See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/320629317

Language as a Challenge in Constructing ASEAN Community

Conference Paper · October 2013

CITATIONS READS

0 1,637

2 authors, including:

Raden Pramesa Narakusumo

Indonesian Institute of Sciences
23 PUBLICATIONS   45 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Coleoptera of Indo-Australian Archipelago View project

SMART NEST BOX View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Raden Pramesa Narakusumo on 27 October 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Language as a Challenge in Constructing ASEAN Community

R. Pramesa Narakusumo1

Master Student at Paramadina Graduate School of Diplomacy

Universitas Paramadina
1
Contact Details : Jalan Taman Edelweis Timur Blok H. 30 , 0813 82204374, pramesa_narakusumo@yahoo.com

R.A. Disyacitta Nariswari

Master Student at Linguistic Major

Universitas Indonesia

1
 Author biography

R. Pramesa Narakusumo

He was born in Bekasi, 29 October 1987. Hold a bachelor degree on Biology from
Airlangga University. Now he is working on Good Neighbors International (NGO) and
received a fellowship from Medco-Paramadina Graduate School to continue his
education at Paramadina Graduate School of Diplomacy (a Master degree program of
Diplomacy & International Relations at Paramadina University).

R.A. Disyacitta Nariswari

She was born in Bekasi, 28 Mei 1989. Hold a bachelor degree in Agribusiness,
Brawijaya University. Now she continues her master education in Linguistic major,
Universitas Indonesia.

2
 Language as A Challenge in Constructing ASEAN Community

ABSTRACT

In year 2015, ASEAN will begin the so-called ASEAN Community as an effort between ASEAN
member states to enhance and integrate three pillars of cooperation namely political and security,
economy and socio-cultural (Severino, 2006). The socio-cultural pillar deserves special attention given
that what ASEAN tries to create is a community that is not only doing business and engage in political-
security building activities but also develop people-oriented and solidarity-enhancement activities that
would further unite people within ASEAN.

These efforts to increase socio-cultural cooperation has been shown by ASEAN member states by
creating ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community (ASCC) blueprint and its action plan. On this ASCC
blueprint, it is mentioned that language is the ASEAN characteristic aspect and the diversity elements that
must be respected and adapted in the reality, opportunity and challenges. In addition, language must be
implemented in the human development plan of education and human resource development sector.

But such effort to construct ASEAN as a socio-cultural community is not easy. According to the several
studies (Benny and Abdullah, 2011; IPSOS, 2012), public perception to recognized ASEAN Community
in 2015 still categorized as a low. Challenges to construct ASEAN multicultural community is to create a
new identity of ‘One ASEAN’ and an imagined community. The critical factor of imagined community is
language, in which one lingua franca that can be used together to communicate each other regardless local
language or foreign language. Another challenge is that the use of English as language of communication
in ASEAN has been taken for granted by the ASEAN elites. A question remain on whether English can
become a catalyst to the formation of ASEAN Socio Cultural Community or insetad become a barrier.

Keywords : ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community, Language, English language in ASEAN, Imagined

Community

3
 Language as Challenging Aspect in Constructing ASEAN Community

R. Pramesa Narakusumo and R.A. Disyacitta Nariswari

ASEAN (Association of South East Asian Nation) was established in 1967. It is a

remarkable regional association that can brings together idea for mutual cooperation
among states in South East Asia. With their own “ASEAN Way”, the leader of ASEAN
can bring harmonious relation in which if we looked back in the 1960’s this region
portrayed as an unstable region. At those time, South East Asian countries had a weak
socio-political cohesion of the region’s nation states, the legitimacy problems of the
region’s postcolonial governments, interstate disputes, intra-regional ideological
polarization and intervention by external powers which marked features of the
geopolitical landscape of Southeast Asia (Acharya). Although the background event
happened in South East Asia Region on that time colored with several confrontation and
dispute situation among nations, but ASEAN as stated by Walsh had been reasonably
successful preventing conflicts among its member nations.

The ASEAN declaration, which is written on English, has been signed on 1967 by five
first member countries: Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore and Thailand. The
Declaration had five preambular and five operative paragraphs, and it pledged their
government to seven aims and purposes1. In 1984, after its independence, Brunei
Darussalam admitted into ASEAN while Vietnam joined in 1995 then followed by Laos
and Myanmar in 1997 and the tenth country to joined was Cambodia in 1999
(Severino).

In near future, year 2015, ASEAN will have a set of goal to create what so called the
ASEAN Community as an effort between ASEAN member states to enhance and
integrate three pillars cooperation namely political and security, economy, and socio-
cultural (Severino). Socio-cultural aspect become interesting because ASEAN had tried
to create a community that not only doing business in economy and political-security
but also directed towards people-oriented and enhance solidarity and unity among

1 The seven aims and purpose of ASEAN are 1) Economic growth, social progress and cultural
development; 2) Regional peace and stability; 3) Economic, social, cultural, technical, scientific and
administrative collaboration; 4) Mutual assistance in training and research; 5) Collaboration in
agriculture and industry, trade, transportation and communication and the improvement of living
standards; 6) Promotion of Southeast Asian studies; 7) Cooperation with regional and international
organization (Severino).
4
people in ASEAN. These efforts to increase socio-cultural cooperation already been
shown by ASEAN member state by creating ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community
(ASCC) blueprint and its action plan. On this ASCC blueprint, it is being mentioned
that language is the ASEAN characteristic aspect and the diversity elements that must
be respected and adapted in the reality, opportunity and challenges. Beside, language
must be implemented in the human development plan in the education and human
resource development sector.

ASEAN community will cause the enhancement of synergy in between ASEAN citizen
and so does the use of language will be more intense. Language that being used in the
middle of multilingual society not only maintain cultural diversity and as a dialogue
media between cultures, but also in the achievement of quality education, strengthening
cooperation in building people knowledge, heritage preservation, and implementing the
benefit from science and technology in the development process.

But in the effort to constructing ASEAN as a socio-cultural community in the society

that live in this region are not an easy way. According to the recent studies (Benny and
Abdullah; IPSOS), public perception of acknowledgement to ASEAN Community in
2015 still categorized as low. Based on this challenges that come into constructing a
South East Asian’s multicultural community to become the new identity of one ASEAN
so does there is an essentials need to build the ‘imagined communities’. Which is
imagined community is concern to construct identity based on the unity of the people.

The primary factor to build ‘imagined community’ is a language (Engel). There is also
an influence of colonialism and the relation with the other nations in the region that can
be related to the language as a factor. Moreover to create the collective identity (Wendt)
so there are ideational factors that can be achieved by discussion, conversation,
education, discourse, migration and inter-subjective understanding in which language as
a medium to socialize will become important element on it. This paper will try to see
the reality that shown by the action of ASEAN member states to what extent their
concern to the language aspect in the ASEAN community construction.

Another challenge that also emerges is English language that taken for granted
(Kirkpatrick) by the ASEAN elites as a lingua franca. Although English believed to
become second language after national language in several ASEAN member state, but
whether English can push or to become catalyze the idea of ASEAN community into
reality or become a barrier.
5
From this point this paper will give a literature review on ASEAN Community and
condition of language in Southeast Asia, then give framework on language as important
factor to create ‘imagined regionalism’, after that an analysis will be given for the
ASEAN attempt to addressing language in the ASCC and on the final section will
review the aspect of English as lingua franca of ASEAN before draw on conclusion.

ASEAN Community: In Attempt to Move ASEAN Forward

ASEAN Vision 2020 has been agreed on December 1997 in Kuala Lumpur and marked
approaches in regional integration of South East Asia (Severino). On this declaration the
ASEAN leaders wanted to transform the South East Asia Region into a stable, welfare
and competitive with the support of balance economic development, reducing poverty
and socio-economic gap among its member states (Mantra). Effort to build ASEAN
Community as declared on the vision then get more strength through the Bali Concord
II in 7th October 2003. In the declaration it was stated three pillars of community,
namely ASEAN political and security community (APSC), ASEAN economic
community (AEC) and ASEAN socio-cultural community (ASCC).

The APSC elements are consist of: 1) bringing ASEAN’s political and security
cooperation to a higher plane – member state live in peace with one another and with
the world; 2) Promoting political development in adherence to the principle of
democracy, rule of law and good governance, and promotion and protection of human
rights; 3) Strengthening the relation between ASEAN and its dialogue partners and
other countries; 4) Comprehensive approach to security (traditional & no-traditional
security), renunciation the use of force, peaceful settlement of dispute (Alexandra).
Based on the above elements of ASPC, following three key characteristic: 1) Rule-based
community of shared values and norms; 2) A cohesive, peaceful, stablle and resilient
region with shared responsibility for comprehensive security and 3) A dynamic and
outward looking region in an increasingly integrated and interdependent world
(Roadmap for ASEAN Community).

The AEC wanted to achieve a goal of ASEAN economic integration in accordance with
the principles of an open, outward looking, inclusive and market driven economy
(Roadmap for ASEAN Community) was build upon 5 elements: 1) free flow of goods;
2) free flow of service; 3) free flow of investation; 4) free flow of capital and 5) free
flow of skilled worker (Mantra).

6
The last component of ASEAN Community is the ASCC, where ASEAN try to put
people centered principle onto the big idea of its community. It characterised by a
culture of regional resilience, adherence to agreed principles, spirit of cooperation
collective responsibility, to promote human and social development, respect for
fundamental freedom, gender equality, promotion and protection of human rights and
promotion of social justice (Roadmap for ASEAN Community). Moreover the
characteristic of ASCC are the following: 1) Human development; 2) Social welfare and
protection; 3) Social justice and rights; 4) Ensuring environmental sustainability; 5)
Building ASEAN identity and 6) Narrowing the Development Gap (Roadmap for
ASEAN Community).

Languages in Southeast Asia

Southeast Asia with 585,743,000 population have 1,254 living language that comprises
of 82 institutional language, 214 developing language, 437 vigorous language, 412 in
trouble language and 109 dying language (Lewis, et.al.). Each ASEAN countries have
their own national language that officially recognize by their governments.These
ASEAN countries official languages are presented in Table 1.

Countries Official Languages

Brunei Darussalam Malay and English
Cambodia Central Khmer
Indonesia Bahasa Indonesia
Laos Lao
Malaysia Malay and English
Myanmar Burmese
Philippines Filipino and English
Singapore English, Malay, Mandarin and Tamil
Thailand Thai
Vietnam Vietnamese
Table 1. ASEAN Countries and their official languages

From the study of linguistics, languages that being used in Southeast Asia consider to be
in Austric super-family that include four daughter-families, which is language family of
Sino-Tibetian, Austroasiatic, Daic and Austronesian. According to Hartmaan, major
indigenous language in Southeast Asia is the Sino Tibetian language family that
comprises of the Burmese and Lao; Austroasiatic language family comprises of the
Central Khmer and Vietnamese; Daic language family which is the Thai; and
Austronesian language family that comprises of Malay, Indonesia and Filipino
(Tagalog).
7
In their enormous linguistic diversity of language, Southeast Asia have many minorities
languages that don’t have no system of writing and some even never recorded before.
Those people that speak on minority languages claimed that they only have hundreds of
speaker left and probably will extinct as these indigenous people gradually convert into
modern community and their young people left their traditional cultures (SOAS).

Language as Important Factor to Construct Regionalism Identity: A Framework

Regionalism has invite many scholar to generate a widely accepted definition on it,
from economist to political scientist disputed over the definition of an regionalism on
the importance of geographic proximity, relationship between economic flows and
policy choices (Mansfield and Milner, 590). Another scholar insist that members of a
common region share cultural, economic, language, religious, political and stage of
development criteria, thus Peter J. Katzenstein opposed to the geographic designations
are not real, natural or essential but they are socially constructed and politically
contested and thus open to change.

‘Imagined communities’ is a theory to explain that the nation is an imagined political

community and imagined as both inherently limited and sovereign. Nation is imagined
as a community because the nation is always conceived as a deep horizontal
comradeship (Anderson, 5-7). ‘Imagined community’ theory rely on languages as a
main factors to build the consciousness of unity from particular imagined community
(Engel). Anderson explained that printing technology that being capitalized in market
economy and the spread of particular vernaculars as instruments of administrative
centralization can foster the community being imagined as an entity of unity (Anderson,
39-49). The mechanism of print-languages to construct a imagined communities laid the
bases for national consciousness in three distinct way, first they created unified fields of
exchange and communication, second print-capitalism gave a new fixity to language,
which in the long run helped to build that image of antiquity so central to the subjective
idea of the nation, third print capitalism created languages of power (Anderson, 44).

Despite being theorized by Anderson to explaining nationalism, but Amitav Acharya

used ‘imagined communities’ theory to explained the regionalism in ASEAN. Acharya
(28) explained that the regionalism of ASEAN, which he said as security communities,
involve a social construction of generative and self-reinforcing attitudes and behaviours
that may gradually lead to the definition and realization of common identity. Moreover,
Acharya (195) noted that ASEAN had evolved as a sort of an ‘imagined community’
8
despite low initial levels of situational differences among its members. The vision of
community in ASEAN was preceded rather than resulted from political, strategic and
functional interactions and interdependence. Main factor to this process was a set of
norms, which is called the ‘ASEAN Way’, like non-interference, non-use of force,
avoidance of collective defence that most salient, these norm then interplay with
socialization process that will redefine interest and identities of ASEAN members
towards a new collective identity (Acharya, 29).

Through this review of ‘imagined communities’ theory and their use to explained
construction of ASEAN community, language can play a part to be crucial point to
create a ‘we feeling’ of multidiverse people in ASEAN. The ‘we feeling’ of collective
identity that being described here will come from the interdependence factor that drive
people in the ASEAN Community to involved in ideological labour such as discussion,
conversation, learning process, etc. (Wendt).

ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community: Review The Language Aspect Point

After set the ASEAN Economic Community and ASEAN Political Security Community,
the ASEAN socio-cultural community was apparently brought in almost afterthought
after Philippine’s suggestion to rounding up the concept of community (Severino, 368).
The EU regional integration was built up under the ‘we feeling’ of socio-cultural
community before they was endorse the security and economic integration, although EU
later on get difficulty on official language issue. Which is now they have 23 official
languages that bring hinder to communication and problem to the financial and legal
costs (Fidrmuc, et.al.).

Severino (370) admitted that ASCC are lagging behind the other two pillars of ASEAN
Community. The plan of action is the least developed and reports that being produced
by the ASEAN for ASCC was considerably weak and fewer and than AEC or the APSC.

Language aspect in the document of ASCC blueprint only being mentioned five times
on it. First in the characteristic and elements of ASCC, language considered as diverse
among peoples of ASEAN and they should respect for it. Then the Promotion of English
Language to develop human development, to support citizen to become proficient in the
English language, promote English language to be used as an international business
language at the work place, and also to promote learning of ASEAN languages and to
promote exchanges of linguists (ASCC Blueprint, 1-4). As shown in the blueprint that

9
the acknowledgement of diversity in language and the effort to preserve ASEAN
language already being mentioned in two different point and another three point in the
blueprint considered to promote, educate and used ASEAN lingua franca, English,
among its member countries.

On the advanced plan of action, because language being put in the human development
point in the ASCC blueprint, as consequences ASEAN put languages under umbrella of
education sector. Whereas an institution has been established on it were the Southeast
Asian Ministers of Education (SEAMEO) and ASEAN Education Minister Meeting
(ASED). Through this body ASEAN endorse the Five Year Work Plan on Education
(2011-2015) and within these document there we could find several aspect on language
as shown in Table 2.

Language aspects in ASEAN Five Year Work Plan on Education (2011-2015)

1 “Translate ASEAN charter into ASEAN national languages”
2 “Offer ASEAN Languages as optional foreign languages subjects in school”
3 “Establishing a sub-network on teacher capacity building by subject areas,
including languages, among institution and universities”
4 “Support language training programs”
5 “Support learning of ASEAN languages and promote exchanges of linguists”
6 “Support the citizen of Member States to become proficient in the English
Language, so that the citizens of the ASEAN region are able to communicate
directly with one another and participate in the broader intercontinental
community”
Table 2. Language Aspects in ASEAN Five Year Work Plan on Education (2011-2015)

Then moreover to implement the five year plan on education ASEAN also publish some
material like ASEAN curriculum sourcebook to guide teacher to disseminate idea of
ASEAN and their people and land are connected, be able to exchange and appreciate
diverse perspectives and envision new way to work together to realize common goal
(ASEAN Curriculum Source Book) .

In the stage of report, ASEAN produce some ASEAN Community Report which
surprisingly are not covered to monitor the progress of language aspect as they already
mentioned on the ASCC Blueprint and ASCC Plan of Action. Two reports from
different period, ASEAN Annual Report 2008-2009: Implementing the Roadmap for an
ASEAN Community in 2015 and ASEAN Annual Report 2012-2013: On Track To
ASEAN Community 2015, didn’t wrote or stated any significant progress on language
aspect. Another specialized report like the ASEAN Community Progress Monitoring
System 2012: Measuring Progress Towards The ASEAN Economic Community and

10
The ASEAN Socio Cultural Community, surprisingly didn’t take any measure to the
language aspect that already mention in ASCC Blueprint such as to report English
proficiency support for ASEAN citizen or the measurement on how ASEAN realized
their support to ASEAN language learning.

Colonial background of foreign language in ASEAN

The position of language in ASEAN could not be taken off by their colonial history as a
background. Since the colonial era, foreign language such as English continued to
playing a role as main language in several ASEAN countries such as Malaysia,
Singapore, Brunei Darussalam and Philippines (Kirkpatrick, p.28). If we looked upon
historical background we would get explanation on how English become a hegemon in
South East Asia.

Malaysia, Singapore, Brunei and Philippine are using English as one of their national
language. The background can be trace back in the colonial era when British gave an
impression to the Malay people in Malaysia that they are the only one that can
guarantee Malay people’s welfare both in political and economic development
(Wiharyanto, p.7), so that’s why English language become dominating Malaysia even
after its independence. Philippines formerly a Spain colony, then become United States
of America colony. After World War II, Philippines fell into Japan but Philippine’s
leader still loyal to the USA to fight Japan (Wiharyanto, p. 2-3). Therefore, the
domination of English in Philippine was more viscous than Spanish or Japanese.

