Should English Be The World’s International Language?

Print This Post 2 Apr 2008 in Politics by Terry Dip

English is spoken in every major city in the world, especially tourist destinations. Terry Dip thinks there’s a problem with that.

Photo by BingBing

Paris. At a cafe outside the Pantheon, I see a group of Japanese tourists, all women between their 20’s and 50’s, telling a waiter in broken English, “Something to drink, please… non-alcoholic.”

Costa Rica. Far away from any major city, I get an ear infection and go to the doctor, who asks me if I speak Spanish. I can chat in the language, but I couldn’t discuss my medical status in necessary detail. The doctor speaks to me in English.

Ho Chi Minh City. I go out with a friend who is bilingual in Cantonese and Vietnamese. I speak neither language. We stay at his friend’s house who speaks only Vietnamese. The friend tries to communicate with me in English.

These scenarios happen the world over.

English is spoken in every major city in the world, especially tourist destinations. You might think that means it has the most speakers. Not true - Mandarin is spoken by more people, but Mandarin is not spoken much outside China.

Mandarin was never a colonial language on a global scale. English claimed the title from French, which was a colonial language but has been losing power ever since America became the dominant world power.

If there’s a world language, it is English.

A Lack Of Colour

I find myself annoyed when Americans tour the world expecting to be understood whenever they speak in English.

I am even more irritated when I hear travelers from outside the English-speaking world visiting another foreign country where English is not the official language and trying to get around by speaking English.

To be fair, there’s nothing linguistically wrong with the English language, and I admit it’s very convenient (for Americans, Brits, and Aussies).

But I strongly believe the prevalence of English is one of the biggest reasons the majority of America’s youth know next to nothing about the outside world. And the ignorance is not limited to just that age group. FDR ended American’s “age of isolationism” more than half a century ago.

It’s time Americans did some serious footwork to catch up.

Studying Abroad

Studying abroad has become more popular over the years for cultural immersion - yet the most common destinations for Americans are still Britain and Australia, followed by Italy, France, and Spain.

You couldn’t live in Rome without speaking Italian, Paris without speaking French, or Seville without speaking Spanish, but English could arguably get you through a summer or semester, which is typically the amount of time college undergrads spend abroad before they get back to the U.S. in the fall.

Even if American college students stay abroad long enough to understand the language and culture to a modest degree, most are still studying in the West.

In comparison, India and China send more students to America for higher education than any other countries in the world. This is a severe global cultural imbalance (not unlike the import-export gap America has with China, and look where that’s gotten the US economy).

Pop Culture USA

Photo by Terry Dip

American movies and TV rule the world. That’s a fact. When was the last time you saw a TV ad or a billboard for a foreign film? Yes, we all know Bollywood, but the Indian actor/character Americans are most familiar with is undoubtedly Apu.

Advertisements for Hero, House of Flying Daggers, and Fearless have gotten some airtime, but any publicity is minuscule compared to what any standard American movie gets. Furthermore, even big foreign films have only limited releases.

During my time own study abroad term in Sweden, Pirates of the Caribbean II and Superman Returns were playing in major movie theaters whereas domestic Swedish films had posters in alleyways and were played in small movie houses.

Friends is insanely popular in France. I know friends who stay up watching 24 in Hong Kong and Japan.

I myself spent many weeknights watching Family Guy, in the original English (Swedes never dub their imported American TV shows), with fellow international students when we could’ve been exploring the nooks and crannies of Lund, the local town.

In Sweden, I had the privilege of taking an academic trip to Brussels with a number of colleagues. While at a mini-conference with some representatives from the EU Commission, an American student raised her hand and asked, “Is the EU thinking about having a single official language?”

The EU now has over 20 official languages, and annual translation costs are over $1 billion USD - so if if her question was thoroughly impractical, it did show some concern for the cost.

But then she added, “Maybe English?”

War Of Confusion

While it’s possible that miscommunication due to ignorance of each other’s languages has been a driving force of ethnic wars, I don’t think having an international language is the solution.

Our entire concept of everyday reality is shaped around language. Language, more than anything else, I think, defines a people.

If English is the world language, it could burn away the cultural differences that make our world so interesting, reducing our vibrant global inheritance of culture to ashes (does anyone remember The Giver?)

