Oldal 35 [35]
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
it is impossible to create an imaginary blend of these communities represent¬
ing a homogeneous anglophone culture (Jenkins 2009, Widdowson 2004). Also,
native speakers of English are outnumbered by non-native speakers of English
by a third (Crystal 2003); as a consequence, learners of English cannot iden¬
tify with speakers of English the same way French speakers did in Canada in
the Gardnerian (1985) model.
A possible solution to this problem was the extension of the original Gard¬
nerian (1985) model, as integrativeness in a globalized world “is not so much
related to any actual, or metaphorical, integration into an L2 community as
to some more basic identification process within the individual’s self-concept”
(Dörnyei-Csizer 2002: 456). In order to justify this claim and to provide em¬
pirical support for the concept, Dérnyei et al. (2006) conducted a large-scale
longitudinal study in Hungary that extended over a 12-year period and involved
more than 13,000 Hungarian students. The findings reinforced the importance
of integrativeness supported by positive attitudes towards L2 speakers and the
positive impact of instrumentality, i.e., the practical benefits of knowing an
L2, such as a higher salary or better position in the labor market. However,
direct communication with members of the L2 community and “real” integra¬
tion with the L2 community was not possible since most students learned
English in an educational setting without direct contact with the target com¬
munity. Csizér and Doérnyei (2005) explained these findings by pointing out
that integrativeness in this sense is different from that of Gardner (1985) and
should, therefore, be treated as a different concept, especially because there is
no specific L2 community in the case of English; rather, learners may develop
a globalized world identity. In light of these findings, Dôrnyei and Csizér (2002)
claimed that integrativeness, on the one hand, refers to the learners’ desire to
become part of the L2 community; on the other hand, it also involves “identi¬
fication with the values that knowledge of the L2 could bring them” (Csizér
2019: 72).
The Ideal L2 Self was chosen to be part of the present research project be¬
cause, in various contexts, numerous other large-scale studies have yielded
results supporting the Ideal L2 Self dimension of Dôrnyeïs (2005) theory.
Studies conducted in Germany (Busse—Walter 2013, Busse—Williams 2010);
Hungary (Csizer-Lukäcs 2010, Kormos-Csizer 2008); Indonesia (Lamb 2012);
Japan, China, and Iran (Ryan 2009, Taguchi et al. 2009); Pakistan (Islam et al.
2013); Saudi Arabia (Al-Shehri 2009, Moskovsky et al. 2016); and Sweden
(Henry 2009, 2010) validated the L2 Motivation Self System, and Dörnyei and
Ryan (2015) add that the studies using both the Ideal L2 Self and Integrative¬
ness found that the two variables correlate (correlation coefficient r=.50), which
reinforces the previous assumption that they are related.
+ 33 +