Cancer: Causes and Remedies (Part Three)

Household Cleaning SuppliesI honestly believe deep down inside of me that all the household cleaning over the years of my beloved mother using all those harmful household cleaning supplies such as Ajax, Windex, 409, Chlorox bleach, Pine Sol, and ammonia to name a few, played a role in her death stemming from pancreatic cancer. With pancreatic cancer, the greatest causative factors with this kind of cancer (the deadliest) is smoking cigarettes and drinking alcohol (which my mother unwisely did plenty of in her lifetime). But the fumes from these harmful household cleaning supplies also played a major role as my mother never detoxified her body in her fifty-one years of existence on this earth in this last lifetime.Commercial household cleaning supplies are caustic and immune debilitating. When you inhale these products, they lower your immunity. Everything you inhale (smell) goes directly to your bloodstream and therefore travels throughout the entire body.It is better, safer, and wiser to switch to more earth-friendly and biodegradable household cleaning supplies (i.e., Ecover, Bon Ami, Seventh Generation, Earth Friendly Products, Country Save, Dr. Bronner’s, etc.).When cleaning, always make sure the windows are open and that air is circulating in your home. If you have an ozone machine, run it while cleaning. An ozone machine is your best bet.A lot of mechanics develop cancer as they are exposed to many harmful chemicals and fumes. Mechanics deal with serious toxicity everyday, smelling/inhaling all those poisonous chemical fumes. Because they have been working around these fumes for many years, they actually become numb, olfactory or smell-wise, to the harmful fumes.LifestyleThe Los Angeles Times reported in the late 1990s that if a woman has taken birth control pills for more than ten years of her life, there’s an 80% chance of her developing some kind of female reproductive cancer. This is true!Birth control pills play a big role in female reproductive cancers. Women would be wise to just accept the fact that they are female by nature and God made them to have (deliver) babies and they should stop trying to compete with and be like men. In attempting to stop or prevent life (birth control), they are ending up losing their very own lives. And the birth control pills cause cancer in areas of the body that denote femininity (breasts, ovaries, fallopian tubes, cervix, uterus and vagina). This is a form of language here. You have disease and female organ(s) which basically means your disease is specifically related to an issue of femaleness or femininity, that’s why the disease manifests in these “female” organs. In attempting to be like and compete with men/males, females compromise their feminine integrity and goddess nature which “eats them up” (anger, frustration, sadness, etc.) inside. When the cancer appears in any female organ, it serves as a sign or sensor that the problem lies on a deeper metaphysical level pertaining to emotions, thoughts and attitude.What about all the synthetic scents from colognes and perfumes? Are they cancer-causing? You bet they are! Nowadays, I don’t understand how people can purchase perfumes and colognes and not be concerned with what the ingredients are. These containers (and the glass bottles) of designer colognes, perfumes and fragrances do not even list the ingredients. While perfumes and colognes may not be a food, they are being consumed by the body. Anything you put on the skin is consumed and gets into the body (the blood).I have written a few articles about the detrimental effect of using commercial brand sanitary napkins which are manufactured with the use of organochlorine (dioxin) for bleaching purposes. This harmful chemical finds its way into the female vaginal orifice and latches on to estrogen receptor sites and proliferates. This is a precursor to a female reproductive cancer.Brain cancer has greatly escalated over the years. Is there any surprise considering how much time people spend on cellular phones? Cellular phones emit serious radiation. It would be wise to purchase a cellular phone diode to place on your phone. Diodes convert radioactive energy (radiation) into beneficial bionic energy. Every cellular phone should have a diode on it. Actually, anything emitting radiation should have some kind or form of diode on it.Microwave ovens play a major role in the development of cancer. I have been saying this for some time now. After doing the research on microwave ovens back in 1996, I got rid of the brand new microwave oven I owned and once used in my Gardena apartment. I sat it out one night and the next morning it was gone. These ovens are dangerous! Yes, they may cook your food fast but you pay a dear price for their use in the end.Normal cooking causes food molecules to spin to the right. Everything in nature naturally spins or moves to the right. The earth spins from right to left on its axis while revolving around the sun. Track runners run from right to left on a track field. Healthy cells spin from right to left.But when you cook your so-called food in a microwave oven, a strange thing happens. The molecules spin in reverse from left to right. This is the SAME direction cancerous cells spin in. Food out of a microwave oven is directly cancerous! Microwave ovens cause an