Our entire concept of everyday reality is shaped around language. If you speak multiple languages, you start to see things in many more shades because some concepts just cannot be translated, directly or indirectly.

Language, more than anything else, I think, defines a people. You can’t fully understand a culture without first learning the language. Forgive me for mentioning pop culture, which some might find vapid, but you can’t deny the influence it has on the members of our society, especially the young.

Have you ever tried to call someone a chicken in Spanish by directly translating the word? Didn’t make much sense, did it?

Did you know that the famous Japanese phrase itadakimasu, said before every meal, simply means “to receive with gratitude” in formal speech? Imagine saying “Receive!” right before dinner.

Even “Let’s eat,” which is the typical translation in anime and Japanese dramas and movies doesn’t quite have the same effect.

Our different languages have shaped who we are, our history, our heritage, our culture, our identity. Why should the world have one language when it can have many?

The Power Of Words

In the end, it is unclear whether our global America-dominated media culture is an advantage to Americans or not.

When I was in Sweden, most Swedes knew more about American politics than I did. The reason is simple: economically and politically, it is more important for them to know about America than it is for Americans to know about Sweden.

If you’re an American, are you comfortable with the rest of the world knowing more about you than you do about them?

English shouldn’t be the international language. Neither should Spanish, French, Mandarin, or Esperanto. The world doesn’t need an international language. What it needs is more cultural exchange and less cultural imperialism.

What do you think about English as the world’s international language? Share your thoughts in the comments!

Terry Dip

Terry is some young chap who's traveled a bit and thinks he writes well enough to have a blog about it. He might be wrong. He has a Bachelor of Arts in Comparative Literature from the University of California, Los Angeles. Check out more of his writing at Complete and Creative.

24 Comments »

Comment by Tyler — April 2, 2008

Interesting article. Recently an American restaurant owner has been hanging ‘please speak English’ signs about his establishment. I wrote an article on my take on it:

http://blog.tylerbell.net/2008.....k-english/

Comment by Olga Pizza — April 2, 2008

In any case, we need a language which will be known by most people. I don’t agree that English may become the world’s international language, but still it helps us to understand one another. As for me I adore various cultures, so I am interested in studying their languages, but most people just don’t need and don’t want to spend their time on it. They know their language and have to learn another one for communicating with people form various countries. Yes, as a rule they say “we have to”. That’s why it is so important for them to have some universal language in this world.

Comment by Sara, Ms. Adventures in Italy — April 2, 2008

I think you need to separate the two arguments: English being the world’s language, and Native English speakers like Americans expecting others to speak English while traveling.

The second is definitely a problem if people refuse to learn how to speak the local language at all. The first IMO doesn’t have to be a problem - living now in Italy, I realize how much Italians have to rely on English traveling abroad. I think if it makes people more open to travel and willing to explore more exotic places knowing that somehow they can make themselves understood, it’s a positive thing. When I visited Fiji, I started filling my notebook with the language and practicing as some locals taught me, but we used English as the medium to further my curiosity.

Another important thing is also the way English is used - about the culture, learning something, instead of “How much does this cost?” and “Where is the nearest bar?” - something I see being a big fault of Study Abroad - an extended binge drinking/shopping trip for some and bad form in any language, and I strongly recommended learning Italian in the guide I wrote for Matador Travel.

Interesting topic!

Comment by N. Chrystine Olson — April 2, 2008

Nothing more surreal than watching CSI or Sponge Bob in French….Madagascar’s colonial language. The island teemed with French tourists. I’ve always had problems with French pronunciation and except for Tana (Madagascar’s capitol) no English is spoken much. I shifted to Malagasy, a language that doesn’t swallow most of it’s consonants.For me part of the allure of travel is not speaking my native tongue, seeing how I fare. Nice, thought provoking article.

Comment by Daniel Harbecke — April 2, 2008

Wow. Can’t wait to read the feedback for this one. Should be pretty lively.

I take the controversial view that a world language needn’t or mustn’t necessarily erase cultural difference. It’s controversial because there are examples where this argument has failed. But I side with linguists David Crystal and Suzette Hayden Elgin, who believe there should be a lingua franca AND distinctive languages of ethnic origin. And both sides of the coin take effort.

