05-06-2007, 02:26 PM
(5) Good read. Written in winter 1998-1999. So it is just a bit younger than start of prolific use of the Internet and its associated vocabulary. Take that into account:
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/Ning/archive/...uisticorder.pdf
<b>The New Linguistic Order</b>
by Joshua A. Fishman
After indicating the expanse covered by English and its vast usage:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Yet professional linguists hesitate to predict far into the future the further globalization of English. Historically, languages have risen and fallen with the military, economic, cultural, or religious powers that supported them. Beyond the ebb and flow of history, there are other reasons to believe that the English language will eventually wane in influence.</b> For one, English actually reaches and is then utilized by only a small and atypically fortunate minority. Furthermore, the kinds of interactions identified with globalization, from trade to communications, have also encouraged regionalization and with it the spread of regional languages. Arabic, Chinese, Hindi, Spanish, and a handful of other regional tongues already command a significant reach---and their major growth is still ahead. Finally, the spread of English and these regional languages collectively--not to mention the sweeping forces driving them have created a squeeze effect on small communities, producing pockets of anxious localization and local-language revival resistant to global change.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->What is to come of English? <b>It may well gravitate increasingly toward the higher social classes, as those of more modest status turn to regional languages for more modest gains.</b> It might even help the future of English in the long run if its proponents sought less local and regional supremacy and fewer exclusive functions in the United Nations and in the world at large. A bully is more likely to be feared than popular. Most non-native English speakers may come to love the language far less in the twenty-first century than most native English speakers seem to anticipate. Germans are alarmed that their scientists are publishing overwhelmingly in English. And France remains highly resistant to English in mass media, diplomacy, and technology. Even as English is widely learned, it may become even more widely disliked. Resentment of both the predominance of English and its <b>tendency to spread along class lines could in the long term provide a check against its further globalization.</b><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->So according to this writer, if English did start favouring some people, it could restrain the language.<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->There is no reason to assume that English will always be necessary, as it is today, for technology, higher education, and social mobility, particularly after its regional rivals experience their own growth spurts. Civilization will not sink into the sea if and when that happens. The decline of French from its peak of influence has not irreparably harmed art, music, or diplomacy. The similar decline of German has not harmed the exact sciences. Ancient Greek, Aramaic, Latin, and Sanskrit---once world languages representing military might, sophistication, commerce, and spirituality--are mere relics in the modem world. The might of English will not long outlive the technical, commercial, and military ascendancy of its Anglo-American power base, particularly if a stronger power arises to challenge it. But just because the use of English around the world might decline does not mean the values associated today with its spread must also decline. Ultimately, democracy, international trade, and economic development can flourish in any tongue.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->About last statement: Nah. Democracy is a Greek word. International trade was known to everyone of the Old World, economic development too. What do these 'values' have to do with English? English has unfortunately become synonymous with imperialism thanks to British colonialism and America's little bid for glory and immortality.
<b>Check out the photo on page 11</b> of the PDF (p.37 of the journal): see a psecular English-educated Indian trying to strike up a conversation with an Indian (looks like he's inspecting the ranks, rather).
Article contains this interesting section:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->LOOKING AHEAD
Since all larger language communities have opted to maintain their own languages in the face of globalization, it should come as no surprise that many smaller ones have pursued the same goal. If<b> Germans can pursue globalization and yet remain German-speaking among themselves, why should Telegus in India not aspire to do the same?</b>
Multilingualism allows a people this choice. Each language in a multilingual society has its own distinctive functions. The language characteristically used with intimate family and friends, the language generally used with coworkers or neighbors, and the language used with one's bosses or government need not be one and the same. Reading advanced technical or economic material may require literacy in a different language than reading a local gossip column. As long as no two or more languages are rivals for the same societal function, a linguistic division of labor can be both amicable and long-standing. <b>Few English speakers in India, for example, have given up their local mother tongues or their regional languages. Similarly, in Puerto Rico and Mexico, English is typically "a sometime tongue," even among those who have leamed it for occupational or educational rewards.</b>
There will of course be conflict, not to mention winners and losers. Language conflict occurs when there is competition between, two languages for exclusive use in the same power-related functionmfor example, government or schooling. Most frequently, this friction occurs when one regional or local language seeks to usurp roles traditionally associated with another local tongue. <b>In the Soviet era, Moscow</b> took an aggressive line on local languages, instituting Russian as the sole language of education and government in the Bakics and Central Asia. In the 1990s, however, many of these states have slowly deemphasized Russian in schools, government, and even theaters and publishing houses, in favor of their national tongues. <b>Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania</b> have passed the strictest laws, placing education, science, and culture within the exclusive purview of their national languages and (until just recently) leaving ethnic Russians out in the cold.
