Linguistic imperialism, or
language imperialism, "involves the transfer of a dominant
language to other peoples. The transfer is essentially a demonstration of
power—traditionally,
military power but also, in the modern world,
economic power—and aspects of the dominant
culture are usually transferred along with the language."
Since the early 1990s, the theory of linguistic imperialism has attracted attention among scholars of
applied linguistics. Particularly,
Robert Phillipson's influential 1992 book,
Linguistic Imperialism, has led to considerable debate about the merits and shortcomings of the theory. Phillipson found denunciations of linguistic imperialism that dated back to Nazi critiques of the
British Council, and to Soviet analyses of
English as the language of world
capitalism and
world domination.
Linguistic imperialism is often seen in the context of
cultural imperialism.
English
Phillipson defines English linguistic imperialism as
Phillipson's theory critiques the historic spread of English as an international language and that language's continued dominance, particularly in
postcolonial settings such as
India,
Pakistan,
Uganda,
Zimbabwe, etc., but also increasingly in "neo-colonial" settings such as continental
Europe. His theory draws mainly on
Johan Galtung's
imperialism theory,
Antonio Gramsci's social theory, and in particular on his notion of cultural
hegemony.
A central theme of Phillipson's theory is the complex hegemonic processes which, he asserts, continue to sustain the pre-eminence of English in the world today. His book analyzes the
British Council's use of rhetoric to promote English, and discusses key tenets of English
applied linguistics and English-language-teaching methodology. These tenets hold that:
- English is best taught monolingually ("the monolingual fallacy");
- the earlier English is taught, the better the results ("the early-start fallacy");
- the more English is taught, the better the results ("the maximum-exposure fallacy");
- if other languages are used much, standards of English will drop ("the subtractive fallacy").
According to Phillipson, those who promote English—organizations such as the British Council, the
IMF and the
World Bank, and individuals such as operators of English-language schools—use three types of argument:
- Intrinsic arguments describe the English language as providential, rich, noble and interesting. Such arguments tend to assert what English is and what other languages are not.
- Extrinsic arguments point out that English is well-established: that it has many speakers, and that there are trained teachers and a wealth of teaching material.
- Functional arguments emphasize the usefulness of English as a gateway to the world.
Other arguments for English are
- its economic utility: it enables people to operate technology;
- its ideological function: it stands for modernity;
- its status as symbol for material advance and efficiency.
Another theme in Phillipson's work is "
linguicism"—the species of
prejudice that leads to
endangered languages becoming extinct or losing their local eminence due to the rise and competing prominence of English.
Other languages
At various times, especially in colonial settings or where a dominant culture has sought to unify a region under its control, a similar phenomenon has arisen. In the
Far East,
Africa and
South America, regional languages have been or are being coercively replaced or marginalized by the language of a dominant culture—
Tibetan and
minority Chinese dialects by
Mandarin Chinese,
Quechua by
Spanish, and so on.
Despite the English language's reputation for linguistic imperialism, during the
Middle Ages it too was an object of linguistic imperialism, by the
French language, particularly following the
Norman conquest. For hundreds of years, French or
Anglo-Norman was the language of administration (
See Law French) and therefore a language of superior status in England. Latin remained the language of the church and of learning. Although many words introduced by the Normans are today indistinguishable by most English-speakers from native
Germanic words, later-learned
loanwords derived from Latin or French often have a more cultured sound to a native English-speaker.
Following the establishment of the
Holy Roman Empire over much of present-day
Germany and
Central Europe, the
German language and its dialects became the preferred language of many Central-European nobility. With varying success, German spread across much of Central and
Eastern Europe as a language of trade and status. This finally came to an end with
World War II (
See also Germanization.).
French too is known as an expansionist language. Languages such as
Breton,
Basque and
Corsican were to a great extent margnialised in France. This process, known as
Francization, often causes resistance amongst the subject peoples, leading to demands for independence. Examples of this can still be found in
Bretagne and
Flanders (
Belgium).
Another example of linguistic imperialism was seen in post-independence
India. That country's authorities initially sought to make
Hindi the sole "national language", but due to protests from southern states (where
Dravidian languages such as
Kannada,
Telugu,
Tamil,
Malayalam, and
Tulu are spoken) and West Bengal (where
Bengali is spoken), the "national-language" policy did not succeed. Both Hindi and English were made the "Official Languages of the Indian Union Government." However, since the economic liberalization in 1991, English has become the
lingua franca of business, higher education and research. In urban India, the medium of education even in
primary schools is now mainly English.
