Linguistic imperialism is generally defined as the imposition of one language on speakers of other languages; it is also referred to by some as a form of linguicism. Theories of linguistic imperialism attempt to address the structures and ideologies which facilitate linguistic hierarchies, explain why some languages are used more than others, and identify the role of language professionals and language teaching in this process.
Often a dominant language is glorified, perhaps presented as the language of God (as with Sanskrit in the Indian subcontinent, Arabic in the Islamic world, and Dutch in South Africa); the language of reason, logic and human rights (commonly associated with French); the language of a superior ethno-national group (as with German in Nazi ideology); the language of progress and modernity (as with English today).
Throughout history, linguistic imperialism has been a common feature of colonialism, with local languages erased and silenced by the new imperial language. It happened as far back as in ancient Greece and under the Persian, Hellenistic, and Roman empires. It is a well-known fact that Latin, the language of the Roman empire, has led to the development of many European languages, including French, Spanish and Italian, and has also influenced English.
The term ‘Welsh’ was originally used by the Anglo-Saxons to refer to indigenous Britons. In Old English, it means ‘foreigner’ or ‘stranger’. The 1536 Act of Union with Wales included submission to the “rights, laws, customs and speech of England”. Additionally, in the Spanish colonies of Latin America, speaking Spanish or Latin was considered a sign of being Christian as well as a sign of being Spanish. Amerindians were often baptised with Spanish names to avoid being seen as a ‘pagan threat’ to the Spanish Inquisition.
Even if native languages weren’t erased, there are many cases of creole languages forming with various influences from both native and imperial languages. For example in the Caribbean, Southeast Asia, and small island territories such as Mauritius and Réunion. It cannot be denied that linguistic imperialism is a fundamental element of our history, however, it is also important to recognise its downsides and how it continues to take place today despite the alleged end to the age of empires.
Examples of linguistic imperialism in the modern-day include discrimination against Kurdish in Turkey, Tibetan and Uyghur in China, and Urdu speaking Muslims in India.
Such discrimination commonly forms part of wider processes of discrimination against a certain group of people because of their cultural or religious identity.
The debate surrounding linguistic imperialism commonly features a discussion about the global expansion of English, which originated from British imperial tendencies.
Having had the largest empire, English has become the most widespread language in the world, and whilst it may no longer be imposed by force, it is important to acknowledge that the current demand for learning English stems from colonial times.
The global spread of English has taken place particularly in school environments, by teaching children in English, effectively as a proposed first language, from a very young age. However, it is thought that children begin acquiring language from their home environment soon after birth, so they have 3-4 years of linguistic experience before starting school.
Teaching children from primary school in a language other than their mother tongue, with the attitude that it will become their first language, fails to acknowledge the natural advantage they would have in their home language. One cannot deny the legitimacy of any language, and increased use of English in education, as both a second language but also a primary language, harms all of us by narrowing our cultural and linguistic universe.
One key point to note with linguistic imperialism, and specifically with the global spread of English, is the inequality it creates. English skills developed through international education qualifications such as the International Baccalaureate which pave the way to higher education at prestigious universities in English-speaking countries, and later, to enhanced employment opportunities both at home and abroad. However, when investigating the true extent of such benefits of learning English, it is important to note that these opportunities are largely reserved for the middle class; for others, there is only the national education curriculum which does not offer the same opportunities for social mobility.
In Indonesia for example, despite being deemed unconstitutional in 2013, around 220 private schools are offering at least some part of their curriculum through Cambridge International, 38 of which are Muslim private schools that are prevented from pursuing Muslim values by the overly anglicised system, in terms of culture, religion and language. Therefore, linguistic imperialism not only reduces linguistic diversity; it also creates a linguistic hierarchy reflected in actual power, thus marginalising speakers of native languages.
Scholar Robert Phillipson is a key proponent of linguistic imperialism theories as he re-popularised the debate in the 1990s. He particularly discusses the global spread of English in his 1992 book ‘Linguistic Imperialism’.
In his book he deals with key questions such as whether the winning of independence from colonisers has led to linguistic liberation, whether colonial languages are truly useful in the international community, or whether they are merely utilised to promote Western interests and permit further exploitation and dominance.
He describes linguistic imperialism as structural, ideological, a cause of inequality, and implemented at the expense of other languages. He proposes that the global teaching of English has featured these aspects. The presentation of English as the language of modernity and progress, and something necessary for success in education and employment, has led to it being considered by many as a ‘lingua nullius’, a non-localised language, supposedly not tied to any social, political, economic, or religious system, or to a specific racial or cultural group.
