Global Usage of a Language - Assignment Example

Introduction As a universal attribute of the species, language has always held a singular fascination for human beings. The Merriam Webster dictionary defines language as ‘a systematic means of communicating ideas or feelings by the use of conventionalized signs, sounds, gestures, or marks having understood meanings.’ Language is a uniquely human experience. The need to communicate and its method (language) are based in human psyche and passed on from one generation to the next. Language is closely bound up with the forms of human thought. It serves a vast range of communicative needs, from getting the neighbor to keep the music down, to telling jokes, making declarations of love or hate, or praying etc. It also functions in the middle of complex civilizations, not just as a way of communication, but as an indicator of social identity, a sign of association to a social class, ethnic group, or country. Every word in a language is a term. Every term has both meaning and assumption, and this is why language barriers are more than measly communication barriers, why something is always lost in translation. A language portrays society and emotion in its very essence. It develops as a people develop. Hence to understand a particular language is to live within it and its culture. This is where swear words get their power from, for example damn, shit all have different textual meanings but are conversationally used as swear words. Linguistics is the study of language and concerns itself with all aspects of how people utilize language and what they have to know in order to do so. Loss of language All languages change, they have histories, and they live and die along with the societies they belong to. Human languages are typically referred to as natural languages. A common progression for natural languages is that they are considered to be first spoken, and then written, and then an understanding and explanation of their grammar is attempted. Any language that is in a constant state of change is known as a living language or modern language. A language that ceases to change or develop is classified as a dead language. The most universal process leading to language death is one in which a society of speakers of one language becomes bilingual in an additional language, and gradually shifts loyalty to the second language until they stop to use their original (or heritage) language. This is a process of incorporation which may be voluntary or may be forced upon a people. Speakers of a few languages, particularly regional or minority languages may choose to abandon them based on economic or practical grounds, in favor of languages regarded as having greater efficacy or prestige. (Nunberg & Wasow) Languages can also die when their speakers are hit by genocide, disease, or the extraordinary event of a devastating natural disaster. A dead language may remain in use for scientific, legal, or religious functions. Old Church Slavonic, Coptic, Biblical Hebrew, Ge'ez and Latin are among the many dead languages used as sacred languages. Any language which no longer has any speakers is an extinct language or if, although it is known to have been spoken by people in the past, modern scholarship is unable reconstruct it to the point that it is possible to write in it or interpret it with assurance .In general the change from a dead to an extinct language occurs when a language experiences language death while being straightforwardly replaced by a different one. For example, Native American languages were replaced by English, French, Spanish, or Portuguese. By these definitions Proto-Indo-European (of which only conjectural reconstructions exist) is an extinct language, but Classical Latin and Old Tupi are dead languages. The expert on world languages, David Crystal, estimates that there are approximately 6000 languages spoken in the world today, and that this number is declining at a rate of one language every two weeks. More than ever, societies that were once self-sufficient find themselves under extreme pressure to integrate with powerful neighbors, provincial forces, or invaders, frequently leading to the loss of their own languages and even their cultural identity. (Crystal, 2000) Multilingualism In most parts of the world, communities use more than one language, and the phenomenon is called bilingualism or multilingualism. Widespread multilingualism is a consequence of language contact. Languages that come into contact can sway each other in various ways, sometimes uniting in grammar or other characteristics. Under certain social environments, a blend of languages can give rise to 'new' languages commonly known as pidgins and creoles. however, frequently the result when languages come into contact is that one particular language gains dominance at the expense of the other, especially when the contact is between a widely used language of a powerful community and a regional or minority language. Professor Peter Austin, Australian linguist asserts that ‘The notion that people only speak one language has only become a normal state of affairs in the past 100 years or so.’ Multilingualism was more widespread in the past than is usually supposed. In early times, most people were members of small language communities and it was necessary to know two or more languages for trade or any other transactions outside one's own town or village. This holds true even today in areas of high linguistic diversity for instance Sub-Saharan Africa and India. Linguist Ekkehard Wolff asserts that almost 50% of the African populace is multilingual. (Wolff, 2000) There are far more bilingual and multilingual speakers in the world than there are monolinguals (Dewaele et al., 2003). A villager in pastoral Kenya or a businessman in Mumbai may perform their daily business in five or six languages or dialects. There are more than a hundred languages spoken in Vanuatu, (Lynch & Crowley, 2001) and it is obvious that most people use several languages on a regular basis. In a multilingual society, not all speakers need to be multilingual. Some countries have multilingual policies and recognize several authorized languages, such as Belgium (Dutch and French), Canada (English and French) or Singapore (English, Malay, Mandarin Chinese and Tamil). The question of which language to use is determined by implicit understandings, and sometimes by official rules and regulations that may raise difficult questions concerning the relation of language to nationality. In many countries, including the US, there are at present important debates about establishing an authorized language. (Nunberg & Wasow, no date) The ability to speak more than one language is growing in importance. The world is becoming smaller and more linked, and with this new linkage, we must be able to communicate effectively as well as understand the diversity in cultures. A sense of tolerance and acceptance needs to be taught and learned to succeed in the global village of the 21st century. Monolingualism Monolingualism is defined as the condition of being able to speak only a single language. Linguistic theories have often assumed monolingualism to be the standard state of affairs (Pavlenko, 2000), and this view is frequently held by individual monolinguals who are speakers of a principal language such as English (Edwards, 1994). Crystal shows that monolingualism is regarded as the rule by many in Western societies: People brought up within a western society often think that the monolingualism that forms a routine part of their existence is the normal way of life for all but a few ‘special’ people. They are wrong. Multilingualism is the natural way of life for hundreds of millions all over the world. (Crystal, 1987: 360) English-speaking Australians are notorious for believing they cannot learn languages, as exposed by a statement by the Australian Linguistic Society: ‘it appears to be widely believed in Australia that foreign languages are essentially unlearnable to normal people, and that Australians have a special innate anti-talent for learning them.’ (ALS & ALAA, 1981: 15) British and American monolinguals complain they have no aptitude for foreign languages displaying a perverse delight in monolingualism, rarely openly acknowledged: ‘[this complaint] (…) is usually accompanied by expressions of envy for those multilingual Europeans, and (sometimes) by a linguistic smugness reflecting a deeply-held conviction that, after all, those clever ‘others’ who do not already know English will have to accommodate in a world made increasingly safe for Anglophones.’ (Edwards, 1994: 60) This is definitely a sorry state of affairs as many academics consider that monolinguals are a disadvantaged group. Kirkpatrick (2000) maintains that those who speak only one language are disadvantaged in the global job market and in business. Many scholars doubt the ability of monolingual speakers to become truly inter-culturally competent, because they lack access to other cultures’ traditions and world view as represented through language. Monolingual children are also said to miss out on the opportunity to develop an early enjoyment of language, and the cognitive and linguistic elasticity referred to in the bilingualism literature (Hamers & Blanc, 2000; Baker, 2001). Language policy Many countries have a language policy designed to favor or discourage the use of a particular language or languages. Monolingualism is also a phenomenon of language phobia in some countries. Many governments around the globe have attempted to protect their local cultures by imposing bans on what they assert to be foreign cultural invasion. France has attracted the most infamy for attempting to guard its language from the migration of foreign words. The French Academy regularly scours the land for insidious words from other languages, most particularly English ones. Terms such as ‘walkman,’ ‘talk show,’ and ‘prime time’ have been stated to be unwelcome foreigners, and the government has tried to replace them with French substitutes. The provincial regulations in Canada's French speaking province of Quebec stipulate that any sign in English posted by a business must also post the same content in French in letters double the size. Even more radical measures to promote the French language have been thought-out, such as forcing immigrants to receive their university educations in French, and requirements that large-scale businesses conduct all their dealings in French. Much of the same is true for the Chinese monolingual-phobia. Even within the United States a significant political movement has sprung up analogous to those seen in France or Quebec, aimed at safeguarding the English language. The group U.S.-English, for example, aims ‘to ensure that English continues to serve as an integrating force among our nation's many ethnic groups.’ Many Americans have grown anxious over the proliferation of other languages and the ensuing language mix, due to the rapid incursion of immigrants into the United States. (Protecting Languages, no date) The above language policies show the uncertainty and monolingual-phobia that is prevalent across the globe. People are afraid that the will loose their identity and culture alongside their language or that language contact will taint their nationality. Even as countries historically have used language policies most often to endorse one official language at the expense of others, many countries now have policies planned to protect and promote provincial and ethnic languages whose feasibility is threatened. One language The role of language in globalizing the world is an important aspect of language and its powers in the contemporary world. Presently 99% of the world languages have not been incorporated in the global market. Economic and military powers are the source of political influence around the globe in the 21st century. While globalization supports economic competitiveness, it also generates a ‘survival of the fittest’ mind-set amongst the competitors. Thus, the language or languages that are used by powerful