Japanese: slang, curses & epithets. Tokyo: C.E. Tuttle.
Stadler, S. (2013) Cross-Cultural Pragmatics. The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics.
Stephens, M. (2011) Response to Gil: The double danger of English as global language.
English Today, Vol.27/1, 35-37.
23
Various Sociolinguistic Perspectives surrounding English-only Policy at Rakuten Tomomi (Tommy) Cope
Toyama, S. (1992) Eigono Hasso, Nihongono Hasso [English ideas; Japanese ideas],
Tokyo: NHK Publishing Co., Ltd.
Tudini, V. (2003) Using Native Speakers in Chat, Language Learning & Technology,
Vol.7/3, 141-159.
Wetzel, P. (1988) Are “powerless” communication strategies the Japanese norm.
Language in Society, Vol.17/4, December, 555-564.
WSJ.com. (2010) English 101, Courtesy of Rakuten. August, 6. The Wall Street Journal,
Japan. [video clip.] accessed January 16, 2013 from
http://blogs.wsj.com/japanrealtime/2010/08/06/english-101-courtesy-of-rakuten/.
Yee, K. (2012) Englishnization and Engineering- How Rakuten Supports Engineers. In
a lecture at Rakuten Technology Conference 2012, October 20, 2012. [Video clip
from Youtube.] Accessed on January 5, 2013 from
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=1p1StXyx5GQ
24
Various Sociolinguistic Perspectives surrounding English-only Policy at Rakuten Tomomi (Tommy) Cope
Appendix 1 13
Appendix 1. : Englishnization In-house Meeting Audit Template (Neeley, 2011, 13)
25
Various Sociolinguistic Perspectives surrounding English-only Policy at Rakuten Tomomi (Tommy) Cope
Appendix 2: TOEIC Score Zone Definition
Employee
Grade
Not Reached
(RED)
Not Reached
(YELLOW)
Not Reached
(ORANGE)
Reached Target
(GREEN)
AAA -550 551-650 651-749 750-
AA -500 501-600 601-699 700-
A -450 451-550 551-649 650-
BBB -400 401-500 501-599 600-
BB -400 401-500 501-599 600-
B -400 401-500 501-599 600-
(Yee, 2012)
Note: Each employee who falls into each employee grade has to reach green target zone for the
TOEIC scores. For example, Grade AAA class-managers have to achieve at least 750 points of TOEIC
score.
Red Zone: More than 200 points away from target
Yellow Zone: Between 100-199 points away from target
Orange Zone: Between 1-99 points away from target
Green Zone: Score meets or exceeds target
26
Various Sociolinguistic Perspectives surrounding English-only Policy at Rakuten Tomomi (Tommy) Cope
Appendix 3: Signboard displays in Rakuten cafeteria (WSJ, 2010)
a)
A signboard display on the rice serving counter (WSJ, 2010)
b) At the milk counter (1) - At the milk counter (2)
(WSJ, 2010) (WSJ, 2010)
- At the milk counter (3)
(WSJ, 2010)
27
Various Sociolinguistic Perspectives surrounding English-only Policy at Rakuten Tomomi (Tommy) Cope
Appendix. 4. The diagram of contrasting hegemony versus homogeny in Rakuten’s case
based on Friedman’s figure (Friedman, 2000, 39):
Cultural
identity Hegemony
Centralization
“Japanese-ness”
own cultural value
Resistance
*Cultural decline
Modernism
Homogeny
No Japanese
Inferior feelings
Worries, fears
Global integrity <= to overseas: not being alienated feelings: ‘Japan is not special to us’
Sharing the same langue = feeling like sharing same value
Denial of traditional hierarchy backed up Japanese language
- using first names
- no hororific language
- direct mannar = clear statement: Yes/No apparent
- lower context dependant from context dependant
Linguistic effect: switching from Japanese to English
Switchin from Japanese
Language proficiency division /
discrimination: Japanese employees
with poor English are devaluated at
work.
-TOEIC scores affect salary
-linguistic threats
Dominant ideology, Nationalism