However, English is taught not just as a second language, but as one involved in the political, educational, social and economic aspects of a country; a language can never fully be divorced from its associated culture, and a single language cannot meet the needs of any diverse society. Not to mention the economic benefit of teaching and examining programmes run by British agencies across the world.
This anglocentricity and belief that English is universally relevant poses a threat to indigenous languages, culture and ways of life, and disregards the benefits of cultural and linguistic diversity. Instead, Phillipson argues for the promotion of multilingual education, which reflects the natural linguistic diversity of the world.
Phillipson refers to several international organisations who support his view that a monolingual education in English in countries of other native languages is damaging. For example, a 2009 Save the Children report - ‘Language and Education: The Missing Link’ stated that “2.4 billion people speak languages which receive minimal use in education systems”, despite clear evidence that “learning at school in a language which is not used in children’s home lives is being linked both to poor performance and total exclusion from education”.
Since 1953, UNESCO has encouraged primary education in the mother tongue. A 1999 UNESCO resolution highlighted the need for multilingual education, which promotes interconnectedness and diversity, as well as acknowledging the need to use children’s mother tongue as the main language of instruction.
A multilingual education focused on the mother tongue will help children develop better-thinking skills, and increase the chances of children, especially those from rural areas with less exposure to a dominant language, succeeding and staying in school longer. It also enhances the engagement of parents with teachers and their children’s learning.
Here are some more specific examples of issues that have arisen from the spread of English globally:
Singapore
All students in state schools in Singapore are taught English as their first language from primary school. They will also be taught a second language—either Mandarin, Malay or Tamil—which are the three most common mother tongues in Singapore.
This has resulted in more than half of the population using English as a home language. Whilst it may be important for students in ex-British colonies to learn English for its value in employment and maintaining a close relationship with Britain, this should not be carried out in a subtractive way that neglects mother tongues.
Not only does this impact people in Singapore, but further afield. For example, the Singapore Intercultural School, an international school in Indonesia, teaches its curriculum through the Cambridge Centre for International Examinations, offering IGCSE, A-level, and IB qualifications with an anglocentric approach.
Pakistan
Pakistan is a very linguistically diverse country, with 5 languages having more than 10 million speakers each—Punjabi (39%), Pashto (18%), Sindhi (14%), Saraiki (12%), Urdu (7%). However, Urdu and English are the only official languages of the nation.
The education system is dominated by attitudes that present English as necessary for improving the system, which perhaps seems logical given that the employment market discriminates in favour of those fluent in English as it is seen as the ‘language of international communication’. However, Pakistan is one of many examples of countries where learning English is only available to the elite who attend private schools beyond the reach of the majority.
In contrast, the state schools that teach in indigenous languages significantly underperform since the competing schools that teach in English are seen as better by the educational system even if their true academic standards are no better, or even worse. Indeed, when English is presented as the one thing that can open all doors in terms of employment, the standards of English may even decline because people are no longer learning it for love of learning, but out of a perceived necessity.
And even if learning English is ‘necessary’ for global communication, this does not mean that it cannot be sufficiently taught as a second language, whilst preserving the cultural and linguistic integrity of the country in question.
Canada vs Quebec
When the British government gave up their right of control in Canada in 1982, a new constitutional agreement was signed by all provinces and territories, except for Quebec, who opposed the constitution’s failure to protect Quebec’s distinct linguistic and cultural heritage. Because of the traditional economic and political superiority of English Canada, the government has and continues to neglect the French cultural and linguistic aspects of Canada, despite being a bilingual nation.
French speakers (the majority living in Quebec) find it much more difficult than English speakers to access and be involved in the political and social networks outside of their province.
Because of the Canadian government giving priority to English speakers, Quebec has become a breeding ground for French-language imperialism which is used to combat English linguistic imperialism. For example, whilst Canadian law states that all national institutions in Canada must provide services in both English and French, all new immigrant children to Quebec are required to attend French-language schools; Quebec’s 1988 Bill 178 decreed that all outdoor signs and billboards must be in French.
Many would argue that we should not dwell on the past; instead, we should accept the current reality that English does open doors in the worlds of education, employment and communication. However, it is not about dwelling on or attempting to change the past, but changing the future by acknowledging the mistakes of the past.
There is a huge difference between learning English as a tool that is indeed useful in today’s world and learning it in a way that neglects other languages and cultures. It is also essential that we recognise how English came to be such a global language, as well as how other languages have become dominant in other societies, acknowledging the damage that linguistic imperialism has done and continues to do to the cultural and linguistic diversity of the world.
Comments