India survives with its historic British influence. So do the many other countries around the world that have at one time or another been swept by the “imperialism” of French, Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch, German, Swahili, etc. They have, admittedly with some struggle, managed to hold on to their ethnic languages in the face of aggressive acculturation. One need only look to Native American tribes to see the devastating effect that cutting out a traditional language has not only on the culture, but the individual psyche - as well as how powerful it is to hold on to your traditions.

Overemphasis on monolingualism is deadly. There is a lot of American shortsightedness to claim some sense of superiority due to the spread of English (Brits and ex-colonies know better) - which, yes, I believe has partly led to our marked ethnocentrism. But it’s a false security. Tourists insisting they can’t even manage a linguistic courtesy is embarrassing, but when a Chinese businessman turns to his partner and discusses an issue in Chinese, the monoglot’s at an incredible disadvantage. That day isn’t coming, it’s already here.

Still, I don’t buy your charge of outright American imperialism. True, Americans are just beginning to understand en masse what we really look like in the mirror of recent events. We’re slowly beginning to wake up to painfully flawed the neocon “Better Living Through Democracy (TM)” is. And a lot of us are still hitting the snooze bar. But as recent voting trends show, that ain’t everybody.

That said, no one here is demanding English bushiban schools in China and Taiwan. Or SUVs. Or fast food. They’re all surviving abroad just fine without forcing them down anyone’s throats. If there wasn’t a market, they wouldn’t exist. Just like American culture isn’t curling up and dying from all the Chinese products at Walmart. Frankly, I consider crappy dollar-buys for crappy happy meals a fair exchange.

It’s impossible to preserve a culture in linguistic amber. Language changes. People, fashion, technology, history - all of it changes, whether it’s due to external cultures or not. Some languages inevitably disappear, just like the telegraph and bowler hats. Today it’s English, which begins to morph into its own local versions (someday, to be dialects?). On the other hand, look how fast Americans are putting Chinese classes in grade schools, just like Russian was hot in the 60s.

In your last line, I don’t see how you expect cultural exchange without a common language. Most people don’t have the time to learn seven languages for their European trip, and even if they do it’s no guarantee they’ll get a “deep interaction” with natives. American imperialism has got a lot of people pretty scared (me, too), and I think reasonably so. But that doesn’t negate the need for a common language. You CAN separate one from the other. It’s a matter of tolerance.

Comment by T. Page — April 2, 2008

What about the Canucks? They speak English too! - including many of the QuÃ©becois.

Comment by Ross — April 2, 2008

“I am even more irritated when I hear travelers from outside the English-speaking world visiting another foreign country where English is not the official language and trying to get around by speaking English.”

So let’s say a Romanian is traveling the world and finds himself in Japan. What language makes sense for him to try to use? Yes he could try to brush up on some basic Japanese, but if he is traveling to many countries over a few months there is no way he can be expected to learn enough every language he will encounter.

English is widespread, it simply makes sense to try to use it instead of grunting and pointing.

Comment by Jessica — April 2, 2008

Thanks for your recent post about embracing other cultures and languages. I am actually from a little town in Wyoming, and I have not had the opportunity to do much traveling outside of the US, but being able to watch and discuss foreign films has allowed me to (in limited ways I realize) experience the world outside of the United States.

If you are curious about film-making in other countries and have a yearning to see things from a fresh perspective, the Film Festival Gems Foreign set will satisfy your curiosity and perhaps start you on a path toward greater understanding of film making all over the world. This 4-disc set of curated independent films is now available from Official Best of Fest. Enjoy four, film festival award-winning films for the cost of one! See the trailers and buy the DVD’s at http://www.OfficialBestofFest.com!

Comment by Greg Wesson — April 2, 2008

“Our entire concept of everyday reality is shaped around language. If you speak multiple languages, you start to see things in many more shades because some concepts just cannot be translated, directly or indirectly.”

While I agree that one’s mother tongue is an important part of both an individuals sense of self and a culture’s sense of self, I’m not sure that language is the most mportant piece of a culture.

