The Lingua Franca of the Net

The fate of English as the global language

With communication systems becoming increasingly globalized, problems are beginning to arise, brought about by barriers related to language. Many feel that the only way of overcoming such problems is through the establishment of a lingua franca. Such an idea is nothing new: Latin was a universal language of sorts during the days of the Roman Empire, and even afterward it was used as a medium of education in western Europe; French, meanwhile, was the language of international diplomacy from the 17th until the 20th century. Although not the most widely spoken language in the world, English is seen by many presently as a de facto lingua franca.

Impressive statistics point to the fact that English is either dominant or well established on all six continents. Furthermore, it is the main language of the Internet, not to mention books, newspapers, airports and air traffic control, international business and academic conferences, science and technology, medicine, sports, international competitions, pop music, and advertising. In addition to this, an estimated three quarters of the world's mail is written in English. In terms of information technology, it is the structural framework for all programming languages. Moreover, about 80% of the information stored on computers is in English.

Despite these impressive statistics, the development of English as a world language is not always viewed with enthusiasm by those that have to learn it. Indeed, the factors that seem to contribute to the spread of the language (political and military might, economic power, and religious influence) has made some view the current progress of English as a lingua franca with concern, and even antagonism. The main concern is that it gives the originating culture (namely, the US) an unfair advantage and unprecedented influence in world affairs, not to mention scientific and technological research.

Yet how secure really is the English language in its present position? The following essay probes into this question by looking to the past as a guide for the future. As already mentioned, there were precedents of languages that obtained an almost universal status, yet all of these have since declined and lost their influence. Could it be that English will likewise fall into decline and lose the influence it presently has?

The Fate of English

Historiographical comparisons, while they do not provide an exact blueprint for present or future events, are nonetheless useful in helping us to understand the underlying processes of change that takes place. History never travels in a full circle; at best it spirals toward some horizon in the distance. Subsequently, in trying to understand the "the ever changing role of the English language in the age of the Net", it appears that Latin provides a suitable historiographical comparison which can give us an indication to where the English language within the world of networking might be headed.

As with Latin, English became a world language primarily through imperialist conquest. Moreover, both languages were associated with an empire whose scale was determined, for the most part, by advanced communication systems. As Parkinson notes, communications have always defined the size (and to some extent, the nature) of a political state. Rivers were the first and most basic means of communication: thus, the Nile, the Tigris, and the Ganges were the basis of large empires; on the other hand, the Tagus, the Mekong, and the Scheldt were able to support only smaller political entities.

The Roman and British Empires broke through the constraints of the river system (the most basic and standard means of communication that had been in use for thousands of years), with the former using roads and the latter extending its domination via the oceans. As a result, both empires were able to expand the reach of their political and social influence. At present, American English is going even further, thanks to computer networking, which transcends many of the physical constraints of traditional communication systems. This has already led many to proclaim, perhaps prematurely, that telematics has brought about "the death of distance".

Ironically, communications systems have always outlived the empires that have either created them or utilized them to their full potential. As Will Durant observes, it is one element among a host of others which has been tenaciously maintained from one civilization to the next: in all, "they are the connective tissue of human history." Language, however, is not among such elements. Rather, it follows the changes in the political fortunes of the state. Hence, Latin is no longer widely spoken, while British English is on the wane. Subsequently, what is of interest is to what extent is English in general following in the footsteps of Latin down the path to obscurity.

When dealing with the decline of Latin as a major language, the question that most people tend to ask is when did people stop speaking Latin. Wolffe points out that the question is misconstrued; people never spoke a uniform Latin in the first place. Instead, like the English of today, Latin was used widely throughout the empire, yet with differences in pronunciation and vocabulary. These linguistic differences were a reflection of the social and cultural differences of a multinational empire. Relative uniformity, nevertheless, was achieved through the written (and especially, literary) language thanks to a standard spelling and grammar system. When this written, literary language came under pressure with the fall of the Roman Empire, a period commonly referred to as the "Dark Ages" , the language easily succumbed to the predominant influences of the succeeding Romance and Germanic languages. As Crystal explains: "if a language dies out [it's] because its status alters in society, as other cultures and languages take over its role."