Critique
Many scholars have participated in lively discussions of Phillipson’s claims. Alan Davies, for instance, envisions the spectre of Phillipson haunting the Department of Applied Linguistics in Edinburgh:
For Davies, two cultures inhabit Linguistic Imperialism: one, a culture of
guilt ("colonies should never have happened"); the other, that of romantic despair ("we shouldn’t be doing what we are doing"). Rajagopalan goes a step farther and maintains that Phillipson’s book has led to a guilt complex among
ELT (English-language-learning-and-teaching) professionals.
Davies also argues that Phillipson’s claims are not
falsifiable: what "if the dominated... wanted to adopt English and continue to want to keep it? RP’s unfalsifiable answer must be that they don’t, they can’t, they’ve been persuaded against their better interests." It has thus been argued that Phillipson’s theory is patronizing in the sense that it does not regard developing countries as being capable of independent decision-making (to adopt or not to adopt ELT). In the context of
Nigeria, Bisong holds that people in the "
periphery" use English pragmatically—they send their children to English-language schools precisely because they want them to grow up multilingual. Regarding Phillipson, Bisong maintains that "to interpret such actions as emanating from people who are victims of Centre linguistic imperialism is to bend sociolinguistic evidence to suit a preconceived thesis." If English should be abolished because it is foreign, Bisong argues, then Nigeria itself would also have to be dissolved, because it was conceived as a colonial structure.
Furthermore, the assumption that the English language itself is imperialistic has come under attack.
Henry Widdowson has argued that "there is a fundamental
contradiction in the idea that the language of itself exerts hegemonic control: namely that if this were the case, you would never be able to challenge such control." Additionally, the idea that the promotion of English necessarily implies a demotion of local languages has been challenged. Holborrow points out that "not all Englishes in the centre dominate, nor are all speakers in the
periphery equally discriminated against."
Irish English, for instance, could be regarded as a non-dominant centre variety of English.
Thus it could be argued that, while those who follow Phillipson see choices about language as externally imposed, the other camp sees them as decisions made by individuals.
Response
Those who support the arguments favoring the reality of linguistic imperialism claim that arguments against it are often advanced by
monolingual native-speakers of English who may see the current status of English as a fact worthy of celebration.
In contrast, it has been argued that those who see the increasing spread of English in the world as a worrying development (that marginalizes the status of local and regional languages as well as potentially undermining or eroding cultural values) are likely to be far more receptive to Phillipson's views. , , and
Julian Edge broadly fall into this group and are often described as .
However,
Henry Widdowson’s remarks on
critical discourse analysis may also be applied to the critical applied linguists:
Appropriation
Some who reject the concept of linguistic imperialism argue that the global spread of English is better understood in the framework of
appropriation—that English is used around the world
for local purposes. In additional to the example of Nigeria, above, the following examples have been given:
- Demonstrators in non-English-speaking countries often use signs in English to convey their demands to TV audiences around the globe. In some cases, the demonstrator may not even understand what the sign he is carrying says.
- Bobda shows how Cameroon has moved away from a mono-cultural, Anglo-centered way of teaching English and has gradually accommodated teaching materials to a Cameroonian context. Non-Western topics are treated, such as rule by emirs, traditional medicine, and polygamy. Bobda argues for bi-cultural, Cameroonian and Anglo-American education.
- Kramsch and Sullivan describe how Western methodology and textbooks have been appropriated to suit local Vietnamese culture.
- The Pakistani textbook Primary Stage English includes lessons such as "Pakistan, My Country," "Our Flag," and "Our Great Leader," which might sound jingoistic to western ears. Within the native culture, however, establishing a connection between ELT, patriotism and the Muslim faith is seen as an aim of ELT, as the chairman of the Punjab Textbook Board openly states: "The board... takes care, through these books to inoculate in the students a love of the Islamic values and awareness to guard the ideological frontiers of your [the student's] home lands."
Such an "internationalization" of English might also create new possibilities for English native-speakers. McCabe elaborates:
See also