Indonesia have a different story. After independence from Dutch and Japan, Indonesia
try to make Malay language as a national lingua franca until the majority of Indonesian
people can communicate with what so called Bahasa Indonesia. English is the second
educated city elites and become foreign language that being taught in school, but to
some limited success (Dardjowidjojo, 2000) in (Kirkpatrick, 2008, p. 28).

In Myanmar, English for the first time play a main role in this country, but after policy
that initiated by U Ne Win on 1962, English become marginalized. This marginalization
being tried to distorted on the previous years but had come into few success
(Kirkpatrick, 2008, p.28)

In Thailand, one of the ASEAN country that never being colonialized by Western
countries, English become the second main language. According to Wiharyanto (p.9),
English influence in Thailand caused by the diplomatic politic from Kingdom of Siam
that maintaining good relationship with British and other western countries therefore
they were not attacked Thailand.

Lao experienced being colonialized by France in 1893 and got their independence 1953.
European language influence was not big, because only a few or limited access to the
education open to elites and government official that can be enter a school. Those

11
people that being into school could adopted France for education, government affair and
social function (Young, 2008. P. 3).

France established schools while occupied Vietnam. After World War II Vietnam
divided into the North which become communist and the South which backed by France
and the USA (Wiharyanto, P. 6-7). The aftermath North win against South and
reunification occurred. The Vietnam war to some extent introduce English language to
Vietnam and influence them later on.

Cambodia, Lao and Vietnam undergo a language shift from France to English, but level
of English proficiency even between elites -- especially in Lao and Cambodia –
relatively low (Bolton, 2002) in (Kirkpatrick, 2008, p.28).

English as ASEAN Lingua Franca: Threat or Advantage?

On chapter 34 ASEAN Charter stated that official working language of ASEAN shall be
English. The adoption of English as working language in ASEAN declared at the
ASEAN Summit in November 2007, when the ASEAN Charter being introduced. The
idea of English as the common language in ASEAN came out automatically and English
already took it for granted (Kirkpatrick, 27).

To choose one of the language over other language need an identity admission
universally (Crystal, 34). On the present-day dialects of English are already in general
mutually intelligible (at least with some language family) (Comrie, 3). English than
become the main driver to developing the economy and also as a neutrally inter-ethnic
link language (Rappa and Wee, 159).

English beside become official working language, also become lingua franca in
Southeast Asian region. The English position as lingua franca not means to become a
national language, but becoming collective cultural capital tool, in which language can
be used to marked the identity (House, 560). If someone want to communicate in the
outer local circle, someone must learn a language that connect one to a broader
communication circle, that is a language that have high communication value (de
Swaan, 33) in (House, 560).

Level of English skill on community is sure to be necessary , people with the basic
knowledge of English can do a communication continuously and at the same time
develop their skill. If multilingual speaker show their competency very well to use
mixing language include English, it is come from the socialization and awareness of
language development in their local community (Canagarajah, 952-930). In the

12
community, people are creating a means and achieve their communication objective in
relevancy with their objective and interest. On behalf of this explanation, means are
being socially constructed. It means that mean are not inside the language but being
produced in practice (Canagarajah, 931).

Therefore the use of English as lingua franca, particularly in ASEAN, for important
objective doesn’t necessary to change national language or the local one, because
English being used for different objective. So according to House, until today lingua
franca are not threaten the multilingualism (House, 575). Moreover as a general
assumption, mother tongue is basically become one of ethno-cultural identity.
Accordance to this, contact between local language speaker with hegemonic language
like English can be viewed as dangerous threat not only to the local language but also
threat the identity (Young, 1). The ideas of “language = identity” mainly come from
socio-psychological perspective based on Tajfel and Turner concerning on social
identity theory and groups conflict. According to them, individual achieve positive and
safe social identity through differentiation in the groups. The observation from Tajfel
broadened by Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Reicher and Wetherell stated that a person not a
one, “a personal”, rather than several personal that connected to the membership of a
group. Although this socio-psychological theory acknowledge several identity, main
reason to defence a language, individual must identified a number of small group or
categorized difference form their ethnic group. This identification resulted on peoples
with strong ethnic identity tend to “achieve ability to be like native speaker” in another
language from the other group.

However, the role of language in ethnicity far from ambiguity and ethnic-language is
not an important component of identity. Many groups can continously survive as a
different group even after there is a shifting of communicative language. According to
this perspective, the use of language always being push on to symbolic and emotional
value. Many scholar agreed that language can be an important component in ethnic
identity but this identification can hold out the lost of language from the native group.
The use of language or language skill must not to be confused with social identity
(Fishman, 144).

