Summary
$is study deals with the cultural dimensions of EIL, which are analysed based on the following 
domains: (a) subjects’ attitudes toward teaching about specific cultures (native and non-native); and 
(b) subjects’ attitudes toward teaching about culture in general. In essence, a view of culture based 
on native cultures can emerge from three different approaches: it may promote British culture only, 
it may focus on both the UK and the US, or it may incorporate other English native cultures. 
Likewise, a more international viewpoint can also be offered from three perspectives: it may refer to 
ESL contexts only, it may present both ESL and EFL communities – including the local culture – or 
it may introduce international aspects not specific to any culture. However, the analysis of data in 
this study indicates that the subjects’ attitudes toward teaching culture do not usually correspond to 
just one of these perspectives; rather, teachers display a manifold set of beliefs which may at times be 
closer or more distant to an international approach to teaching culture.
Key words: English as an international language, language attitudes, cross-cultural 
communication, language pedagogy
 Povzetek
T a študija predstavlja kulturološke dimenzije angleščine kot mednarodnega jezika (EIL), ki jih 
analiziram s stališča (a) odnosov učiteljev do pouka določenih kultur (rojenih in tujih govorcev) in 
(b) odnosov učiteljev do pouka kulture na splošno. Dejansko izhaja pogled na kulturo, ki temelji na 
kulturah rojenih govorcev iz treh različnih pristopov: lahko promovira le britansko kulturo, lahko 
se osredinja tako na britansko kot ameriško kulturo, ali pa vključuje druge kulture rojenih govorcev 
angleščine. Podobno lahko tudi bolj mednarodno usmerjen pogled na kulturo razlagamo s treh 
vidikov: z vidika angleščine kot drugega jezika, z vidika angleščine kot drugega in tujega jezika, ki 
vključuje tudi lokalno kulturo, oziroma z mednarodnega vidika, ki ni specifičen za nobeno kulturo. 
Analiza podatkov, ki jih predstavlja ta študija, kaže na to, da odnos učiteljev do pouka kulture ne 
temelji na samo enem vidiku; učitelji imajo običajno različna stališča, ki so včasih bližja, včasih pa bolj 
oddaljena od mednarodnega pristopa k pouku kulture.
Ključne besede: angleščina kot mednarodni jezik, jezikovni pogledi, medkulturna komunikacija, 
jezikovna pedagogika.
 DOI: 10.4312/elope.7.1.105-118

English as an international language (EIL) can be defined as the language used by native and 
non-native speakers for communication in international interactions – business, advertisements, 
sports, news, travel, diplomacy, entertainment. In other words, EIL aims at mutual intelligibility 
and appropriate language use involving nationals of different countries – non-native speakers 
interacting with native speakers, non-native speakers interacting with other non-native speakers, 
and native speakers interacting with native speakers. Essentially, the concept of EIL focuses on 
cross-cultural, cross-linguistic interactions (Campbell et al. 1983).
T omlinson (2004, 5) has recently called attention to the limited participation of users of EFL in 
the discussion of EIL:
Ironically, so far the main proponents of teaching a variety of international English have been native 
speaker (or at least native speaker like) applied linguists. Not many are teachers and not many are 
users of English as a foreign language. $ey have provided expert insights into the characteristics and 
exponents of international English and are conducting the rigorous research that will soon provide 
us with very useful objective descriptions of the English used in international communication. But 
the danger is that an expert syllabus could be imposed on learners without any input from them and 
without a methodology to bring it to useful life.
Significantly, some native and non-native applied linguists and teachers have been surveying 
the discourse of learning and teaching EIL in EFL countries: McKay (2003) has examined the 
teaching of EIL in the Chilean context; Kubota (2002) and Yamaguchi (2002) have studied the 
effects of globalization in the learning and teaching of English in Japan; Matsuda (2002; 2003) 
has argued for incorporating World Englishes in ELT practices in Japan; Sifakis and Sougari 
(2003) have pursued a similar approach to investigate pedagogical, ethical and methodological 
considerations of the international status of English, particularly in the Greek context.
Moreover, Seidlhofer (2004; Jenkins et al. 2001) and Jenkins (1998; Jenkins et al. 2001), among 
others, have been doing linguistic research on global English in general and on Euro-English as 
a variety of English as a European lingua franca in particular. However, most studies which refer 
to English in a European country are usually concerned with one or more of the following areas: 
(a) Anglicisms or English expressions in European languages, e.g. in Dutch (Ridder 1995), in 
German (Hilgendorf 1996), and in Finnish (Hyrkestedt and Kalaja 1998); (b) the status, role 
and use of English, e.g. in Sweden (Davidson 1995), in Malta (Davidson 1996), in Italy (Pulcini 
1997), in France (T ruchot 1997), in Greece (Oikonomiclis 2003), and in Finland (Taavitsainen 
and Pahta 2003); and (c) ELT and English teacher training, e.g. in the Netherlands (Van Essen 
1997), in Macedonia (Dimova 2003) and in Germany (Hilgendorf 2005).
However, a central issue that needs to be discussed in any debate about EIL is the language users’ 
attitudes toward the language and the current developments related to its spread and global 

roles. In a presentation at the IATEFL Conference in Liverpool in 2004, Henry Widdowson 
stated that nowadays English as a lingua franca (ELF) is a matter of attitudes. Rather than just 
a linguistic issue, ELF is a pedagogical matter which involves significant changes in people’s 
attitudes. $us, no examination of English as a global language would be complete without a 
thorough analysis of teachers’ attitudes toward EIL. 
 $ough using the term English as a global language (EGL), Gnutzmann (1999, 158) provides a 
definition of EIL based on the situations of language use, which can be applied to the concept of 
international English. For him, EGL means “English used as a medium of communication in all 
sorts of communication contexts and for many different purposes for instance, in written academic 
discourse or by a Frenchman talking to a Greek waiter ordering a pizza in an Italian restaurant in 
Norway”. Gnutzmann states that intercultural competence refers to and implies (166):
•  awareness of the culture-specific dependency of thought and behaviour;
•  knowledge of general parameters according to which cultures can be distinguished (e.g.  
religion, role of the sexes);
•  rejection of ethnocentrism: one’s own system of cultural norms is not considered appropriate 
to be applied to the evaluation of other cultures;
• interpersonal sensitivity: the ability to understand a person in their own right;
• cognitive flexibility: openness to new ideas and beliefs;
• behavioural flexibility: the ability to change one’s behaviour patterns.
One of the major concerns in the discussion of cross-cultural communication is the idea of 
adaptation. Baxter (1991, 67) states that “communicating internationally means actively seeking 
a common ground, and this entails adapting one’s way of speaking English”. He adds that 
“adaptation is not an easy process, requiring in the speaker a variety of communicative skills and 
an awareness of what is entailed in cross-cultural communication”. 
However, Smith (1987, 3) remarks that using English in cross-cultural contexts “does not change 
the interactor’s cultural assumptions and expectations about what is and is not appropriate 
language behaviour in particular situations”. As a result, Smith proposes that a negotiation of 
meaning should be done when involving the following senses: 
(1) a sense of self: factors such as race, gender, nationality, age, socioeconomic status, belief 
system and values, ethnic/religious/political background, etc. help define one’s identity, 
which is not changed when one is using English (discourse patterns from the first language 
do not carry over entirely into the second language);
(2)  a sense of the other: in the use of English, one needs to know something about the discourse 
strategies of the prospective other (using a common linguistic medium – English – does not 
mean that the discourse strategies are shared);
(3)  a sense of the relationship between the self and the other: the degree or affiliation of distance 
between sender and receiver;

(4)  a sense of the setting/social situation: English is used differently in London, Los Angeles, 
Manila, Melbourne, T okyo or T oronto, so the geographic setting and the social situation 
should be taken into account;
(5)  a sense of the goal or objective: having a clear understanding of the goal/objective is essential 
if we are to negotiate meaning successfully across cultures.
 Modiano (2001a) identifies two major areas in the teaching of English as an international language 
(TEIL) and their scope: language varieties and culture. Modiano believes that when teachers only 
emphasize American and British English and cultures, students tend to perceive other varieties and 
cultures as less valued. Such an approach to teaching “presents English as the property of a specified 
faction of the native-speaker contingency” (340). In his opinion, teaching and learning English 
based on an international frame of reference is superior “when compared to the conventional 
integration-orientated practices associated with the learning of culture-specific varieties such as 
British English” (2001b, 162), what he calls a “nation-state centred view” (2001a, 340).