implosion in your food, especially meats. This means that instead of the heat penetrating into your food, the heat begins in the middle of your food. This is dangerous, People!If you insist on still using a microwave oven, please lace it with crystals, diodes, and plants. Crystals that are great for neutralizing radiation include Covalite, Smoky Quartz, Fluorite, Lepidolite, Sodalite, Black Tourmline, Black Obsidian, and Jet, to name a few.The Earth that we foolishly destroy (for financial gain, in most cases) supplies us with so much for our good. I am so thankful to Mother Earth and what she provides for us to protect us from ourselves (wicked inventions).With over 700 chemical ingredients in them, cigarettes are a contract with premature and painful death. You are just outright foolish to smoke cigarettes if you do. There’s absolutely NO nutritional value derived from this insidious product. The same thing applies to alcohol and beer. These two things play the greatest role in the development of pancreatic cancer (which is no joke, People) followed by liver and lung cancer.And these wire-strapped bras women wear – they inhibit circulation in the chest/breast area. These bras cause toxins to be trapped in the breast area. Therefore, the Body Intelligence causes internal trash bags called tumors to develop in an attempt to hold all of the waste in one spot so as to prevent these toxins from circulating throughout the entire body. And using underarm antiperspirants doesn’t help in this scenario. The chemicals in antiperspirants causes the sweat gland ducts to ball up and shut down, and because of this, toxins are not eliminated via the lymph nodes via the underarms, but are trapped in the breast/chest area. This plays a pivotal role in the physical manifestation or development of breast cancer.Those daily 3-6 cups of coffee will undoubtedly play a pivotal role in the physical development of stomach cancer and/or cancer of the esophagus.Excessive ejaculation of sperm or semen without replenishing the nutrients will lead to a serious loss of precious minerals, especially zinc, which is pivotal in the physical manifestation of prostate cancer.In re prostate cancer, tight underwear is also indicative here. Metaphysically, misogyny or too much “yang” or masculine energy not balanced by the female energy or “yin” fosters the physical development of prostate cancer.Governmental Ban On Cancer RemediesThe United States Government plays a role in the high rates of cancer and cancer deaths amongst American citizenry. By banning certain effective alternative treatments, the U.S. Government via its medical military wing – FDA (Food and Drug Administration) causes many people to perish from cancer.U.S. citizenship is predicated upon the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. U.S. citizens, property of the corporate United States (defined territorially in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17 of the U.S. Constitution) pursuant to Section 4, Article 2 of the Constitution, can be regulated by the U.S. Congress and are. U.S. citizens (people) are property of the corporate United States and Congress can make all needful rules and regulations for its property. The American people are regulated by the FDA. And you have the nerves to talk freedom, talking about you have freedom in America and Djehuty Ma’at-Ra doesn’t know what the hell he’s talking about. You’re free? Oh really? Are you free to get in your car without valid registration tags on your license plates without getting pulled over by some law enforcement agency? Hell no! Are you free to work your job without paying federal and state taxes that do not support you? Hell no! Are you free to get on an airplane without showing government-issued identification? Hell no! Are you free to have a baby in the hospital without a birth certificate being issued? Hell no!Americans are not free. They are only free to think they are free. Americans are regulated and heavily so. They must account for everything. American citizens must keep books and records like corporations. Why? Because they are in fact corporations – living corporations (corporate entities).When it comes to abortion (infanticide, murder) the government says “It’s your body and you have a choice.” But when it comes to trying an alternative cancer treatment, the government says “It’s not your body and you don’t have a choice.” Now ain’t that a bitch?With the approval of the government (FDA), you can take birth control pills and other harmful pharmaceutical grade drugs that have serious side effects with the greatest side effect being “death”, but when it comes to natural and alternative cancer treatments and remedies, the government (FDA) bans these practices and products under the premise that they are harmful to human health. The FDA has some damn nerves talking about what is harmful in one breath and then turning around and approving the sale of cigarettes that destroy the health of smokers and nonsmokers.How are you going to approve the sale of alcohol, pharmaceutical drugs and cigarettes, which the FDA has done, and then turn around and ban laetrile (Vitamin B-17), ozone/oxygen therapy, and Royal Raymond Rife technologies which help to eradicate cancer?You see, the government wants you to become and stay sick. It’s easier to control and regulate sick