Moreover, a result between language and identity depend on the social context that to be
related to pertinent language groups. Although language can be a most important criteria
from social identification, it was not the only one. As consequences, it is clear that

13
native language preservation are not important feature from group identity but language
that may become central for some group to another group (Fishman, 144). On that
account, official working language of ASEAN, that is English, will not threat group of
identity in Southeast Asia.

ASEAN Country Performance in English Proficiency

To measure language acquisition of individual person so we can refer to the Test of

English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL), which is design to measure the English
proficiency of people whose native language is not English (ETS, 2011). In Table 3, we
can see ASEAN countries and their mean TOEFL score summary in series of period
ranging from 1995-2010. The mean score data displayed was summarized from
Educational Testing Services (ETS) data, in use to compare the performance of TOEFL
Paper Based Test (PBT), Computer Based Test (CBT), Internet Based Test (IBT) of a
particular student with that of other student from the same native country. So the data
presented in Table 3, 4, and 5 are not being used to compare the performance among
one country with the other.

1993- 1999- 2000- 2001- 2005-

Countries 1995 2000 2001 2002 2006 2007 2009 2010
Brunei Darussalam 544 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 549 N/A
Cambodia 506 475 498 485 N/A N/A 538 N/A
Indonesia 505 525 534 N/A 535 535 562 529
Laos 509 473 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Malaysia 525 535 545 N/A 572 579 560 N/A
Myanmar 512 498 496 503 518 533 N/A 536
Philippines 574 566 568 561 566 580 552 538
Singapore 593 N/A N/A N/A N/A 617 609 N/A
Thailand 492 511 515 514 500 500 493 486
Vietnam 501 530 527 522 534 531 520 530
Table 3. Mean Score of TOEFL PBT from ASEAN Countries (Summarized from ETS
report on TOEFLvolume 1993-1995, 1999-2000, 2000-2001, 2001-2002, 2005-2006,
2007, 2009, 2010)

Instead to compare, we will see each individual country performance based on the
TOEL mean score from 1993-2010. Singapore TOEFL PBT mean score range from
593-609, Malaysia 525-579, Philippine 538-580, Brunei Darussalam 544-549,
Indonesia 505-562, Laos 473-509, Myanmar 496-536, Thailand 492-514, and Vietnam
501-534. Based on ELT (1995, 1), score above 550 being used by 88% of college and
universities where English is the language of instruction as the required admission
14
score. If those measurement were being taken as minimum English proficiency and we
are try to take a look of ASEAN countries performance in between year 2007, 2009 and
2010 data so only Singapore, Malaysia, Philippines and Indonesia that have mean score
that reach above 550 score.

Beside using paper to conducted TOEFL test, in 1998 to 2005 TOEFL being tested
through computer based test (CBT) (ELT, 2001, 3) and in 2005 TOEFL also conducted
through internet based test (IBT) (ELT, 2006, 4). In Table 4 and 5 there are mean score
resepectively form CBT and IBT TOEFL test.

Countries 1999-2000 2000-2001 2001-2002 2005-2006

Brunei Darussalam N/A N/A N/A N/A
Cambodia 203 199 194 206
Indonesia 203 207 210 214
Laos 204 201 198 N/A
Malaysia 219 224 228 232
Myanmar 209 206 208 206
Philippines 234 233 230 238
Singapore 252 253 255 255
Thailand 194 194 197 200
Vietnam 200 207 207 207
Table 4. Mean Score of TOEFL CBT from ASEAN Countries (Summarized from ETS
report on TOEFL Volume 1999-2000, 2000-2001, 2001-2002, 2005-2006)

Countries 2005-2006 2007 2009 2010

Brunei Darussalam N/A N/A N/A N/A
Cambodia 71 63 68 63
Indonesia 80 78 79 78
Laos N/A 69 60 67
Malaysia 89 87 88 88
Myanmar 73 75 70 74
Philippines 85 88 88 88
Singapore 100 100 99 98
Thailand 72 72 74 75
Vietnam 71 70 70 73
Table 5. Mean Score of TOEFL IBT from ASEAN Countries. (Summarized from ETS
report on TOEFL Volume 2005-2006, 2007, 2009, 2010)

The range of TOEFL CBT mean score from ASEAN Country in 1999 to 2006 are
Cambodia 194-206, Indonesia 203-214, Laos 198-204, Malaysia 219-232, Myanmar
206-209, Philippines 230-238, Singapore 252-255, Thailand 194-200, and Vietnam 200-
207. Moreover TOEFL IBT mean score in 2005-2010 from ASEAN country, Cambodia
63-71, Indonesia 78-80, Laos 60-69, Malaysia 87-89, Myanmar 70-75, Philippines 85-
15
88, Singapore 98-100, Thailand 72-75, and Vietnam 70-73. The mean TOEFL score data
shown above gave a picture from each ASEAN member countries English performance
were varied differently. This will affect the integrity of ASEAN if they were a
community by 2015. As the people begin to connected freely in ASEAN region, the
communication that will be bridge by English will be take place in everyday of ASEAN
people’s life. Countries that have better performance in English will get an advantage
rather than countries with poor English performance. This condition in the long run will
affect the process of ASEAN community entirely.