Modiano (2001b, 161–2) also states that EFL students hardly need to be aware of culture-
specific language and that practitioners who support this kind of teaching are in fact pursuing a 
political agenda. Modiano underlines the role of culture in TEIL when he states that: 
…with English, because it has lingua franca status, because there are a number of nation-states which 
have large populations speaking the tongue, and because the cross-cultural dimension of English 
among foreign-language speakers can effectively exclude the native speaker as well as the cultural 
distinctiveness which the native speaker represents, it is illogical to talk of the learning of English as 
a foreign language as an activity which is enriched through interjecting a cultural studies dimension 
defined as the history, society, culture, and institutions of the British. $e cultural framework for 
English is global and as such is no longer situated in the legacy of one distinct culture.
In order to promote cultural equality, “a multiplicity of teaching practices, and a view of the 
language as belonging to a broad range of peoples and cultures, is the best that language instructors 
can do” (2001a, 340). Modiano maintains that “the ideologies which underpin globalization and 
the vision of cultural pluralism are more in tune with a lingua franca perspective as opposed 
to ELT platforms based on culture-specific varieties” (2001b, 159). In other words, EIL can 
‘neutralize’ the negative impact that the spread of the language can have on the learner’s culture. 
Although Modiano can sometimes sound quite provocative, it is undeniable that he tries to 
tackle the essential issues related to learning and teaching EIL.
Several other authors have reported on significant changes to be introduced in teaching the 
language. If we are to accept English as an international language of communication and 
incorporate these characteristics into the classroom, educators in the field of English language 
teaching will have to take on some new responsibilities. T rifonovitch (1981) points out some 
aspects that need to be emphasised in the classroom. First, as speakers of English will be contacting 
a variety of cultures – native and non-native – teachers should not concentrate on the cultures of 
the native speakers. Second, it is important that the learners of EIL understand their own culture 
and develop an awareness toward accepting other cultures in order to understand the other’s 

point of view. Also, the EIL learner should listen to as many varieties of English as possible. 
Finally, he/she should be able to notice and accept different styles of spoken and written English, 
because they exhibit the cultural background of the speaker/writer.
More recently, Gnutzmann (1999, 165) declared that “cultural topics relating to countries 
where English is spoken as a native language, particularly the United Kingdom and the United 
States, have to be complemented by topics dealing with other parts of the world in order to 
do justice to the global use of English in classroom teaching”. Besides widening the scope of 
topics geographically, Gnutzmann (1999, 166) thinks that a “stronger orientation toward social, 
economic, scientific and technological topics with an international or global dimension would 
seem an appropriate measure in view of the global dimension of English”, a change which could 
probably happen “at the expense of target culture-specific topics”. Baxter (1991, 67) seems to 
share the same viewpoint when he says that “teaching materials should be drawn from all the 
various English-using communities, not only L1 communities, so as to introduce students to the 
different manners of speaking English and to build an attitudinal base of acceptance”.
In essence, the main premise of this study is that the analysis of teachers’ attitudes toward the 
cultural dimension of EIL is crucial to assessing how EIL is being dealt with in a country where 
English is used as a foreign language. 
 $e research question – What are the teachers’ attitudes toward the cultural dimensions of EIL? 
– was formulated based on cultural issues such as having contact with a variety of cultures (not 
just cultures of the English-speaking world), developing an understanding of the student’s own 
culture, and developing sensitivity and awareness toward understanding other cultures.
 $is study uses two methods of data collection in surveys: questionnaires and face-to-face 
interviews. $e choice of using both quantitative and qualitative methods aimed at enriching 
data and attempting to balance the weaknesses of any one method. Each interview lasted one 
hour on average and was conducted in Portuguese. Basically, they aimed at supplementing the 
findings of the questionnaires. It was hoped that these face-to-face interviews could provide more 
detailed and richer data and reliable means to validate the questionnaire data.
 $e subjects in the questionnaire (13 teacher trainers and 13 ESP teachers) and interviews (5 
teacher trainers and 7 ESP teachers who had previously answered the questionnaire and had 
volunteered for the interview) were part of four educational institutions, two universities 
– University of Evora (UE) and University of Lisbon (UL) – and two polytechnic institutes 

– School of T ourism and Hotel Management of Estoril (ST) and School of Education of the 
Polytechnic Institute of Beja (SE).
