Teaching in Taiwan can be a blast. Taiwan is very liberal and often you meet lots of teachers who have no degree or fake degrees. One thing I was told when I first arrived is that Taiwanese want to learn all kinds of English. I think this is cool. English, like all languages, is spoken in many dialects throughout the world and exposure to these as an English student can be hugely beneficial. One thing I have a problem with is Chinglish, specifically teachers who use Chinglish to communicate. There is an argument that this is actually a form of English, but I disagree. The majority of business in Taiwan, Mainland China, and other Chinese speaking countries will be in an authentic form of Chinese. This may include a dialect that prefers specific word choices and speech patterns, but for the most part it will be standardized Mandarin. I would argue the same for all languages. I think that it is good for teachers to model bilingualism, but I believe the speech patterns should be authentic and modeled authentically.
There’s an argument for ‘grading your language’ for learners, in the same way that caregivers do to children. This should be simplified, but obviously not inauthentic.
I also tend to follow American verb tense usage more with lower level students, rather than my authentic language because it’s more what learners are accustomed to. English is a global language and this is valid, I think.
If communication is the goal and we accept that there are many Englishes spoken outside England, then we have to accept variants. English as spoken by Chinese L1 speakers as a kind of interlanguage exists. What’s the goal of learning? Communication, or emulating people like me? One is a realistic target, one isn’t, for the large part.
Uh… you seem to using the word “authentic” to mean something other than sincerity of expression.
The whole point of language is to communicate. If a pidgin English works for people, what’s so awful about that?
There is no “authentic” English. It’s always been pragmatic and adaptible, not rigidly defined. There are some features of English as we know it that the language would be better off without: irregular verbs for starters.
English – broadly speaking – is the international language, and I think it’s self evident that the world needs an international language. Why make it harder for people to master the international language than it has to be?
‘Authentic’ is a term used in teaching.
I agree and I disagree. Learners can speak ‘global English’ but I still retain my native language which is ‘English’. I simplify it for non-native speakers and I also grade it for nonBritish native English speakers because it’s kind of hickish to assume toot le monde understands my dialect and accent: normal code-switching. But this is where the frustration comes in for learners: they understand me when I speak to them but they’d never follow the language if I were speaking with my sister or my uncles. It’s not a huge issue if you teach in Taiwan but it really is if you teach in a English-speaking country. Learners really want to bridge that gap. Supporting that is an English teacher’s job - neither inauthentic baby-talk or blasting them with idiomatic strings of sounds that a group of people who have learned English most through reading and through memorising vocab are just not equipped to decode are useful.
In that case, maybe it would make sense to have two tiers of English instruction.
First, a simplified international version of English that people of different nationalities can master with moderate effort and then use to communicate with each other.
Second – and optional – training in some specific form of English, by which an immigrant to an English-speaking country can integrate better into society.
In a couple of centuries, the reformed international English could be the only living language on the planet, and everyone’s lives will be made easier thereby. It would be all that Esperanto wanted to be.
Of course, that would make it harder to appreciate the nuances of Shakespeare. There’s no free lunch.
Two tiers? I think somebody might have already thought of that (ESL/EFL) … 
Sure to the global English thing. English as a native language isn’t going to simplify though. Too many origins and influences. And native speakers have the right to a native language as much as anyone. Learners get that, for the large part.
My ex…an American from LA, coudnt understand my family from Kentucky.
SO this is a wasted thread really.