The Gap between Academic English and Interactional English in Indian ELT
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31305/rrijm.2026.v11.n05.017Keywords:
Academic English, Interactional English, Indian ELT, communicative competence, grammar-translation method, sociolinguisticsAbstract
Academic literacy, or the formal, written language of exams and institutional settings, has long been given priority in English language instruction in India, but the interactional competence necessary for everyday communication has been generally overlooked. Using theoretical frameworks from applied linguistics and sociolinguistics, this research investigates the nature, causes, and effects of this division within the Indian ELT scene. The study makes the case through a critical analysis of pertinent literature that the excessive focus on academic English, which is maintained by grammar-translation pedagogy, examination-driven instruction, and insufficient teacher preparation, results in students who are linguistically proficient on paper but have limited communication skills in real life. The study also examines how this disparity is mediated by multilingualism, code-switching conventions, and the aspirational value of English in Indian society. Pedagogical suggestions are made for a more well-rounded strategy.
References
[1] Annamalai, E. (2004). Nativization of English in India and its effect on multilingualism. Journal of Language and Politics, 3(1), 151–162.
[2] Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 1–47.
[3] Canagarajah, A. S. (1999). Resisting linguistic imperialism in English teaching. Oxford University Press.
[4] Cummins, J. (1979). Cognitive/academic language proficiency, linguistic interdependence, the optimum age question and some other matters. Working Papers on Bilingualism, 19, 121–129.
[5] Cummins, J. (1981). The role of primary language development in promoting educational success for language minority students. In California State Department of Education (Ed.), Schooling and language minority students: A theoretical framework (pp. 3–49). Evaluation, Dissemination and Assessment Centre.
[6] Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford University Press.
[7] Garcia, O., & Wei, L. (2014). Translanguaging: Language, bilingualism and education. Palgrave Macmillan.
[8] Graddol, D. (2010). English next India. British Council.
[9] Horwitz, E. K., Horwitz, M. B., & Cope, J. (1986). Foreign language classroom anxiety. The Modern Language Journal, 70(2), 125–132.
[10] Hymes, D. (1972). On communicative competence. In J. B. Pride & J. Holmes (Eds.), Sociolinguistics: Selected readings (pp. 269–293). Penguin.
[11] Kachru, B. B. (1985). Standards, codification and sociolinguistic realism: The English language in the outer circle. In R. Quirk & H. G. Widdowson (Eds.), English in the world: Teaching and learning the language and literatures (pp. 11–30). Cambridge University Press.
[12] NASSCOM. (2019). Future of work: Skilling for India's digital economy. NASSCOM.
[13] Scarcella, R. (2003). Academic English: A conceptual framework. The University of California Linguistic Minority Research Institute.
[14] Shohamy, E. (2001). The power of tests: A critical perspective on the uses of language tests. Pearson Education.
[15] Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
[16] Willis, J. (1996). A framework for task-based learning. Longman.
