Perhaps it is arrogant and chauvinistic of me to think that English should be the number one international language since it is the only language I know and am happy to know. Nevertheless, it is my opinion, and judging by its extensive use, from air traffic control to global commerce to the Internet, that English is the only language that is capable of connecting this complex and unavoidably interactive world. It is the chief means of communication between nation with umpteen languages, like those in Scandinavia and Europe. Moreover, it seems logical to me that English should be the international language because it is the mother tongue of democracy and market-oriented economics, the dual system that has virtually come to govern the world.
That English has nurtured and facilitated the world's key governing principles (human rights, rule of law, economic theory and practice, etc.) is an excellent reason why it should be the international language. Those principles were born and cultivated in the British Isles where English started, and from where they were initially exported worldwide. Yet, such an argument doesn't fully explain why English is at this juncture the chosen language of world affairs.
I found a good explanation for English’s predominance in "The Journal of The English-Speaking Union". One of its contributing authors concluded that the dominance of English was significantly due to its being "in the right place at the right time". That makes sense. For instance, English was rightly positioned in two world wars, as the language of the winning side. As a result, English gained a special status, first as the chief language in the fight for freedom, with the efforts of Britain, its colonies and the United States, and then as the language of reconstruction of its defeated enemies. It was the language of triumph. This certainly helped galvanize English as the world's premier language. In the aftermath of the war it became the language of international treaties like those dealing with trade and currency exchanges.
I see a parallel relationship between Democracy's ascendancy and English's ascendancy. English has developed as a user-friendly language, where the user is generally in control of its use. Other languages are not as democratic or user friendly, less flexible and more dictatorial about their use. English is quite a democratic language in that it is organic, constantly adapting and modernizing. I think it is also significant that the two major countries that speak English are the countries that have exported democratic ideals and principles. The Magna Carta, the nascence of democracy, was written in the British Isles. The United States is the one who established lasting democracy in Germany and Japan, the defeated enemies. The U.N., an institution devoted to encourage and reinforce democratic principles and human rights around the world, is headquartered in an English speaking country. English is a modern language. Democracy is a modern governance. The two have a lot in common.
French also had the opportunity of being the international language because it was the instigator of a very important world activity, diplomacy. As the years went by, though, the French and their language lost out to English because of France's losses in colonization, and the influence that went with it. As a result, French was relegated to a second tier language. In directly, those French losses resulted in an introspection, which manifested itself in a protectionist attitude towards the French language which in turn made French less flexible than English and thus less attractive as an instrument of global communications.
Because Chinese is the most spoken language in the world, it could become the international language that English is now. However, I don't think so because it is a very difficult language to learn and use. Another drawback is its inflexibility. This became apparent when China and Taiwan were discussing their separation (Taiwan essentially is a rogue state of China that broke away during the communist revolution) and Taiwan's right or non-right to independence. They had to turn to English for the sake of clarity and reason. Had they continue their exchange in Chinese, the chances of an international incident were very really. Their turning to English may have prevented a war between them. English's usage allowed a vagueness, which English is good at, to enter the discussion, allowing for the ambiguous interpretation of such absolute Chinese terms as nation, state, self-determination, freedom and equality, which otherwise would have been fighting words.
The above explanation of why English is or should be the number one international language may be on their own unsatisfactory, but as a whole those things are what have facilitated English's ascendancy Yet, English itself can also take credit for its rise to the top. As a consummate opportunist it has enrich and advance itself by borrowing from other languages, in the process making itself flexible, resourceful and extremely relevant. However, one historical circumstance above all has given English the opportunity of being number one. Had it not been for the world becoming a sufficiently connected place, the need for a central language of communications would never have been possible or necessary.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment