A Variety of English as a Truly Neutral Means of Communication - Essay Example

Can a variety of English ever be a truly neutral means of communication? The linguistic concept of variety is associated with describing the existence of various linguistic systems which are shared by individuals who essentially represent their link to a specific group which may be defined on the basis of geographic or social characteristics (Hall, Smith and Wicaksono 2013, p. 29). The presence of linguistic variety in this scenario asserts that a speaker’s connection with a particular group defines his/her selection of a suitable dialect or adopted style of language as both of these concepts lie at the crux of linguistic analysis and study with regard to the understanding of variation and variety (Hall, Smith and Wicaksono 2013, p. 29). In their discussion on language variation Becker and Bieswanger (2006, p. 174) specify that a variety of English language may stem from three distinguishable components which can be identified as 1) geographical 2) sociolects and 3) functional. As stated previously, geographic varieties are explored through the recognition of characteristics that are linked with the adoption of dialects on the basis of region. However, the notion of sociolects encompasses the critical influence of social aspects in addition with economic components as the key factors for determining the extent of language variation as it emerges as an outcome of social status, nature of job or work and affiliation with groups. Accordingly, the aspect of functional varieties is linked with the selected use of language as per the existing scenario and the specific requirements of interaction with regard to the given situation (Becker and Bieswanger 2006, p. 174). Once the basic assessment of language variation has been conducted, it is important to suggest that the concept of a standard denotes that a specific linguistic system is labeled as the norm in a society and thus distinguishes itself from the variation of linguistic systems which may exist in the same society. As an integral concept in the study of linguistics, the notion of variety has been incorporated into scholarly works and analysis to identify and apply the teachings of the discipline for comprehending the role of language as the most significant element of human reality and the social construct. In alignment with this view, this paper comprehensively explores the popular debate on the notion of whether the existence of language variation in English can possibly encourage the language to emerge as truly neutral means of communication and correspondence. The paper incorporates scholarly articles and sociolinguistic literature to derive objective and viable conclusions on the topic. The global spread of English has sparked a debate regarding the critical role of the language in acting as a neutral means of communication for allowing today’s multiethnic and diverse communities to correspond and communicate in an effective manner in a given geographic setting. However, the transformation of the language as it occurred during its spread across the globe has led critics to argue whether what is termed as ‘English’ today can be accurately described as being the language whose existence is rooted in 450 A.D Britain. For example, in his assessment of the modern and widespread usage of English as a means of communication sociolinguist Michael Toolan argues that the status of English as a global language transformed the language to a point where it has become “so culturally removed from the traditional national language of England that it should not be called ‘English’ ” (Seargeant and Swann 2011, p. 5). The manner in which the aforementioned transformation of English has occurred can be attributed to a number of factors including colonization which triggered the spread of the language in lands which exist much farther away than the birthplace of English. However, the question which is being scrutinized in this research aims to understand whether the linguistic variation of the language has radically transformed it to the extent where it can no longer be termed as a neutral means of communication. At this point in the discussion the framework of linguist Braj Kachru can be integrated into the discussion to develop a theoretical comprehension of the modern identity of the English language and trace its implications. As noted by Kachru, the contemporary outlook of English has transformed to a point where it boosts of having multiple identities rather than a single identity which Toolan appears to advocate through his argument of rootedness (Sergeant and Swann 2011, p. 5). This view essentially postulates that the presence of numerous cultures where English has been assimilated into society as a whole has revoked the status of language as a sole representative of the British socio-cultural identity. In the light of this view, Kachru asserts that it is more appropriate to term the language as ‘Englishes’ to take into account the diverse socio-cultural identities with which the language can be associated (Sergeant and Swann 2011, p. 5). The arguments which have been forwarded by Toolan and Kachru appear to support the notion that with regard to modern society the use of English can no longer be limited to a particular cultural diaspora (Sergeant and Swann 2011, p. 5) and the evolution of language in this case signifies that how English is classified or assessed today is much different from before it gained the status of an international language. Therefore, for the purposes of assessing the applicability of the language as a neutral means of communication it is important to define the boundaries of what can be regarded as English by linking the multicultural identities of the language. According to Seargeant and Swann (2011, p. 7) the contemporary conceptions of English language which define the linguistic model are greatly influenced by the development of social definitions and therefore, have not been formulated by understanding the specific components of the linguistic structure and model of the language. These social comprehensions of English are essentially responsible for suggesting that it is not entirely possible to confine the language to a restricted or limited frame because as an element of the social construct it is impractical to disassociate language from society, groups and communities. In her analysis of the practical steps which have been taken to establish English as the lingua franca and the subsequent impact of these systematic efforts, Seidlhofer (2001, p. 133) identifies a