 $e cultural dimensions of EIL are analysed based on the following domains: (a) subjects’ 
attitudes toward teaching about specific cultures (native and non-native); (b) subjects’ attitudes 
toward teaching about culture in general; and (c) probable influences on subjects’ attitudes 
toward teaching about native and non-native cultures in English classes.
$e subjects’ answers are explained depending on how close they were to viewing the cultural 
aspects of learning English as either intrinsically oriented toward native communities – particularly 
the UK – or incorporating a more international perspective which takes into account native as 
well as non-native societies. Essentially, a view of culture based on native cultures can emerge from 
three different approaches: it may promote British culture only, it may focus on both the UK and 
the US, or it may incorporate other native cultures. Likewise, a more international viewpoint can 
also be offered from three perspectives: it may refer to English as a Second Language contexts 
only, it may present both ESL and English as a Foreign Language communities – including the 
local culture – or it may introduce international aspects not specific to any culture. 
However, the analysis of data in this study indicates that the subjects’ attitudes toward teaching 
culture do not usually correspond to just one of these perspectives; rather, teachers display a 
manifold set of beliefs which may at times be closer or more distant to an international approach 
to teaching culture.
On reflection, teachers clearly identified British and American cultures as the most important 
cultures to be incorporated into English language classes. Moreover, most subjects regarded other 
native cultures as essential aspects to be considered. However, what might be seen as an approach to 
culture which emphasizes native countries should be re-examined due to the importance subjects 
gave to learning about international cultural aspects not specific to any country. Nonetheless, 
teachers placed very little importance on learning about ESL and EFL cultures.
T o sum up, even as subjects favoured British and American cultures as the most important in EL T , 
they also acknowledged the importance of referring to Portuguese culture and international cultural 
aspects not specific to any country. $e subjects’ attitude toward the cultural dimensions of EIL seems 
to combine a native culture centred angle with one that highlights a global attitude to culture.
 T eachers were asked in the questionnaire and interviews to indicate the level of importance in 
how they viewed learning about different cultures (British, American, other native cultures, ESL 
cultures, EFL cultures, Portuguese culture) and international aspects not specific to any country. 
In the questionnaire, teachers reacted to seven statements in a Likert-scale. Moreover, they were 

also asked if they would have different approaches to teaching culture depending on the type of 
students they taught (teacher trainees or ESP students).
Some teachers characterized the teaching of culture as “important”, “fundamental” and “absolutely 
essential”. In one teacher’s opinion (SE03
1
) “teaching a language is transmitting cultural aspects”.
While some teachers shared the opinion that culture should be a means and not an end and that 
cultural aspects should be chosen according to their influence on language, one teacher had a 
different opinion: 
UL04: #e teaching of English should touch on other cultural aspects whatever they might be 
even when not related to the language.
However, two teachers believed that teaching culture is not a relevant issue in their classes: 
UE04: #ere’s some room for that but not much (…) there’s not enough time. At the end of the 
day, ESP classes focus mostly on grammar.
UE02: I don’t think it’s that relevant. If our aim is the international use of the language, then it’s 
not so important to study individual cultures of every English speaking country.
$e analysis of quantitative data shows that teachers hold an overall positive attitude toward learning/
teaching about some specific cultures. First of all, the vast majority of teachers (96.1%) believe that 
it is very important/important to study about British culture. In addition, studying about American 
culture is seen by 92.3% of the teachers as very important/important. Next, 76.0% said that it is 
very important/important to learn about Portuguese culture. Learning/teaching about international 
cultural aspects not specific to any country is very important/important for 73.1% of the teachers. 
Most teachers (72%) also hold the view that it is very important/important to learn/teach about ENL 
countries. Remarkably, most teachers do not attach much importance to studying about ESL and 
EFL cultures as just 40% stated that it is very important/important to study about ESL countries 
and even fewer teachers (only 16.7%) said it is very important/important to learn/teach about EFL 
countries (see T able 1 for the overall percentages for each statement and response).
British 
culture
American 
culture
Other ENL 
cultures 
(Canada, 
South Africa, 
Australia,...)