I’ve been to many places where English is the official language, and can still find important culture differences between them. Ditto with places that speak French or Spanish (though admittly I am not very fluent in either of those languages). While it may be English, French of Spanish colonialists that initial spread the use of these languages and installed them as the “official” languages, that hasn’t stopped these places from developing a very unique and interesting culture.

Comment by Zoey — April 2, 2008

Very interesting. However, I feel the thing that we cannot lose sight of when discussing the prominence of one language over another is the fact that all languages have an wonderful habit of evolving naturally, intermingling, becoming modernised and bastardised in equal measures. No language is a fixed thing and whether we embrace or resist the dominance of English people the world over are simply going to use the language that makes most logical sense to them and provides the opportunities that are attractive to them. Without a doubt, knowing the local language helps you engage with the local culture on a far deeper level. But ultimately I feel that as an individual you need an innate curiosity about the world and sense of adventure as an impetus for study abroad. Whether you are a complete novice or an expert speaker of a foreign language is less important than the enthusiasm for foreign culture. Using a simple ‘please’ and ‘thank you’ in the local language can be as meaningful as being able to conduct advanced conversations, and so long as one is traveling with awareness and genuine interest in the local culture, I feel that having to occasionally resort to English for logical reasons is not the most terrible thing a person can do.

and for this reason I feel that

Comment by Tim Patterson — April 2, 2008

Really enjoying this discussion - great points as usual Daniel.

T Page - I was surprised at how few Quebecois spoke English outside Quebec City and Montreal. I had a hard time communicating on the Gaspesie.

Sara, I really liked your article on Study Abroad in Italy over at MatadorStudy - nice job!

http://matadorstudy.com/the-st.....-to-italy/

Comment by Terry Dip — April 2, 2008

Thanks for reading, everyone. And for the input.

More than happy to have started such passionate debate.

I’ll keep on working hard to produce articles like this. =)

Comment by Brian — April 2, 2008

You wrote:
>If English is the world language, it could burn away the cultural differences that make our world so interesting,

I totally agree. But I think maybe you haven’t quite got clear in your head exactly what you mean by ‘world language’. The way we are headed nowadays with World English it seems to mean ‘one language for the world’ - which totally appals me - I’m all for linguistic and cultural diversity. What I would prefer, and what seems to make the most sense to me, is ‘universal bilingualism’ [YOUR language + non-ethnic, non-territorial Esperanto for everybody (including English-speakers)]. That is the fairest and most democratic solution, where we are all on the same level playing-field, and not in a place where some are specially linguistically privileged. Take a look at the 7 points of the Prague Manifesto:
http://lingvo.org/
and let us know what you think.

Comment by Eva — April 3, 2008

“English claimed the title from French, which was a colonial language but has been losing power ever since America became the dominant world power.”

Daniel alluded to this, but the history here is a little off. French went into decline after the British Empire was done wiping the floor with its French equivalent a couple hundred years back. Of course in the 20th century American pop culture has done its bit, but English was on track to be the world’s global language even before 1776, let alone the FDR era.

I also think your assessment of the dominance of American pop-culture is a little skewed. Sounds like Sweden was all Hollywood, all the time, but not everywhere is like that. Bollywood actually produces more films (and I believe, brings in more money) and they are gaining popularity outside of the Indian subcontinent, and particularly in Britain. Meanwhile, lots of countries have potent local film-making and television-producing industries, including France, Britain, Canada, and Australia - the countries that are generally considered to be most America-fied. Foreign films are easy to find where I live anyhow, playing in mainstream theaters alongside the big blockbusters.

Of course I agree that people should learn second and third languages, and try to pick up bits and pieces of local languages when they travel, but I don’t think it has to be one or the other. English can continue to be the “global language” - we can all simply choose to make the effort to learn more anyway.

Comment by Eva — April 3, 2008

One more thing, because I can’t resist!

“for Americans, Brits, and Aussies…”

And Canadians, Irish, Kiwis, South Africans (English is one of 11 official languages there), Indians (English is in fact the official language of India)…

My point is, it’s hardly a “fringe” language spoken by some tiny imperial elite and being imposed on the rest of the world. It’s the dominant language on two continents (North America and Australia) and spoken by entire nations on three others. What other language can claim to be so widespread?