Even though local and regional regimes are most likely to use language for political ends, global languages (including English, the language of globalization) can also foster conflict. France's anxiety over the spread of English is well documented. <b>The govemment in Paris forbids English in advertising and regulates the number of English-language films that may be shown in the country.</b> A cabinet-level official, the minister of culture and communication, is responsible for monitoring the well-being of the national tongue. The Academie francaise, France's national arbiter of language and style, approves official neologisms for Anglo-American slang to guard the French language against "corruption." Yet French schools are introducing students to English earlier and earlier. Those who speak and master the languages of globalization often suggest that "upstart" local tongues pose a risk to world peace and prosperity. Throughout most of recorded history, strong languages have refused to share power with smaller ones and have accused them of making trouble--disturbing the peace and promoting ethnic violence and separatism.<b> Purging Ireland of Gaelic in the nineteenth century, however, did not convince many Irish of their bonds with England.</b> Those who fear their own powerlessness and the demise of their beloved languages of authenticity have reasons to believe that most of the trouble comes from the opposite end of the language-and-power continuum. Small communities accuse these linguistic Big Brothers of imperialism, linguicide, genocide, and mind control.
Globalization, regionalization, and localization are all happening concurrently. They are, however, at different strengths in different parts of the world at any given time. Each can become enmeshed in social, cultural, economic, and even political change. English is frequently the language of choice for Tamils in India who want to communicate with Hindi-speaking northerners. <b>Ironically</b>, for many Tamils---who maintain frosty relations with the central authorities in Delhi--English seems less like a colonial language than does Hindi. <b>In Indonesia, however, English may be associated with the military, the denial of civil rights, and the exploitation of workers, since the United States has long supported Jakarta's oligarchic regime.</b> Although English is spreading among Indonesia's upper classes, the government stresses the use of Indonesia's official language, Bahasa Indonesia, in all contact with the general public. Local languages are denied any symbolic recognition at all. The traditional leadership and the common population in Java, heirs to a classical literary tradition in Javanese, resent the favoritism shown to English and Indonesian. Spreading languages often come to be hated because they can disadvantage many as they provide advantages for some.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->In the case of English now creating classes in Java: Indonesia was a Dutch colony. So this is not because of 'British' legacy then, but due to US meddling.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->English itself is becoming regionalized informally and orally, particularly among young people, because most speakers today use it as a second or third language. <b>As students of English are increasingly taught by instructors who have had little or no contact with native speakers, spoken English acquires strong regional idiosyncrasies.</b> At the same time, however, English is being globalized in the realms of business, government, entertainment, and education. However, Hindi and Urdu, Mandarin Chinese, Spanish, and vernacular varieties of Arabic can all expect a boom in these areas in the years to come--the result of both a population explosion in the communities that speak these tongues natively and the inevitable migrations that follow such growth.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/Ning/archive/...uisticorder.pdf
<b>The New Linguistic Order</b>
by Joshua A. Fishman
After indicating the expanse covered by English and its vast usage:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Yet professional linguists hesitate to predict far into the future the further globalization of English. Historically, languages have risen and fallen with the military, economic, cultural, or religious powers that supported them. Beyond the ebb and flow of history, there are other reasons to believe that the English language will eventually wane in influence.</b> For one, English actually reaches and is then utilized by only a small and atypically fortunate minority. Furthermore, the kinds of interactions identified with globalization, from trade to communications, have also encouraged regionalization and with it the spread of regional languages. Arabic, Chinese, Hindi, Spanish, and a handful of other regional tongues already command a significant reach---and their major growth is still ahead. Finally, the spread of English and these regional languages collectively--not to mention the sweeping forces driving them have created a squeeze effect on small communities, producing pockets of anxious localization and local-language revival resistant to global change.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->What is to come of English? <b>It may well gravitate increasingly toward the higher social classes, as those of more modest status turn to regional languages for more modest gains.</b> It might even help the future of English in the long run if its proponents sought less local and regional supremacy and fewer exclusive functions in the United Nations and in the world at large. A bully is more likely to be feared than popular. Most non-native English speakers may come to love the language far less in the twenty-first century than most native English speakers seem to anticipate. Germans are alarmed that their scientists are publishing overwhelmingly in English. And France remains highly resistant to English in mass media, diplomacy, and technology. Even as English is widely learned, it may become even more widely disliked. Resentment of both the predominance of English and its <b>tendency to spread along class lines could in the long term provide a check against its further globalization.</b><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->So according to this writer, if English did start favouring some people, it could restrain the language.<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->There is no reason to assume that English will always be necessary, as it is today, for technology, higher education, and social mobility, particularly after its regional rivals experience their own growth spurts. Civilization will not sink into the sea if and when that happens. The decline of French from its peak of influence has not irreparably harmed art, music, or diplomacy. The similar decline of German has not harmed the exact sciences. Ancient Greek, Aramaic, Latin, and Sanskrit---once world languages representing military might, sophistication, commerce, and spirituality--are mere relics in the modem world. The might of English will not long outlive the technical, commercial, and military ascendancy of its Anglo-American power base, particularly if a stronger power arises to challenge it. But just because the use of English around the world might decline does not mean the values associated today with its spread must also decline. Ultimately, democracy, international trade, and economic development can flourish in any tongue.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->About last statement: Nah. Democracy is a Greek word. International trade was known to everyone of the Old World, economic development too. What do these 'values' have to do with English? English has unfortunately become synonymous with imperialism thanks to British colonialism and America's little bid for glory and immortality.
<b>Check out the photo on page 11</b> of the PDF (p.37 of the journal): see a psecular English-educated Indian trying to strike up a conversation with an Indian (looks like he's inspecting the ranks, rather).
Article contains this interesting section:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->LOOKING AHEAD
Since all larger language communities have opted to maintain their own languages in the face of globalization, it should come as no surprise that many smaller ones have pursued the same goal. If<b> Germans can pursue globalization and yet remain German-speaking among themselves, why should Telegus in India not aspire to do the same?</b>
Multilingualism allows a people this choice. Each language in a multilingual society has its own distinctive functions. The language characteristically used with intimate family and friends, the language generally used with coworkers or neighbors, and the language used with one's bosses or government need not be one and the same. Reading advanced technical or economic material may require literacy in a different language than reading a local gossip column. As long as no two or more languages are rivals for the same societal function, a linguistic division of labor can be both amicable and long-standing. <b>Few English speakers in India, for example, have given up their local mother tongues or their regional languages. Similarly, in Puerto Rico and Mexico, English is typically "a sometime tongue," even among those who have leamed it for occupational or educational rewards.</b>
There will of course be conflict, not to mention winners and losers. Language conflict occurs when there is competition between, two languages for exclusive use in the same power-related functionmfor example, government or schooling. Most frequently, this friction occurs when one regional or local language seeks to usurp roles traditionally associated with another local tongue. <b>In the Soviet era, Moscow</b> took an aggressive line on local languages, instituting Russian as the sole language of education and government in the Bakics and Central Asia. In the 1990s, however, many of these states have slowly deemphasized Russian in schools, government, and even theaters and publishing houses, in favor of their national tongues. <b>Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania</b> have passed the strictest laws, placing education, science, and culture within the exclusive purview of their national languages and (until just recently) leaving ethnic Russians out in the cold.
Even though local and regional regimes are most likely to use language for political ends, global languages (including English, the language of globalization) can also foster conflict. France's anxiety over the spread of English is well documented. <b>The govemment in Paris forbids English in advertising and regulates the number of English-language films that may be shown in the country.</b> A cabinet-level official, the minister of culture and communication, is responsible for monitoring the well-being of the national tongue. The Academie francaise, France's national arbiter of language and style, approves official neologisms for Anglo-American slang to guard the French language against "corruption." Yet French schools are introducing students to English earlier and earlier. Those who speak and master the languages of globalization often suggest that "upstart" local tongues pose a risk to world peace and prosperity. Throughout most of recorded history, strong languages have refused to share power with smaller ones and have accused them of making trouble--disturbing the peace and promoting ethnic violence and separatism.<b> Purging Ireland of Gaelic in the nineteenth century, however, did not convince many Irish of their bonds with England.</b> Those who fear their own powerlessness and the demise of their beloved languages of authenticity have reasons to believe that most of the trouble comes from the opposite end of the language-and-power continuum. Small communities accuse these linguistic Big Brothers of imperialism, linguicide, genocide, and mind control.
Globalization, regionalization, and localization are all happening concurrently. They are, however, at different strengths in different parts of the world at any given time. Each can become enmeshed in social, cultural, economic, and even political change. English is frequently the language of choice for Tamils in India who want to communicate with Hindi-speaking northerners. <b>Ironically</b>, for many Tamils---who maintain frosty relations with the central authorities in Delhi--English seems less like a colonial language than does Hindi. <b>In Indonesia, however, English may be associated with the military, the denial of civil rights, and the exploitation of workers, since the United States has long supported Jakarta's oligarchic regime.</b> Although English is spreading among Indonesia's upper classes, the government stresses the use of Indonesia's official language, Bahasa Indonesia, in all contact with the general public. Local languages are denied any symbolic recognition at all. The traditional leadership and the common population in Java, heirs to a classical literary tradition in Javanese, resent the favoritism shown to English and Indonesian. Spreading languages often come to be hated because they can disadvantage many as they provide advantages for some.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->In the case of English now creating classes in Java: Indonesia was a Dutch colony. So this is not because of 'British' legacy then, but due to US meddling.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->English itself is becoming regionalized informally and orally, particularly among young people, because most speakers today use it as a second or third language. <b>As students of English are increasingly taught by instructors who have had little or no contact with native speakers, spoken English acquires strong regional idiosyncrasies.</b> At the same time, however, English is being globalized in the realms of business, government, entertainment, and education. However, Hindi and Urdu, Mandarin Chinese, Spanish, and vernacular varieties of Arabic can all expect a boom in these areas in the years to come--the result of both a population explosion in the communities that speak these tongues natively and the inevitable migrations that follow such growth.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->