ESL 
cultures 
(Nigeria, 
India, Hong 
Kong,…)
EFL 
cultures 
(France, 
Japan,  
Russia,...)
Internation-
al cultural 
aspects not 
specific to 
any country
Portuguese 
culture
% % % % % % %
Very important 
Important 
Neither important  
nor unimportant 
Unimportant 
Very unimportant
69.2% 
26.9% 
3.8% 
65.4% 
26.9% 
3.8% 
3.8% 
28.0% 
44.0% 
24.0% 
4.0% 
12.0% 
28.0% 
36.0% 
20.0% 
4.0% 
4.2% 
12.5% 
29.2% 
12.5% 
41.7% 
42.3% 
30.8% 
23.1% 
3.8% 
32.0% 
44.0% 
20.0% 
4.0% 
T otal 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
 SE = School of Education of Beja; UL = University of Lisbon; UE = University of Evora; ST = School of Tourism of Estoril

$ese results make it clear that in the teachers’ opinion British and American cultures play a very 
important role in the language class: 
ST02: As we’re teaching English, our references will always be the US and England.
One teacher explained his choice for presenting British and American cultures in his teacher 
training classes: 
UE01: I do it with these students because I think that a lot of textbooks that they’ll be using with 
their future students also rely a lot on information about Britain and America. 
In addition, two ESP teachers displayed a culturally centred viewpoint which emphasizes British 
culture only: 
ST01: It’s important that we say something about British culture because if the language is seen 
as a bridge then there are some cultural aspects that can also be seen as a bridge so it’s important 
that we know something about the British. 
ST03: What I did was to make them more sensible to British history. (…) I believe it’s important 
that we know about the origin. 
Surprisingly, two other subjects explained why they do not incorporate British or American 
culture in their classes, either emphasizing the international scope of English or denying a view 
of culture based on nationalities: 
UE02: If the aim is to learn an international language then we cannot be limited to one or two 
or three cultures, we’d have to study them all.
UE03: #is doesn’t exist! #is is a myth! What is American culture? What state are we talking 
about? Are we talking about an underground New York culture or are we talking about Florida? 
(...) We understand people by their lifestyle not their citizenship. (…) I don’t believe there’s a 
native British culture either.
Furthermore, one subject believed that stereotypical facts should be avoided and general cultural 
aspects emphasized: 
UL02: What you find in materials, like the British like tea, they eat this, that, well, that kind 
of thing seems to be to me stereotypical and really untrue for the most part. (…) Getting into 
what’s happening where, when, how, why would be more relevant than having fragmented stale 
presentations of facts. 
Another subject valued international cultural aspects in her approach to teaching culture in ESP 
classes: 
UE03: Sometimes I use materials from international meetings and conferences, how the Greek, 
the Turkish, the Indians react when they face the same situation, their cultural behaviour. 
Some teachers underscored that, since English is not tied to any one culture, the major aspect in 
language learning should be cross-cultural awareness: 
SE02: I’m not really worried about issues relating to one culture in particular, native or non-
native, I’m interested in issues concerning the contemporary world.

Other teachers emphasized Portuguese culture, international cultural aspects and other native 
cultures.  Including Portuguese culture in the English language class was viewed as an effective 
means for comparing and contrasting the different cultures: 
SE02: Many times it comes as a contrast. We usually depart from a foreign context, English 
speaking or non-English speaking, and then later on we compare and contrast it with the students’ 
own experience in terms of Portuguese culture. 
Although some teachers stressed the need to establish links between the native English and Portuguese 
cultures, one native English teacher believed he would not be the right person to do so:
UE01: Not being Portuguese, I wouldn’t try to teach them their own culture. 
Moreover, in his opinion, the culture to be studied should be related to the language used in 
class:
UE01: It would sound a little artificial to learn about Portuguese culture through the medium 
of English.
As far as teaching native cultures other than British and American is concerned, one subject 
expressed his concern to relate culture and language teaching: 
UE01: From a general education perspective (…) it’s good to learn about other cultures whether 
it be English speaking cultures or not. Obviously, if it’s an English speaking culture than it’s 
already an input into the language straight away, it’s an obvious thing to use as a vehicle for 
language teaching. 