Comment by Daniel Harbecke — April 3, 2008

Fun fact: English is even the official language of Zimbabwe. For what it’s worth…

Comment by Eva — April 3, 2008

Ha. Thought it might be, but couldn’t be bothered googling to make sure…

As a total sidebar, I think it’s fascinating the different ways different countries approach the “official language” issue. You’ve got South Africa on one extreme, trying to accomodate everyone with eleven official languages (my best effort at naming them without resorting to google: English, Afrikaans, Sesotho, Xhosa, Zulu, Setswana…) and on the other hand, India, admitting defeat given the hundreds (?) of local languages and dialects, and just opting for English - neatly sidestepping the Hindi/Urdu divide with its Hindu/Muslim overtones…

Comment by Rory B — April 3, 2008

Interesting post and the endless source of debate in hostels around the world. I’ve lived in several countries around the world, learning the language in some (Poland) not in others (China), but I can undoubtedly say that the use of English as a second language has only benefited travellers.

I agree that learning a local language gives a much deeper insight into a country than speaking in English. However, as pointed out above, expecting people to learn a language for a holiday is wholly impractical. Nor do people need a deeper, spiritual connection with every country they visit. English allows visitors to strike up a conversation immediately and get to know the country much better than having no common language. Chatting to the locals in English while in Spain on a week long holiday is a great way to get a feel for the place, you don’t need to be talking in Spanish about the finer points of moorish culture. English has changed the way the world communicates for the better.

I have to say this point made me laugh out loud

Trust me, I’ve tried speaking to a Vietnamese taxi driver in Polish, it just doesn’t get the job done. People speak English because it works. When you want to make sure what you’re eating is pork and not dog, high ideals of a utopian society where we all speak thirty different languages go out the window pretty quickly

Comment by Language Hub — April 3, 2008

Hey!

I think every language has its own beauty and speaks about the culture of its own country. So, there is no point in discussing about this topic.

Comment by Terry — April 3, 2008

Hmm…where to begin?

Well, I read the Prague Manifesto (yes, in English). I think I might’ve seen this way back in high school in computer science class.

As for the abundance of comments, I’d like to thank everyone who took the time to type paragraphs. And I’ve taken everyone’s criticism to heart.

Gracias. è°¢è°¢ã€‚ã‚ã‚ŠãŒã¨ã†ã€‚Merci. Grazie. Danke.

Comment by Daniel Harbecke — April 4, 2008

“I find myself annoyed when Americans tour the world expecting to be understood whenever they speak in English.”

Y’know, I kinda know what you mean. Americans annoy me, too. And I’m an American, in America even. “American Idol” just nails me to a cross. But the Sturm und Drang helps me write. It also makes me want to drink. But anyway.

It’s getting better. One of the best things to come out of the last 8 years is the USA beginning to notice - surprise! - we’re not the only ones on the planet. That’s a good thing. It just takes a little while to remove our collective head from our ass when so many people seem to like the view.

(Ever notice how no one else on all of two continents are “Americans” except us? Sorry, Canada! Maybe that’ll change soon. Your dollar’s pretty strong these days.)

You seem to be saying, “How can a country so self-obsessed inspire so many others to adopt their language?” That, my friend, is a whole ‘nother discussion. But on behalf of my fellow Americans: “Thanks for your patience.” =)

Terry, you’re awesome. Thanks for writing this. You can take that to heart, too.

Comment by Sandra — April 25, 2008

I personally agree that we should have a generic Language that we could use all over, it will be nice for it to be English (already speak), it can be another one also.
This is a direct effect of the global economy and increase on the communications due to the internet.

Personally I speak English, German and Spanish, which makes it quite simple to get around, but generally it is easier to locate a person that speaks (or partially) English.

In some cases or due to the complexity of meetings it is required to have a professional translator or interpreter, but (in my point of view) it will be very simple if we all could communicate in the same language.

Comment by Bill Chapman — April 27, 2008

An interesting debate. I hope you’ll take another look at Esperanto, which has never had any ambitions to displace ethnic languages. Take a look at http://www.esperanto.net

Comment by inga johanson — April 27, 2008

And this will happen when a swede use English as an international language
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....re=related