nations stand a better chance of becoming global and to assume a versatile role of communication. The United States is at present the only standing super power and the national language is English. The chief currency of the world is the dollar and the language of the dollar is English. The Europeans use English to commune across their own borders and with the rest of the world. Australia is an English speaking continent and, as a result of colonization, Africa and most of Asia communicates with each other in English. Thus English is pretty much ‘the global language’. (Moshi 2006) Dangers of one language The rise of English as a global language has strengthened the certainty of some English-speaking people that learning another language is unnecessary (Crystal, 1997) ‘The dogma of homogeneism’ is entrenched in European views, a view of society in which differences are seen as hazardous and centrifugal and in which the ‘best’ society is recommended as one without inter group differences. That is, the ideal model of society is monolingual, mono-ethnic, mono-religious, and mono-ideological. (Blommaert & Verschueren, 1998: 194-95) Should we accept one language as linguistically inevitable and so disregard any efforts to have a linguistically diverse world? Walters and Brody (2005) correctly notes that when we advocate for a global language, we need to contend with the concerns of both sides of the debate. There are real concerns by both native and non-native English speakers about political, economic, and cultural consequences as they affect them should English become global and spread to all corners of the world. Crystal (2005:508-514) details the risks of accommodating one language to serve the world. These are: 1) Elite monolingual linguistic tendencies: where one faction assumes the monopoly of the language cementing the development of smug and dismissive attitudes towards new languages and cultures. 2) Manipulative tendencies: where the advantaged group use their competitive supremacy to manipulate the system at the cost of those who have less control and lack the capability to use it. As a result the gap between the poor and the rich would increase. 3) Marginalization: where some languages become marginalized and considered not worth learning. 4) Language death: when a language is thought to be not worth learning, it becomes extraneous and its eventual death is hastened. This is a real hazard for small languages and languages spoken in less influential nations. This also enables the mentality of ‘survival of the fittest’. Conclusion The dictionary meaning of the term globalize is ‘make something become adopted on a global scale’. There is a distinction between developing a language for global use and developing a language as a sociological tool. Global usage of a language enhances global understanding. However, when it is used for socio-political purposes its function assumes an imposing and menacing value to the culture of other groups of speakers. A shared language should be a link between cultures, a bridge that bonds speakers and allows people to share cultural values, assorted views and knowledge, and encourages a global understanding and a polycentric society. One doesn't even need to look to cryptic, specialist discussion to comprehend that language is a facilitator of the flow of power. It is a substrate that connects people, and allows them to co-ordinate and build systems and ideas based on groups rather than individuals. To bring about a polycentric equation, promoters of a linguistic and cultural diversity need to be busy in a much broader struggle for the creation of a polycentric world. If globalization is permitted to eradicate linguistic and cultural diversity, then there will be no chance for the growth of a polycentric world where varied experiences and knowledge contribute evenly to science and technology, the two dynamic forces of global advancement in the 21st century and beyond. (Moshi, 2006) Bibliography 1. ALS & ALAA (Australian Linguistics Society & the Applied Linguistics Association of Australia) (1981). “Languages in a core curriculum –a set of statements from the profession”. Babel, Journal of the Australian Federation of MLTA 17, 2-3 2. Blommaert, J. & J. Verschuren (1998). “The role of language in European nationalist ideologies”. In B. Schieffelin, K. Woolard & P. Droskrity (eds.), Language ideologies: Practice and theory. New York: Oxford University Press, 189-210 3. Crystal, D. (1987). The Cambridge encyclopaedia of language. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press. 4. Crystal, D. (1997). English as a global language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 5. Crystal, David (2000) Language Death. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 6. Crystal, David (2005). Globalizing English. In Keith Walters and Michal Brody (eds.). What’s Language Got to Do With It? (pp. 504-514). W.W. Norton and Co. New York, NY. 7. Dewaele, J.M., A. Housen & L. Wei (eds.) (2003). Bilingualism: Beyond basic principles. Fetschrift in honour of Hugo Baetens Beardsmore. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters 8. Edwards, J. (1994). Multilingualism. London: Routledge 9. Globalization. In Encarta World English Dictionary 1999:759. Bloomsbury Publishing, St. Martin’s Press,New York, NY. 10. Hamers, J.F. & M.H.A. Blanc (2000). Bilinguality and bilingualism. (2nd edition) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 11. Kirkpatrick, A. (2000). “The disadvantaged monolingual: Why English alone is not enough”. Australian Language Matters 8(3), 5-7 12. Lynch, J. & T. Crowley (2001). Languages of Vanuatu: A new survey and bibliography. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics 13. Moshi, Lioba. (2006) The Globalized World Languages: The Case of Kiswahili. In Selected Proceedings of the36th Annual Conference on African Linguistics, ed. Olaoba F. Arasanyin and Michael A. Pemberton, 166-175. 14. Nunberg, Geoff and Wasow, Tom(no date) LSA: Linguistics- An Overview Accessed July 9, 2009 Read More