The ownership of English
Perspective
of referring to communication in English between speakers with different first languages. In a similar vein, Jenkins 2000, 2009 posits the international interaction between NNS-NNS,
while Holliday 2005 is aware of the tendency to exclude NS because the NS norms can hinder a NNS. However, as the discussion of the global use of English covers all users
Ferguson, 2009, in her more recent study, Jenkins 2012 argues that NS is still a part of this ELF communication with the expectation that NS will adjust their “habitual modes of
recep tion and production” in the interaction p. 487. In spite of her seminal works in ELF,
Jenkins still highlights the fact that there are a greater number of NNS than NS who are using English 2009, 2012.
Furthermore, Conrad and Mauranen 2003 view ELF as a variety of English in ELT. Yet, it raises some disagreement because the term ‘variety’ for NNS-NNS interaction does not add a
new stable speech community because of the emergence of various indigenised Englishes which cause pluricentric interaction Maley, 2009, Prodromou, 2007. Cogo 2012 modifies
these ideas, stating that ELF occurs in a community of practice with fluidity, variability and creativity where ELF is value-laden according to multicomponent speakers. Maley 2009
sets the example of many interactions among NSs, outer-cirle nativised users, and expanding-circle users. Obviously, the concept of World Englishes embraces ELF as it
acknowledges the equal status of the varieties of Englishes owned by diverse users Berns et al., 2009. As a result, the use of varieties of English are acceptable in communication as
bilingual resources for code switching and code mixing to bridge ELF communication Jenkins, 2009. All in all, ELF is a core sociolinguistic dimension of communication in EIL
where the speakers are the agents who carry diverse linguistic resources. In order to gain further understanding of the complexity of EIL, this ELF perspective needs to be in
accordance with views on an ideological as well as a pedagogical level Murray, 2012.