by Paul Gibson
Home >> The Rise of English
The irrevocable position of utter dominance of English in the world of business is unmistakable. In a Union where you have 27 countries , however, there are over 23 officially recognised languages. While this may seem like good news for interpreters, the reality is quite different. Interpreters are only used at grand official meetings which are few and far between. So how are officials from Bucharest and Eastern European countries communicating with their fellow Western Europeans? In English of course. So the real question is: Is this new trend good for Europe?
The answer in Great Britain is a resounding YES! But you may be surprised at other opinions which actually argue that English “confers an unfair advantageâ€? to native English-speakers. (Everyone turn on your Neelie Kroes Detector * – she’s on the prowl for more competition fines.)
Advocates of this position say that it is much easier for the English to articulate or argue their position because they can do it in their own language. The unfair advantage also comes from the misfortune of other non-natives who have trouble understanding the sometimes broken-English of their European counterparts, whereas the British and the Irish understand better.
Francois Grin (a Swiss economist) has made reference to the financial gains or advantages of native/ fluent English speakers. Mr. Grin refers to the billions of euros that Great Britain saves in language education, proportionately lower than in France or Switzerland. And if that were not enough, they even make money off of teaching English to foreigners. According to Grin, attributing a dominant position to a language is “tantamount to giving a handout� to the nation where they speak the language.
Hugo Beardsmore, a Belgian academic, goes even further to talk about the “complacency� of the English and Americans due to the global rise of English. (An attitude of: “I already know English, so why do I want to learn another language.�) While recognising the suitability of English in the international arena, he contradicts himself and even goes so far as to say: “English, in effect, blocks the learning of other languages.� WHAT???
Mr. Beardsmore backs his position with reference material from documentation of the European Union (from Brussels no doubt) which speaks of a program to encourage avoiding the “riskâ€? of pupils being taught English, and recommends that English be taught as a third-language. (How envious is that! I think someone is green, and it’s not the Irish this time!)
But Beardsmore stands firm to his convictions. He cites a shortage of job candidates who lack the proper local (non-English) language instruction which somehow translated into a loss of contracts in some 40% of Belgian businesses.
And finally the ironic part: Beardsmore brushes aside the coveted position Brussels enjoys as the capital of the EU, and the positive economic impact that supposes, and complains about a 20% unemployment rate in Belgium which he attributes to a lack of “local� language education. The ironic part is that these job vacancies he is talking about are the same jobs being offered by the EU because of demands by linguists (like him) with close ties to European institutions and governments.
I think Beardsmore had better not quit his day job and leave economics to the economists. His remarks are a disgrace to the European Union – and just another measure of his own “academic� prowess.
Language is culture, knowledge, heritage… a priceless gem, whether it’s English, French, German, Italian, Dutch,Czech, Polish, Russian, etc. “Linguaâ€? is indeed a treasure to be shared by all.
-—- Neelie Krowes, Head of the European Union’s Fair Competition Committee – better known for imposing fines on multinationals such as Microsoft Corporation.
Released under the following licence: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDeriv
You are free to copy, distribute and display the contents of this article but you must give credit to and mention the original author. You are not allowed to use these contents for commercial purposes, and you may not modify them to make any derivative works.
For full licence description, go to: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.1/es/deed.en
Posted on http://www.weeklyletter.com at 2007-07-31 12:00:00 +0200
Copyright (C) ITT (http://www.itt.es) and Planet Lingua (http://www.lingua.es)
We have more weekly letters by Paul
Poll for this weekly letter
I believe that English should be taught as a third-language here in Europe:
Licencing
You are free to copy, distribute and display the contents of this article but you must give credit to and mention the original author. You are not allowed to use these contents for commercial purposes, and you may not modify them to make any derivative works.
(click the above link for more information)
Add a comment
It is interesting that a Swiss economist would be the one to realize that English is being reduced to some sort of half-assed Esperanto. I find the fact that my language has turned into pure pragmatics and is only learned because it is practical highly offensive.
It is true that Europeans who know English, though there are exceptions, tend to forget that there are other languages in the world. Someone living five minutes from the French or Portuguese border, not to mention the linguistic borders of Basque or Catalan or Galician, is stupid enough to think that English will be more practical and helpful when chances are that person will encounter a speaker of the neighboring languages long before English will be of any help. English does, indeed, block the learning of other languages. Have a look at the schools around you.