Another approaches to compare English proficiency presented by EF by their English

Proficiency Index (EPI) in 2012. EF has been claimed that the index can be used to
compare English proficiency between countries. Table 6 shown 5 ASEAN countries that
had been surveyed by EF for their English proficiency.

Ran EF EPI
Country Category
k SCORE
Singapor
12 58.65
e High Proficiency
13 Malaysia 57.95 High Proficiency
27 Indonesia 53.42
Low Proficiency
31 Vietnam 52.14 Low Proficiency
53 Thailand 44.36 Poor Proficiency
Table 6. EF English Proficiency Index 2012: ASEAN Countries Summary (EF, 2012,
28)

From the Table 6, two ASEAN countries that categorized as high proficiency in English
are Singapore and Malaysia, while Indonesia and Vietnam considered as low
proficiency and Thailand are in the bottom of the list and categorized as poor
proficiency. This table show that there is a gap in English proficiency between those
countries. Moreover, gap that happened in English proficiency issue will create a
problems that being caused by dialect variations of English language which occur
between Southeast Asian countries. The dialect variation being mentioned are the
variation of lexical, phonological, and grammatical, and caused by the language contact
with the mother tongue, time, places, socio-cultural, and situation. As a result from this
dialect variation so there will be differences in the degree of mutual intelligibility of
conversation that will take place in between the ASEAN community people.

16
Another concern here is that the average education achievement of each individual
countries in ASEAN also differ. Education level will correlated with the second
language acquisition, in this term is English. While there are more than five hundred
million people of ASEAN and still today there is still many people that don’t get proper
basic education, so does this people will also get disadvantages to become part of
ASEAN community as they cannot use English to communicate with people in other
country in ASEAN.

Conclusion

ASEAN Community that wanted to bring closer people to people connection must build
upon common collective identity and throught the explanation of this paper, language
play an important part to build the imagined community from the multidiverse
community to become ‘One ASEAN’. What should be realized that the language aspect
on constructing ASEAN community is still being a complementary issue of the other set
of goals.

Moreover English as “official working language” as stated by ASEAN Charter give

advantages to ASEAN as whole community because English can become a lingua
franca that connect multilingual community of Southeast Asia. In the future it can avoid
a burden like European Union that have a 23 official language which create many
troublesome in some matters. Moreover ASEAN as regional institution in the Asia
Pacific region are very strategic geographically and politically, the influence that will
come from foreign power cannot be avoided especially in the term of cooperation so
therefore the decision to choose a lingua franca must consider the ease of use to
communicate with the other partner countries.

Important findings on this paper suggest that the gap of English proficiency between
ASEAN member country are quite wide and ASEAN should implement the way they
support English proficiency among its citizen and to monitor it periodically. So
therefore each people in ASEAN can communicate actively and interact to build
ASEAN identity and mutually cooperate as already being dreamed by the founding
father of ASEAN. Language is becoming serious problem if ASEAN in a serious
manner want to build socio-cultural community. It is need to be inclusive not to be
exclusive regarding language to construct a community.

17
Bibliography

Acharya, Amitav. Constructing a Security Community in Southeast Asia. London:

Routledge, 2001. Print.
Anderson, Benedict. Imagined Community: Reflection on the Origin and the Spread of
Nationalism. London: Verso, 2006. Print.
ASEAN Community Building Survey. Jakarta: ASEAN Secretariat & IPSOS, 2012. Web.
28 September 2013.
Benny, Guido, and Kamarulnizam Abdullah. “Indonesian Perception and Attitudes
toward the ASEAN Community.” Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs 30,
1 (2011) : 39-67. Print.
Canagarajah, Suresh. “Lingua Franca English, Mutilingual Communities, and Language
Acquisition”. The Modern Language Journal 91, (2007) : 923-939.Web. 2
October 2013.
Comrie, Bernard. The World's Major Languages. London and New York: Routledge,
1991. Print.
Clayton, Thomas. (2002). “Language Choice in A Nation Under Transition: The
Struggle Between English and French in Cambodia. Language Policy 1: 3-25,
2002.” Web. 1 September 2013. http://link.springer.com
Crystal, David. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language. Cambridge, University of
Cambridge, 1987. Print.
Engel, Steven T. “Rosseau and Imagined Communities.” The Review of Politics Vol.67,
No.3 (2005) : 515-537. Print.
Fidrmuc, Jan, Victor Ginsburgh, and Shlomo Wheber. “Ever Closer Union or
Babylonian Discord?” The Official-language Problem in the European Union,
2007.
Fishman, J.A. Handbook of Language & Ethnic Identity. Oxford University Press, 2001.
Google Books. Web. 1 October 2013.
Hartmann, John. “Outline: Spoken and Written Languages of Southeast Asia”. Web. 1
October 2013. http://www.seasite.niu.edu/crossroads/hartmann/hartmann.htm
House, Juliane. “English as a Lingua Franca: A Threat to Multilingualism?.” Journal of
Sociolinguistics 7/4 (2003) : 556-578. Web. 3 October 2013.
Katzenstein, Peter J. “Introduction: Asian Regionalism in Comparative Perspective.”
Network Power: Japan and Asia. Ed. Peter J. Katzenstein and Takashi Shiraishi.
New York: Cornell University Press, 1997. 1-44. Print.

18
Kirkpatrick, Andy. “English as The Official Working Language of the Association of
Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN): Features and Strategies.” English Today 94,
Vol. 24, No. 2 (2008). Web. 1 September 2013.
Lewis, M. Paul, Simons, Gary F., and Fennig, Charles D. (Eds.). Ethnologue:
Languages of the World, Seventeenth Edition. Dallas, Texas: SIL International,
2013. Web. 1 October 2013.
Mansfield, Edward D. and Helen V. Miler. The New Wave of Regionalism. International
Organization 53, 3, 1999, 589-627.
McArthur, Tom. “English as an Asian Language.” ABD, Vol 33 No. 2 (2002). Web. 1
September 2013.
Rappa and L. Wee. Language Policy and Modernity in Southeast Asia (Malaysia,
Filipina, Singapura, dan Thailand). New York: Springer, 2006. Print.
Severino, Rodolfo C. ASEAN: Southeast Asia In Search Of An ASEAN Community.
Singapore: ISEAS, 2006. Print.
SOAS. 2007. London: University of London. Web. 27 September 2013.
http://www.soas.ac.uk/sea/sealanguages/
Tajfel, H., and J.C. Turner. An Integrative Theory of Intergroup Conflict. The Social
Psychology of Intergroup Relations. Ed. W. G. Austin and S. Worchel. Monterey,
CA: Brooks/Cole, 1979. 33-47. Google Books. Web. 2 October 2013.
TOEFL Computer-Based and Paper-Based Tests: July2005-June 2006 Test Data.
Princenton: ETS, 2007. Web. 28 September 2013.
TOEFL Internet-based and Paper-based Tests: January 2007-December 2007 Test Data.
Princenton: ETS, 2008. Web. 28 September 2013.
TOEFL Internet-based and Paper-based Tests: January 2009-December 2009 Test Data.
Princenton: ETS, 2010. Web. 28 September 2013.
TOEFL Internet-based and Paper-based Tests: January 2010-December 2010 Test Data.
Princenton : ETS, 2011. Web. 28 September 2013.
TOEFL Test and Score Data for TOEFL Internet-Based Test: September 2005-
December 2006 Test Data. Princenton: ETS, 2007. Web. 28 September 2013.
TOEFL Test and Score Data Summary: 1995-96 Edition. Princenton: ETS, 1995. Web.
28 September 2013.
TOEFL Test and Score Data Summary: 1999-2000 Edition. Princenton: ETS, 2000.
Web. 28 September 2013.
TOEFL Test and Score Data Summary: 2000-2001 Edition. Princenton: ETS, 2001.
Web. 28 September 2013.

19
 TOEFL Test and Score Data Summary: 2001-2002 Edition. Princenton: ETS, 2001.
Web. 28 September 2013.
TOEFL Test and Score Data Summary: 2002-2003 Edition. Princenton: ETS, 2003.
Web. 28 September 2013.
Turner, J. C., M.A. Hogg, P.J. Oakes, S.D. Reicher, and M.S. Wetherell. Rediscovering
the Social Group: A Theory of Self-categorization. New York: Basil Blackwell,
1987. Google Books. Web. 2 October 2013.
Wendt, Alexander. Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge University Press,
1999. Print.
Wiharyanto, A.K. Pembentukan Negara-negara Nasional di Asia Tenggara. Web. 10
February 2014. http://www.usd.ac.id
Young, Richard F. English and Identity in Asia. Asiatic, Vol. 2, No. 2, December (2008).
Web. 1 September 2013.

20

View publication stats