people. Sick people are weak people.Royal Raymond Rife created a machine back in the 1930s. This machine healed people of cancer and other fatal diseases. The U.S. Government came in and confiscated this machine.Dr. Ed McCabe is considered the king of Oxygen or Ozone. Ozone is actually oxygen to the third power. Ozone is three molecules of oxygen whereas oxygen is only two molecules of oxygen. Ozone kills all viruses and negative bacteria and microorganisms. Parasites and worms hate oxygen. Nothing hates oxygen more than cancerous cells. Cells cannot remain cancerous in the presence of oxygen or ozone.Ed McCabe started helping people heal from the most fatal and insidious diseases (i.e., so-called A.I.D.S., cancer, genital herpes, etc.) with the use of oxygen therapies. The governmental authorities found out about McCabe’s great works and came after him. The man has been in and out of jail all because he is helping people to heal and stay alive – a most beautiful thing. But because his modality is not approved by the government, he’s accused of violating various laws and regulations of the government. Now what’s more important: bullshit political laws and regulations or saving lives?The same thing has happened to Dave Hinkson, founder of WaterOz, who was also helping people to heal from very insidious diseases and conditions. Dave is now serving time in federal prison after being framed by federal government officials (F.B.I.) who said Dave threatened them. This is blatant tyranny.And the cowardly American people sit back and just let this medical tyranny take place. I thought you had some say with the payment of your tax dollars to the government? Your government does not give a damn about you. It is only concerned with its own existence. It is only concerned with power and at the expense of human lives.The Declaration of Independence itself gives the American people the right to dissolve the present government when that government no longer serves the needs and best interests of the people and to set up a new government in its stead. But how can you expect people who are dependent upon the government to dissolve it? It’s pretty difficult to dissolve government when you’re dependent upon government for a welfare check, social security check, or disability check.Hulda Clark was also helping people to heal NATURALLY from various cancers. The government ran her out of town too.Dr. Marijah McCain, a naturopathic doctor in Arkansas, has been harassed by government numerous of times even having her expensive microscope confiscated by state authorities in her home state.You may have also heard or read about the Canadian healer, Renee Caisse, creator of Essiac herbal tea, who ran into trouble with government because of the tea she put together and gave to cancer patients and victims which miraculously healed them from various cancers.You see People, it’s politically correct to talk about finding a cure for cancer but it’s politically incorrect to actually find a cure for cancer.However, there’s no need to find a cure for cancer because the cure (answer) is already here and government can’t do anything about it. Modification of thoughts, diet and lifestyle, and consuming the natural vegetation of the Earth is the cure for any and all diseases.”…and the leaf shall be for the healing of the nations.” Revelation 22:2″God causes the grass to grow for cattle and herb for the service of man.” Psalm 104:14Now some folks ask me can cancer be injected into you or given to you. The answer is emphatically yes. Singer Bob Marley and Jack Ruby are two of the most notable figures in history who died of cancer being injected into them.Neil Bush, brother of President George W. Bush, Jr., and Carl Colby, son of the late C.I.A. director William Colby, posed as writers for a music magazine and came to visit Marley while he was hiding in seclusion after a failed C.I.A. assassination attempt on Marley while performing live on stage. Marley was given a pair of boots as a gift that had a copper-like wire embedded in the boot.Marley was one of many singers (including John Lennon, Mama Cass Elliott, Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplan, Peter Tosh, etc.) who were covertly targeted by the U.S. Government because of either politically conscious songs and lyrics, political involvement and/or views (anti-government practices and policies, esp. war), or their influence on the American youth. And would government really want to kill entertainers? Check out the movie “Down On us” (also entitled “Beyond the Doors”) and read the book “The Covert War Against Rock” by Alex Constantine for the answer.Jack Ruby, the shooter of Lee Harvey Oswald (who was framed with the assassination of President John F. Kennedy) was injected with a carcinogenic substance while in jail. This was “their” way of silencing Ruby (before he was to give testimony) and making sure the truth about the Kennedy assassination would never be exposed to the American people. Jack Ruby was murdered in jail. There’s a scene in the closing part of the movie “Ruby” starring Danny Aiello where Ruby is screaming from his jail cell, “They’re killing me! They’re killing me!” The man was screaming for his life. Ruby was a victim of medical liquid assassination just like civil rights attorney Johnny Cochran, former Nation of Islam minister Khalid Abdul Muhammad, Bob Marley, J. Edgar Hoover, James Earl Ray (who did not shoot Martin Luther King, Jr.), Marilyn Monroe, Pope John Paul I, John Belushi, and Ian Fleming of James Bond fame.continue in Part 4