On the other hand, some teachers observed that they would not prepare classes specifically on 
native cultures: 
UE02: I don’t actually value the teaching of culture as culture per se. But I’m aware that through 
certain materials I end up transmitting some cultural aspects from several English speaking 
countries. (…) But I never choose materials with that in mind.
However, results showed that teachers do not see much relevance in presenting ESL or EFL cultures. 
In spite of that, one of the subjects mentioned her work in an African Studies course and the relevance 
of presenting ESL varieties in these classes in particular and in EFL classes in general: 
UL02: One of my courses is English for African Studies and so I’m concentrating on African 
types of English and the students have to understand the sociocultural reality of different African 
countries. (…) It’s good for [EFL students] to look at Bollywood films and see how other people 
speak the language. 
Nevertheless, other subjects did not consider the inclusion of ESL or EFL cultures in their 
English classes for a number of reasons. One subject wondered if the English class should be the 
right one to expose students to other cultures: 
SE03: Would the English class be the most adequate for that? Perhaps all classes are responsible 
for it, perhaps the Portuguese language class could also include global culture. I don’t see why it 
should be in the English class. 

Another teacher referred to limitations of time and relevance:
UL08: We can’t attempt to teach too much, [we should] concentrate on the main thing (…) I do 
question their importance in the Portuguese context. 
Finally, a subject believed that contacting ESL and EFL cultures are likely to happen outside 
school: 
ST02: If I’m told that I have to include cultural aspects from every country that uses English as 
a language of communication, this is a never-ending task, it’s impossible! (…) I think it has to 
do with the student’s own discovery. (…) What I might do is to say ‘Listen, we’re talking about 
these cases but don’t forget that you’ll be working with people from different cultures so you’ve got 
to have open minds to that. And all the rest you’ll learn through hands-on experience’.
 T eachers were also asked if they thought studying cultural aspects depended on the students and 
aims of the course (ESP students or teacher trainees). Data analysis showed that nine teachers 
said there were no differences when teaching cultural aspects to ESP students or teacher trainees, 
while seventeen teachers said there were some differences depending on the group of students 
they had. 
A. #ere are no differences in the two groups of students
Some teachers emphasized the idea that learning cultural aspects does not depend on the kind 
of students: 
UL09: You can’t be competent in a language without knowing the culture in depth. 
UL03: Any EFL student should develop cross-cultural communication or awareness.
UL08: Cultural aspects are always important as they help to understand more about the 
language.
B. Learning culture depends on the students
Some teachers identified two major reasons for distinguishing cultural aspects depending on the 
students. First, different learning goals mean different content as far as culture is concerned: 
UE05: Cultural aspects should always be present though the kind of student will define the scope 
of their studies. 
UE06: We should distinguish general cultural aspects which could be shared by both kinds of students 
and other specific means which are related to certain topic areas in different professional activities.
Second, due to the relevance of cultural aspects to certain professions, it may be possible that 
teacher trainees might need greater exposure to culture: 
SE01: In some specific and technical courses these cultural aspects might be secondary.
SE03: Cultural aspects should be dealt with in more depth if we’re talking about future teachers 
of English. 
UL05: Future teachers of English should have a greater knowledge [of cultural aspects].

$e following section analyses quantitative data regarding teachers’ attitudes toward teaching 
culture in general. Subjects showed their attitude toward learning about cultures in general by 
reacting to two statements in a Likert-scale: (a) it is important to know that different cultures 
use English differently; and (b) it is important to learn about the cultural patterns of English 
speaking as well as non-English speaking peoples.
96% of the teachers strongly agree/agree that it is important to know that different cultures use 
English differently and 76.9% strongly agree/agree that it is important to learn about the cultural 
patterns of English speaking as well as non-English speaking peoples (see Table 2 for the overall 
percentages for each statement and response). 
(a) It is important to know 
that different cultures use 
English differently
(b) It is important to learn about 
the cultural patterns of English 
speaking as well as non-English 
speaking peoples
Count % Count %
Strongly agree
Agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Missing system
Total
12
12
1
1
26
48.0
48.0
4.0
3.8
100.0
9
11
6
26
34.6
42.3
23.1
100.0
 All in all, subjects reacted more positively to the statement which does not mention non-native 
cultures. In other words, subjects distinguish an approach to dealing with non-native cultures on 
the whole from one which relates to particular cultures.