It would appear that English is following this same process. Widely spoken throughout the world, it is not a uniform language but reflects the different social and cultural conditions in which it is used. For instance, the most common difference between American English and British English is in pronunciation and spelling, with Canadian English subject to the conflicting influences of the two (and, to a certain extent, French). Meanwhile in Europe, Euro-English has developed in symbiosis with the political evolution of the European Union. Further south, South Africa continues to build a new vocabulary, peppering the English language with Afrikaans words. Similarly, Australians and New Zeleanders have their own differences in terms of accent and pronunciation vis-a-vis British English, not to mention a large number of additional terms for plants and animals peculiar to their region. Moreover, the historical legacy pertaining to their ethnic origins adds a further dimension to their use of English.

If the varied and fragmentary use of English is one indication of its progression toward decline, as had been with Latin, then what is yet to come is the demise of the empire upon which the English language is based. Although the sun has already set on the British Empire, through which English initially had been able to permeate throughout the world, the American Empire, using an amalgam of capitalism and technology (namely computer and networking technology) has been able to pick up where the British have left off, thereby sustaining the international influence of the English language - at least for a little while longer.

Yet the present dominance of world affairs by the US, this "Pax Americana" (in line with the Pax Romania and Pax Britannica of old), is also bound to fall. Arnold Tonybee, in his "A Study of History" , traced the rise and fall of human civilizations and came to the discovery that the life-cycle of a civilization follows along a certain pattern, from beginning to end. Accordingly, he concludes that western civilization is of no exception and has been following along this same pattern; indeed, he sees that western civilization is already in an advanced state of decline.

The view that western civilization is in decline is not limited to the field of historiography but is shared by others. Mark Stahlman , for example, fears that present trends toward an "Information Society" are leading us toward a "New Dark Age". The fact that Stahlman refers to this future as a "Dark Age" is interesting in that it falls into line with our comparative analysis between Latin and English, for it was the advent of the "first" Dark Age which relegated the use of Latin to insignificance. Thus, Stahlman's notion of the "New Dark Age" could very well be the event that will render English to irrelevance in the same way Latin was centuries before.

Whether adhering to Stahlman's view that western civilization is being targeted for destruction or Toynbee's organismic interpretation of historiographical decay, it is clear to most observers that the main reason western civilization is in decline is because it is no longer capable of rediscovering its creativity. Stoller ventures further, adding that post-modernism (pomo) in itself is an unconscious acknowledgment that the western world is living in a period that has peaked, an ebb like the decline of the Roman Empire, which had marked the transition between slavery and feudalism. Hence, the art that we see around us today merely "exemplifies the decadence, disintegration, and decay of the late capitalist epoch." She points out that "late" in this sense refers to morbid and moribund, not dead - at least, not yet.

If western civilization is indeed headed on a downward slide toward oblivion, then it is doing so with a fight. Samuel P. Huntington, in an article in Foreign Affairs magazine entitled "The Clash of Civilizations" , puts forth a neo-Cold War hypothesis that a conflict between civilizations is inevitable. As a result, his short-term recommendation for the western world is "to promote greater cooperation and unity with its own civilization". Ironically, his call for unity only further credits Toynbee's hypothesis, for Toynbee concluded that in all past civilizations it was the achievement of unity that marked the beginning of the end. Therefore unity, both politically in Europe through the EU and economically in North America through NAFTA, is merely further evidence of the advanced state of decline of western civilization.

The present, perceived need for unity, which finds its ultimate expression in a resistance toward change, ultimately translates itself to the use of language as well. As Crystal points out, since language changes because society changes, "to stop or control the one also requires that we stop and control the other -- a task which can succeed to only a very limited extent." Nevertheless, measures to implement some sort of control have been instigated: in France, there is resistance to what many see as a linguistic invasion, coming mainly from the US, while in Germany the government recently introduced a new system of spelling and punctuation rules, despite protests from leading intellectuals and writers.

All this, of course, is of little relevance to the individual in the present, many of whom are concerned with communicating over computer networks. Nonetheless, the realization that English will fragment into a lingua franca that will, in time, bear no or little resemblance to the English that is spoken today, is important. It is important in that to set standards for the future, or to even try and control the process of language change, is futile. What is more, what shall perhaps facilitate the process is the fact that the use of English among most native speakers is pathetic, and if they were to be judged by their proper use of the language, then undoubtedly most would score badly - if not worse than non-native speakers. As George Bernard Shaw once remarked: "in London nine hundred and ninety nine out of every thousand people not only speak bad English but speak even that very badly."