Higher Technical Education: Distinctiveness of Humanities, Indian English, and ESP

I am grateful to the organizing committee for thinking about me and inviting me to deliver a guest lecture on distinctiveness of Humanities and social sciences in higher technical education. I feel rather uneasy and highly septic, as I stand here with no pretensions of a high-brow professor or specialist whose discourse goes overhead. I speak to you as a practicing teacher of English language skills, especially for science and technology, and Indian English writing, especially poetry, with interest in what concerns us in the Humanities division, which, unfortunately, enjoys little academic respect in the over-all scheme of things in almost every technical institution.Maybe, a conference like this augurs well for friends in the department of Humanities & Social Sciences, as they seek to explore interdisciplinarity, which indeed expands the scope of teaching and research. But I must provide a perspective to my several remarks that ensue from my reflections on the quality of intellectual activity in most technical institutions vis-a-vis the negligible support for scholarship in the Humanities, perhaps with the belief that the humanities are not ‘real subjects’ or that these have no bearing on learning of technical subjects, or these bring no demonstrable economic benefit.The discipline has declined more perceptibly with, to quote Nannerl O. Keohane, “the creation of increasingly specialized disciplines and rewards for faculty members for advancing knowledge in those areas.” We have a marginalized status in technical institutions even if we may have been playing a crucial role as teachers of languages and letters. I don’t want to dwell on them here. But, we should be aware of the ground reality.Yes, study in humanities is not always a matter of communicating ‘new findings’ or proposing a ‘new theory’. It is rather ‘cultivating understanding’ or thinking critically about some profound questions of human life; it is often the expression of the deepened understanding, which some individual has acquired, through reading, discussion and reflection, on a topic which has been ‘known’ for a long time. To me, practices in arts and humanities elevate consciousness, refine susceptibilities in various directions, create deeper awareness, and enable us to respond critically and independently to the ‘brave new world’ we live in. Arts and humanities alone can help us to explore what it means to be human, and sustain “the heart and soul of our civilization.” Perhaps, it’s the usefulness of humanities which is acknowledged by inviting me to speak to a distinguished audience like this.I intend to divide my brief into two parts: I would reflect on technical institutions as schools of higher learning; and then, I would say something about the business of English language teaching, which is my prime professional concern. Yet, much will remain unsaid, for I am aware of the controversies I may be raising.I strongly feel most university level technical institutions in India, like the general ones, have failed in promoting or upholding healthy intellectual attitudes and values, and academic culture and tradition, expected of a university, just as, it’s painful for me to observe, the culture has been virtually dismal in the case of studies in arts and humanities in the last four decades. The dullness and sameness has marginalized both creative and critical performance, or the standards handed down to us have become obsolete, or we have fallen into an abyss of unbecoming elitism, or we have become used to a cornucopia of pleasures formerly denied us: I won’t comment. But an opportunity, such as this, is necessarily not to offer any authoritative judgments but to reflect on, or to provide insights into, issues that concern intellectuals at the top of university teaching hierarchy. Should I say ‘non-university’? for I fear most of the faculty do not want to move beyond the parochial confines of narrow exclusivity. It’s the age of specialization they say, and discourage diversity, tolerance and inclusivity: they do not strive for intellectual mobility and change of attitude; we, as seniors, too, have not tried to reach out, or explore!As a university, we are not oriented to the transformation of our social order, nor are we obligated to act as a moral deterrent in inhibiting the growth of selfish motivation. We think of education in terms of laboratory or industrial practices in mineral and mining sectors, energy, electronics, engineering, computer application, environment, management, law, health sciences, life sciences, and all that, but hardly care for ‘producing’ fully competent and spiritually mature human beings. We do not pay attention to the growth of individual creativity and to an intuitive understanding of individual purpose. We do not bother to educate with, to quote Rabindranath Tagore, the “knowledge of spiritual meaning of existence” which is also the ethical and moral meaning. We have been, unfortunately, bogged down in schemes that inculcate a habit of the mind which indulges in seeking only better opportunities