Eliminate English language learning? Of course not. But why does it have to replace? It seems to me of utmost absurdity for a German-speaker and an Italian speaker to communicate in English, when there are more native German speakers in the E.U. than English speakers and just as many native Italian speakers. Who learns Italian?
Disglossia is wrong. Always. It’s not about envy, it’s about the creation of a previously inexistent need, a need to learn English before anything else. English is no longer a priceless gem, and if it is, it’s pure business. People don’t give a brass razoo about my language. They don’t get it. All they want is to order machine parts from Finland or have a beer in Prague. That is not English.
Thanks for your comment Wes…
I found your observations thought-provoking… I wouldn’t be surprised that people are willing to learn English for practical uses. There are some people who do not have as much “ease” as some do to learn several languages. They resort to learning what they “need to learn” in order to get by. Yes, it would be much better if they decided to learn more than just practical sayings etc,(I agree with yoiu!) but let’s face it – English is the language of business – business is practical…therefore, the English they learn is practical. Some people would think twice before considering that offensive.
I totally agree that English should not replace any language. While the number of people in Europe who speak German may be formidable, and the number of Italians who speak Italian as well, I find it very hard to believe that there are not more English speakers in Europe and in fact I am convinced that Eastern Europeans communicate with Germans and Italians in English. They have a lot of meetings with a number of people from different countries and they look for a common language – that’s what I think we are talking about.
Why communicate with five translators when you can speak face-to-face, in a language you all know? English certainly doesn’t block learning – anyone who wants to learn a language just needs to look for a tutor, buy a language book, listen to world radcio, etc.: they teach German, Italian, Chinese, even Japanese here in Sanse. But I have to say, I think I understand and share your frustration in a certain sense! People could learn so much more, if they just put in a little more effort!
Thanks for your comments Wes!
This is all very interesting. I read the article “Charlemagne: Linguistic Follies� in The Economist while riding a train in London. Just four comments:
One, adult language education is something entirely different. I think we’re talking children here, SCHOOLS. English is being shoved at kids in school with no regard to what is right next door.
Two, I think there are more native German speakers in the E.U. than native English speakers. There’s Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Luxembourg, Schleswig-Holstein in Denmark, etc.
Three, of course anyone can take up any old language whenever they want, right?
Four, language fluency, etc., comes for all when a language is learned as a child. Only few of us become fluent as adults.
I think English is the most important and international language in the world today. Why? I don’t know as Esperanto was invented for this very purpose,but has unfortunately practically died out.
I’ve just come back from holiday on the Costa Brava and every time I saw communication between the Dutch,Germans etc with the Spanish or other nationalities it was in English.
I do agree however that in border towns like where I live in IrĂşn etc, the neighbouring country’s language is more important to learn. Especially if you are going to be dealing with that country.
However, I also think it’s very important to learn English if the student is going to travel to any English speaking country or any country that speaks English as a second language.
In my experience the common language used to communicate among Eastern Europeans is normally either German or Russian.
Language is not merely a way of communicating. It is a way of thinking too.
In Gaelic, I am told, there are no ‘property’ words. You can only say things are yours if they don’t involve outside things (like ‘tiredness’ ). But you would never say ‘my’ house or ‘my wife’.
So Gaelic speakers, for example, see themselves, their place in the universe and their relationships immensely differently from the English, Spanish or Germans.It is said that in Gaelic there are no words for property but there are seventeen words for love.
That’s why people get passionate about their language and why people resist dominant cultures. To do otherwise would be treacherous.
—-In a 2004 survey 80% of the English people interviewed said they did not need to learn another language because “everybody speaks English”.
Thank you all for your interesting comments.
After reading your observations, I must say that we have opened the door to yet another question: What does “native” mean when we are talking about an international language….probably loses meaning, but I am sure there will always be people “who speak like natives” or speak “native English” or “native German”. That’s the great thing about language – it grows and takes on an entirely different version depending on the region where it is spoken.
As far as language instruction is concerned, languages can be learned at any age with a lesser or more acute degree of difficulty. One thing is for sure, if you are an adult learning a new language, you will have to start from the beginning – speaking like a child!
Thanks again!
Paul
It’s a very interesting discussion and I want to contribute with only two new ideas.
One : especially for Wes. I once heard that English people thought that English was the most common language in the world, but in fact the most common language in the world is English that is spoken by non native speakers.
Two : Rise and fall. Have you thought about languages like Greek, Latin, Spanish or French, that once dominated the world and nowadays have been removed from its place by English ? Nothing is forever.