 $is section analyses data from teachers’ interviews when subjects commented on some probable 
influences on their attitudes toward teaching native and non-native cultures in English classes. It 
is believed that the analysis of the subjects’ English learning experiences can help describe their 
present attitudes.
T eachers pointed out some possible influences on their attitudes toward native and non-native 
cultures (American culture, British culture, other native cultures, ESL cultures and EFL cultures) 
based on how these cultures were presented (a) in classes when they were learning English, (b) by 
their English teachers, and (c) in the materials they used to learn English.
Based on teachers’ remarks, data were divided into two categories: (a) influences on their attitudes 
toward American and British cultures; and (b) influences on their attitudes toward other native 
and non-native cultures.

A. Influences on teachers’ attitudes toward American and British cultures
Although some teachers remarked that there was an emphasis on British culture, a few subjects 
recalled having classes or teachers who briefly presented American culture. Some subjects 
mentioned having studied American culture in primary school – “because the teacher was 
American” (ST01) – and at university.
B. Influences on teachers’ attitudes toward other native and non-native cultures
Few subjects referred to classes or teachers in their English language education who made 
extensive references to native and non-native cultures other than British and American. One 
subject mentioned some brief references to cultural aspects of Australia and New Zealand, while 
another subject observed that in some of the classes that talked about Great Britain there were 
some references to Ireland, Scotland and Wales. 
One subject recalled a native teacher at university who used short stories written by African 
authors. Similarly, another subject told of the same kind of experience: 
UE02: In literature classes (…) I studied South-African writers, Canadian writers, (…) that’s 
when I got in touch with different realities of the English speaking world. But it came from 
literature not language classes.
Some teachers recalled having classes and teachers who focused on British culture and, to a 
lesser extent, American culture. Moreover, few remarks were made about classes or teachers who 
presented cultural aspects of other native and non-native cultures.
In sum, from teachers’ data, subjects were more able to remember contacting with British culture 
and, though not as frequently, American culture. It seems to be fair to say that the subjects’ 
educational background – learning the language or learning to teach the language – was centred 
on the most influential cultures in ELT , with a clear emphasis on British civilization.
 $is study aimed at identifying teachers’ attitudes toward the cultural dimensions of EIL based 
on data analysed from questionnaires and interviews which considered the following features: 
subjects’ attitudes toward learning about specific cultures (native and non-native); subjects’ 
attitudes toward learning about culture in general; and influences on teachers’ attitudes toward 
native and non-native cultures.
On reflection, teachers viewed learning culture in ELT very positively. However, if, on the one 
hand, they regarded British culture, American culture, international cultural aspects not specific 
to any country, and other English native cultures as important, they did not have the same 
opinion about ESL and EFL cultures. Most teachers regarded ESL and EFL cultures as quite 
unimportant. Apparently, they have not assimilated the importance of non-native cultures 

although several applied linguists have observed that teaching materials should focus on native 
as well as non-native communities. Furthermore, when asked about teaching culture in general, 
that is, without naming specific cultures such as British, American, ESL or EFL, they reacted 
more positively toward the statement which did not refer to non-native cultures. 
Moreover, they pointed out British culture as the most important culture in ELT , followed by 
American culture. However, teachers also referred to the importance of international cultural 
aspects in language classes. $is may indicate that besides appreciating British and American 
cultures, teachers are also interested in approaching English as an international language, which 
seems to reinforce Gnutzmann’s (1999) opinion that rather than focusing on target culture-
specific topics, a stronger orientation toward international topics should be more appropriate in 
teaching English as an international language.  
$ere seems to be no consensus among teachers on how to approach culture in ELT . Most of 
them believed that the choice of cultural materials in language classes depended on the kind of 
students they taught (e.g. teacher trainees or ESP students). However, about one third of the 
teachers affirmed that there would be no differences between their students and their approach 
to dealing with culture would be the same. 
A fundamental aim of this study is to make space for the voices of the Expanding Circle. $e 
EIL debate has been led by researchers in the Inner and Outer Circles. However, this does 
not represent the reality of English use in the world today. $e future of the English language 
does not depend only on what happens in the native countries of the Inner Circle or in the 
communities of the Outer Circle where English has acquired an official status.