significant gap in the current status of English as being truly recognized as a global language by suggesting that non-native speakers are yet to receive recognition for adopting the language and using it as per their cultural identities and requirement. According to Seidlhofer (2001, p. 133) the launch of a variable framework for launching English as a lingua franca holds the potential to alter the language for meeting the needs of the world which has become a global village. This view entails that in the modern setting it is still possible to accept a varieties of English as being valid and adequate even if their linguistic models do not operate in accordance with the recommendations of authentic English. Another aspect of assessing the status of English as a neutral means of communication distances itself from the contemporary examinations of the language and guides itself to the historical development of the language. The purpose of this analysis is to understand how the interaction of English with other languages has essentially played a critical role in its subsequent spread and acceptance on a global scale. The systematic development of English as lingua franca has triggered the use of the language across geographic regions and through the assessment of various components of how the language is taught across the globe such as English as a Second Language (ESL) and English as an International Language (EIL) it can be noted that the language is being consciously altered to cater to the requirements of a much larger audience. This methodical concept can be assessed and explained through the incorporation linguist Braj Kachru’s theoretical framework termed as ‘The Three Circles of English’. Seargeant and Swann (2011, p. 30-31) describe the recommendations of Kachru’s model by defining the existence of three distinct circles 1) the inner circle 2) the outer circle and 3) the expanding circle. The application of this model is associated with understanding the rise of English as an international language and also documenting the spread of the language in accordance with geographic regions and locations. As reflected by its name, the first circle encompasses the region from where the language first emerged. Thus in this case the English language as it is practiced by the inner circle can be identified as the standard or benchmark for Kachru because the linguist suggests that the linguistic practices of the inner circle are responsible for shaping the manner in which the members of other circles are able to understand the language (Seargeant and Swann 2011, p. 30-31). Accordingly, Kachru’s outer circle comprises of those nations which were colonized by the United Kingdom and therefore, came under the influence of English as an outcome of the colonization process. Seargeant and Swann (2011, p. 30) outline that the process of integrating English language within the society of the outer circle is essentially rooted in transforming the status of the language as a truly neutral means of communication. This notion emerges from the idea that former colonies employ language patterns in a distinctive manner than that of the inner circle, for example, by combining their native language with English which is also known as Hinglish in India as a hybrid depiction of the authentic set of English and one of the many varieties of the same. Subsequently, English is also employed across former United Kingdom colonies in strictly official settings and therefore, may not be able to replace the status of that the native languages such as Hindi or Urdu hold in the households of citizens. In terms of assessing the expanding circle, Kachru’s model allows linguists to understand the status of English in regions where the models for teaching the language transcend the concept of English as a Second Language and progress to the notion of learning the language through the means of English as a Foreign Language (Seargeant and Swann 2011, p. 32). The variable scales of examining the nature of English language and how it is employed across the globe allows to develop a picture of how the language’s multicultural identity can be accepted and promoted to create a truly neutral means of communication for everyone. Moreover, another positive implication of applying Kachru’s model can be understood in the form of distinguishing between valid linguistic systems. This view entails that regardless of the circle – inner, outer or expanding, where English is being practiced, employed and utilized the existence of the language is linked with the development of an authentic presence which cannot be termed as inadequate or insufficient. Therefore, it is possible to suggest that non-native varieties of English are truly acceptable and justifiable as a means of correspondence which essentially enhances the neutrality of the language. However, Seargeant and Swann (2011, p. 32) acknowledge that Kachru’s model is subject to objections because it is rooted in the identification of specific nations. This notion postulates that by examining the nature of the adoption of English language on a macro level the theoretical framework fails to take into account the presence of multicultural identities within the nation. For example, South Asian countries of India and Pakistan are marked by the existence of different cultures which may demonstrate variable ways of using English that may not be analogous to how the language is spoken by a majority of citizens or in a more general sense. Furthermore, the example of hybridization of language such as Hinglish where speakers may combine their native language with English defies the concept of varieties which appears to be restricted and limited when applied to this case. Therefore, it can be suggested that while English has been able to develop into a neutral means of communication for a range of societies, nations and communities, the key word in the argument which is that of ‘truly’ implies that alternative models of promoting and teaching the language need to be adopted for cementing its place as a ‘truly neutral means of communication’. References Becker, A., & Bieswanger, M. (2006). Introduction to English linguistics (Vol. 2752). UTB. Hall, C. J., Smith, P. H., & Wicaksono, R. (2013). Mapping applied linguistics: A guide for students and practitioners. Routledge. Seargeant, P., & Swann, J. (2011). English in the world: history, diversity, change. Routledge. Seidlhofer, B. (2001). Closing a conceptual gap: The case for a description of English as a lingua franca. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 133-158. Read More