to survive, or higher pay packages.I’m afraid for too long we have practiced the “how to” of life and neglected the “why”. I believe it is comparatively easy to learn how to accomplish certain material tasks, but much more difficult to learn “what for”. If our educational system has failed over the years, it is because we have never come into a working knowledge of our humanity. We have gained incredible amount of technical knowledge, perhaps more than enough to resolve many problems with which mankind is presently faced, but we have never tried to reflect on how to apply it constructively and successfully for the good of all, with a sense of human dignity.Some of us rightly worry about the general lack of mutual respect for the rights and feelings of others, the tendency to be suspicious of the unknown, the tendency to take liberty with the sanctity of the individual person, and complain about the general lack of character and integrity, despite higher education. I see our failure in communicating with the spiritual insight which is marked by a balance between individual desires and social demands; I see our failure in creating the awareness of the world of values and principle of the spiritual oneness underlying the great variety found in the world. I see our failure in the humanity being torn apart by intolerance and fundamentalism, the suicidal urge for self-destruction. I see our failure in the rising ethnic, linguistic and religious tensions that now belie the scientific, technological and enlightened euphoria of the sixties.We seem to have lost a sense of obligation toward creating a good, tolerant, forward-looking society. Thanks to the role of money in democratic processes and institutionalization of corruption at all levels, people have lost faith in politicians, bureaucrats and government. The invasion of governance by the criminal-politician-bureaucrat nexus has done the country greatest harm than the shift of power following the wave of globalization, multinational capitalism, corporate economy, politics of war on terror, environmental concerns, human rights and all that. There is a reshaping of self, values and norms with dominance of the Western discourse in critical reasoning and reflection through perils and delights of growth and change; through survival skills vis-à-vis emigration, sex, parenthood, and age; through re-visiting past and present with vested awareness; through political orthodoxy in the name of democracy, religious fanaticism, casteist dominance, and repression of the liberals and the simple; and through the new processes of fossilization of the pre-colonial/colonial/post-colonial that renders many of us in the profession irrelevant. I wonder if we are not terribly dislocated in our small world.Let me not digress any further. Ladies and Gentlemen, every university is a school of higher education, but how high is high? If we are only interested in technical education for the sake of developing professional ability or skill in some area of life, then we are talking about a vocational school or polytechnic, and not a true university. Unfortunately, most universities (and technical institutions) have been vying with each other to become professional schools, not committed to the teaching of better morality, higher philosophy, universal order or universal culture. They are not producing morally and ethically conscious good citizens. I am afraid all one can expect from the present priorities in the so called higher education is survival, pursuit of money, and power.When science is transformed into technology, it becomes a form of power. And, as history would testify, power is the power for good and for evil. The technological culture we live in pervades and shapes our lives. The computer and internet culture, electronic gadgets, microwave, fridge, mobile phones, antibiotics, contraceptives and several such devices have been more than new means. Our sense of vulnerability has been changing fast. The new consumerist culture has taken away what was earlier meaningful and rich experiences of life.We in the Humanities & Social sciences department need to debate the multifaceted reality that modern technology offers-not only its devices and infrastructure which are its material manifestation but also skills and organization, attitudes and culture, perhaps constructively and contextually. Thinking through technology should make possible for us to develop and contribute to humanities philosophy of science and engineering just as different visions may be possible to discuss through social philosophy of technology. Researchers in the West have already been talking about technology as liberator, technology as threat, and technology as instrument of power. Our lives and ideas have thus changed and will continue to change. In fact, every field has been changing rapidly these days. The discipline (HSS) needs to incorporate their study, especially as media such as internet and social networking have already modified and redefined human relationship and identities everywhere and at all levels.Then, there is the emergence of what has been called ‘knowledge society’. The growth or creation of knowledge society that we have been talking about since the beginning of this century presupposes our capacity for idea generation. But if knowledge is not made freely available