Why You Need a Foreign Language & How to Learn One

Chapter 5 (Excerpt)

Language and the limits of globalization

"A language is a dialect with an army and a navy."

--Uriel Weinreich

The notion of English as a global language is closely tied to the wider concept of globalization itself. But what exactly is "globalization?"

Globalization is not a specifically codified doctrine. Nor is globalization an inherently right-wing or left-wing ideology. Globalization includes the following elements and outcomes:

• Unlimited free trade
• Borderless labor markets
• An increased role for supranational governmental bodies like the United Nations and the European Union.

Evangelists for globalization are enthusiastic about Global English for several reasons. A single world language would make the world more homogenous. Homogenized consumers who spoke the same language could be reached through a single marketing message rather than multiple diverse ones. If all the world’s workers spoke English, then a corporation in London or Chicago could hire engineers in China or Brazil just as easily (and much more cheaply) than they could hire them at home. A single world language would also make diverse populations less diverse, and therefore more accepting of international governmental entities. 

The advocates of globalization have succeeded in implementing English as an administrative language in settings where it has no logical connection to the population it theoretically serves. For example:

• Cultural elites in Europe have succeeded in making English the language of instruction in some university programs in countries where English is not spoken as a native language.
• English is sometimes used as a working language in the meetings of international government bodies like the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and the European Union, even when a minority of the delegates present actually speak the language.

There are also examples from the private sector. English has been forced into some European corporate environments where neither the customers nor the organizational staff speak English. (As you will recall from Chapter 2, the functional value of English in situations where no native speakers are present is minimal.) However, English is now a doctrinaire aspect of "going global." Many European managers have therefore hastened to introduce it into their organizations, without considering how the language is actually going to be used. Recall the rank-and-file Spanish engineer from Chapter 2 who described "the descent into babble" which accompanies the forced usage of English in the European workplace.

This has been fundamentally a top-down process rather than a grass-roots movement. Globalization (and the accompanying emphasis on Global English) is led by management consulting firms, multinational corporations, and the cultural elite.

Predictably, there has been a grassroots backlash. In 1430, Joan of Arc energized her countrymen with the cry of "France for the French." Today, the cry is more likely to be "French for France," "German for Germany," or "Spanish for Spain." No one wants to see his language and culture swallowed by a "global standard." When European elites propose implementing English as the language of university-level instruction in countries where it is not the national language, the man and woman on the street understandably take umbrage. What is wrong with French, Danish, German, etc?

In 2003 a group of Japanese academics and media elites proposed granting English a secondary official status in the country. The result was a huge outcry on the Internet and in the letters-to-the-editor columns of every major newspaper. Common citizens were adamant: Japanese was the national language of Japan.

I can understand this attitude because I have a strong attachment to my own language. If French were to somehow recoup its position of international prestige, Americans would become more protective of English. We would bristle at the idea that we should conduct university classes in French, or make French the language of our corporations--just because people were speaking French in some classrooms and boardrooms on the other side of the world.

LINGUISTIC DIVERSITY IN EUROPE

The concept of "linguistic diversity" is a strong component of European identity. The EU recognizes eleven "official" languages: Spanish, Danish, German, Greek, English, French, Italian, Dutch, Portuguese, Finnish and Swedish. Maintaining equal status for each of these languages is a highly politicized issue..........

(End of Chapter Excerpt)

Copyright © 2005 Beechmont Crest Publishing