to all who seek it, how can one promote humanity or make it power for a liberal democratic society. Moreover, as scientific and technical knowledge spreads or becomes more powerful, it would become more problematic for the scientific community to assume moral responsibility for the use and abuse of scientific knowledge. To mitigate this challenge, one needs an education not so much in science but in humanities. When scientists say they want to live up to their social responsibilities, what they seem to mean is that they want more power than they have; it means they want to run things, to take charge. They should not end up ‘doing politics’ in the name of improving the world or society. Let them be interested in themselves, in facing the task of their own self-improvement, and learning how to think about their own responsibilities in a more serious and reflective way, their own moral education.As a faculty in the Department of Humanities and Social Sciences in one of the leading technical universities in the country, what I think the scientific and engineering community has to face up to is its own self-education, its own social education. Our budding engineers and scientists have to explore answers to such basic questions as: what is a good society? How do we go about achieving it? How do we-what do we-learn from history? What do we learn from political philosophers of the past? Or, why scientists think and speak the way they do? They cannot neglect this kind of educational enquiry in technical education because there is more and more to know as the fields proliferate. Which means, the department of Humanities and Social Sciences should equip them with the basics that helps them demonstrate understanding in and across the major disciplines: scientific understanding, technical understanding, mathematical understanding, historical understanding, artistic/humanistic understanding, cross-cultural understanding, and understanding of moral and political philosophy, and philosophy of science etc. There is need for providing new unfamiliar concepts and examples to promote such understanding which will later enable them to take enormous decisions vis-à-vis the complexity of the world science and technology has brought about.With the present consciousness, accept it or not, we, in educational establishments, have perpetuated living with a world in upheaval, and in some cases, have even shown a preference for it. But, with a higher order of awareness that approaches intuitive levels of understanding (something arts, culture and humanistic studies essentially seek to develop), we should be better able to look at an issue from many different dimensions, and rationalize how we ought to live in the future “as complete citizens who can think for themselves, criticize traditions, and understand the significance of another person’s sufferings and achievements,” to quote Martha Nusbaum from her book Not for Profit.A technical university needs to provide for education which also elevates the consciousness and extends the power of the soul; that is, we need to shift a part of the current educational priorities from the intellect to the heart, and from scientific and technical thinking to soul cognition. The end and aim of a university, be it technical or general, is the perfection of man, striving to evolve the consciousness in tune with the universe.The education we ‘sell’ needs to be re-tuned towards creativity, innovation, and respect for fundamental freedom; our policies and curiculums should help in strengthening the culture and values of a global society which is characterized by multiculturalism, intercultural interactions, mutual respect, tolerance, dignity and respect for values, and consciousness of ourselves as one human race, human rights and global responsibility for change in attitudes. We must, at every level, strive for a balance between the traditional attitudes and the need for a modern multi-cultural society.I believe most of the new technical institutions can maintain their distinctiveness by seriously opening to the diversity of our times, by sharing freely with students representing the diversity of our larger society, culture, and future needs. The enclave approach which seeks to shut out or at least seriously limit the diverse socio-cultural needs and understanding may not help any more to maintain distinctiveness of the institution.I also worry about the system’s unwillingness to nurture the ethos and sensibility that sustains a university spirit even as, according to the current govt. policies, an institution of higher learning is expected to run as a business enterprise which in days to come, will modify, perhaps irreversibly, our attitudes to teaching and research, our notions of knowledge, our administrative practices, and our relationship with the state and society. We need to make a move from the concerns of the immediate present to the future and visualize a different typology of cultural, linguistic and educational problems against the backdrop of a very fluctuating socio-political climate and pressures of all types.As part of the language and literature teaching fraternity for over 38 years and working in a specialized university, I know how significant Humanities teaching is to hone the mind, critical thinking and communication skills. I am tempted to quote Erwin Griswold (of the Harvard Law School): “You go to a great school not so much for knowledge as for arts or habits; for the art of expression, for the art of entering quickly into another person’s thoughts, for the art of assuming at a moment’s notice a new intellectual position, for the habit of submitting to censure and refutation, for the art of indicating assent or dissent in graduated terms, for the habit of regarding minute points of accuracy, for the art of working out what is possible in a given time; for taste, for discrimination, for mental courage, and mental soberness.”Now, let me talk about the business of English Language Teaching. I say ‘business’ because it has developed into a multi-million dollars commercial enterprise outside the native bases. We too, have an opportunity to capitalize on it in our own way, if we can. We can reach out to people in over 70 countries where English is one of the main languages.The global diffusion of the language has now taken an interesting turn: the ratio between the native speakers of English (in countries like the U.K., the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand) and the non-native speakers (in countries like India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Singapore, Ghana, Kenya, Malaysia, Nigeria, Tanzania, Sri Lanka, Zambia, Philippines etc where English is used along with the mother tongue) is almost 40: 60, and it has expanded fast to other countries (like China, Japan, Egypt, Indonesia, Korea, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Zimbabwe, Taiwan, the Gulf Countries, and the countries of the erstwhile Eastern Bloc). It is virtually a native language in South Africa, Jamaica and West Indies. Its acculturation, its international functional range, and the diverse forms of literary creativity it is accommodating are historically unprecedented.As Braj B. Kachru notes, the situation today is such that the native speakers have an insignificant role in the global spread and teaching of English; they seem to have lost the exclusive prerogative to control its norms of use or standardization; in fact, if current statistics are any indication, they have become a minority.This sociolinguistic fact and its implications have not yet been fully recognized by most linguists, ELT practitioners, ESPists, administrators, language policy planners, and college and university teachers in India. What we need now are new paradigms and perspectives for linguistic and pedagogical research and for understanding the linguistic creativity, including the scientific and technical writing, in multilingual situations across cultures.You will appreciate the English we all speak is not like the English the native speakers of the language speak. We don’t need to. The yardsticks of the British or American native speakers, or their standards as reflected in GRE, TOEFL or IELTS etc, or their kind of tongue twisting, are simply damaging to the interests of non-native speakers. We have to develop our own standards, instead of teaching to sound like Londoners or North Americans. Pronunciation must be comprehensible and not detract from the understanding of a message. But for this nobody needs to speak the so called standardized English that makes inter- and intranational communication difficult. David Crystal too appreciates this reality and favours local taste of English in India and elsewhere.Our Indianness is clearly reflected in the pronunciation of certain vowels and consonant, in the stressing of words, in the rhythm and pauses, in the vocabulary and lexical acculturation, discourse patterning, code mixing, usages, grammatical deviations etc. The prolonged linguistic and cultural contact of English in various states of the Indian union has given it a unique character which deserves serious academic exploration. It has acquired a considerable functional range and depth, and it is preposterous to expect that the language would not be ‘shaped’ or ‘moulded’ according to the local needs or remain unaffected by the influences of local languages and literatures, cultures and users. It is, in fact, the result of such deep-rooted local functions, that we have now an institutionalized model of English for intranational uses. The way India’s multilingualism and ethnic pluralism have added to the complexity of Indian English, apart from ‘mixing’ words, phrases, clauses and idioms from the Indian Language into English, and in ‘switching’ from one language to another, perhaps to express the speaker’s ‘identity’ or linguistic ‘belonging’, the role of ‘native speaker’– the British or American– as become peripheral, as Kachru rightly asserts, unless he or she understands the local cultures and cultural presuppositions.I am not very much concerned with the literary perspective of Indian English here, even if I have been actively associated with Indian English literary practices for over thirty five years. I am professionally interested in the language use and usage of Indian writers, and scholars and researchers of science and technology, the localized educated variety they have developed to communicate indigenous innovations. You can appreciate this if you have noticed development of local registers for agriculture, for the legal system, for entertainment industry, for Environment, and so on. The publications of Indian practitioners of science and technology have certain discourse features which are unique to Indian English, but not examined.I suspect Indian English is not yet recognized as an important area of research for ‘English for specific purposes’ (ESP) that we teach. [It is also, however, very sad that though ESP as an approach is now firmly established, it still has fewer supporters in India, possibly because nobody wants any changes in the conventional teaching-learning practices?] Having been in the forefront of ESP movement in the country for over twenty five years, I am aware of the localized linguistic innovations in the huge output of Indian researchers, some of which has the potential for serving effectively and successfully as pedagogical texts or teaching materials. But it is unfortunate the English teaching academia are slow to recognize the pragmatic contexts–the importance of intranational uses of English and according to local needs – and continue to stick to the external norms of English. It’s more regrettable that the conceptual and applied research on ESP in the West has avoided addressing issues which are vital for understanding the use of English across cultures.The way ESP has turned international, teachers and researchers in Applied Languages in our country need to explore: what accommodation a native speaker of English may have to make for participation in communication with those who use a local (or non-native) variety of English; what determines communicative performances or pragmatic success of English in its international uses; what insights we have gained by research on intelligibility and comprehensibility concerning international and intranational uses of English; and what attitudinal and linguistic adjustments are desirable for effective teaching of ESP based on a non-native English, like Indian English. These are a few basic questions, not convenient to Western ESP enthusiasts.I have noticed in the Western ESP in general, and science and technology in particular, a strong bias towards ethno-centricism in approach and neglect of intranational motivation for the uses of English. It is not possible to practice ESP effectively unless we respect, what John Swales call, “local knowledge” and “localized pragmatic needs”. After all, we use the language as a tool and we cannot ignore the localized innovations that have “code-related” and “context-related” dimensions. We ought to view non-native innovations in ESP as positive and consider them as part of the pragmatic needs of the users. It is the attitudinal change that I plead for!Teaching of ESP in a university in the second language situation like ours is largely a “collaborative sense-making” with the class. When I say this, I am pointing to the interactive nature of formal instruction, which, in terms of actual language use, is essentially Indian in tone, tenor and style. I am also referring to the need for understanding the dichotomy between the rhetoric of EST teaching and the practice enacted in the classroom from the viewpoint of adult learners, and language skills development and competence in the Indian social setting. We need to evolve a dynamic model of ‘communicative teaching’ of ESP which seeks to develop (i)linguistic competence (Accuracy), (ii)pragmatic competence (Fluency), and (iii) sociolinguistic competence (Appropriacy), without ignoring interrelated aspects of local practice, research and theory and at the same time emphasizes language awareness, which is a significant concept in ELT, in that it covers implicit, explicit, and interactive knowledge about language and provides for a critical awareness of language and literature practices that are shaped by, and shape, sociocultural relationships, professional relationship, and relationship of power. The approach can also facilitate cross-cultural comparisons and contrasts, and promote genre-based studies (i.e. how language works to mean, how different strategies can be used, how meaning is constructed), basic to ESP, in that it truly develops individual’s performance competence.Friends, I have hopped from one point to another, perhaps jumbled up, in my zeal to draw your attention to several aspects of English, Indian English and ESP that have wider and deeper implications. They touch attitudinal chords of English language users, teachers and administrators too. Teaching of English, both language and literature, today is not only academically challenging but also opens new refreshing avenues for applied research. This is because of the spread and changing status of English, which has grown from a native, second, and foreign language to become an international language of commerce science and technology, spoken among more non-natives than natives in the process of their professional pursuits or everyday lives. I have also placed certain facts of science and technology education in the context of Humanities before you, raised issues, expressed my view, and now it is for the profession to accept, reject or explore their implications. Thank you.Copyright:
Professor R.K.Singh
Head, Dept of Humanities & Social Sciences
Indian School of Mines
Dhanbad 826004 India[This is the Text of my specially invited Lecture at SRM University’s International Conference on ‘Role and Responsibilities of Humanities and Social Sciences in Technical Education’ on 17 March 2011]