This observation, which contains within it a kernel of truth, is important for non-native speakers of English, for given the sloppy use of language by the vast majority of English native speakers, a precise use of English can actually be a barrier to effective communication. As Shaw was fond of pointing out: "Even among English people, to speak too well is a pedantic affectation. In a foreigner it is something worse than an affectation: it is an insult to the native who cannot understand his own language when it is too well spoken." His advice to foreign speakers of English, therefore, is to be more natural with the use of English, and not to be bothered if it "sounds" foreign.

Having said thus, it is important for native speakers of English, many of whom take for granted that other languages exist, no less the fact that communication systems such as the Internet are becoming increasingly multi-lingual, accept the fact that their days of hegemony over communications are numbered. Furthermore, an effort is needed in countries where English is officially the national (and only) language to be more receptive of foreign languages. One way in which this should be done is through the encouragement of foreign language learning. What is more, the range of foreign languages should not be limited to the same language group or civilization. Already, in the US, this decade has seen a shift in language interests among students enrolled in college foreign language courses. Chinese and Arabic were among the fastest growing languages in terms of popularity. Conversely, Russian and German were among those with the greatest declines .

In Europe, the importance of foreign language learning has, in large part, already been realized. The European Commission has recently created a programme known as the Multi-Lingual Information Society (MLIS). The objectives of this programme is to encourage the use of different languages through communication systems such as the Internet. As far as the European Commission is concerned, it expects the average European citizen of the future to be proficient in at least three official languages of the European Union.

Artificial language

Because we are supposedly living in a "revolutionary" period in terms of communications, it is hard to say how the process of language change - not to mention use - will develop. In all ages, there was the fear of language change. However, up to now language change has always been quite minimal and gradual. Additionally, the process of language decline, as with Latin, did not happen overnight. As Crystal relates, at one point, "in the mid-19th century, it was predicted that British and American English would be mutually unintelligible within 100 years!"

Still, there have been cases where linguistic change was too sudden, leading to problems of unintelligibility, ambiguity, and social division, as in contemporary Papa New Guinea. Hence, some degree of caution is required in the interests of maintaining precise and efficient communication.

The need to maintain precise and efficient communication has been on the minds of linguists for centuries. One proposed solution to this problem is the use of an artificial language. The most famous example of this is Esperanto. Although widely recognized, it has yet to achieve a status in which it can be considered an official language of sorts.

There are many reasons why Esperanto has failed thus far to permeate throughout the world in depth. Foremostly, learners from languages that don't fit the latinate use of tenses or prepositions have problems using Esperanto grammar; in terms of vocabulary, forms that are common in many natural languages are not used, thereby making some words unusually difficult to recognize. Also, being an artificial language, it doesn't take into account the fact that language is a natural phenomenon that perpetually changes: words are constantly created or fall into disuse; likewise, grammar rules change to take into account a new, expanded or contracted vocabulary, as well as new physical or existential realities, the Internet being a perfect example of this. Indeed, Esperanto's use of circumflex letters is cumbersome, especially when typing text on a computer or typewriter. Still, another reason has to do with simple linguistic chauvinism. A proposal to the UN a little over thirty years ago to grant Esperanto official status as a world language was rejected, partly on political grounds; many regard Esperanto as an "international language of propaganda" .

Since the standardized use of an artificial language is not likely, the only strategy left for the short-term is to make do with the present. But this is easier said than done. Some have already gone as far as to declare the structural base of the English language as something passe, as can be seen in the increased use of rebus and the blatant misuse and abuse of certain grammar rules. This unconcern is often done in favour of so-called "creativity" and "self-expression". The rationale behind this is that it is merely enough to communicate, and that the context of a sentence or phrase is enough to prevent it from being misunderstood.

Unfortunately, this is not always the case. By ignoring certain structural aspects of a language, the line between carelessness and creativity subsequently becomes blurred. As Bailey demonstrates: "Most people would understand [the phrase 'English as She is Spoke'], but they would not say it is good English. 'Bill done that' is just as understandable. So is the South Sea Islander's way of talking of a missionary helicopter as a Mixmaster-Him-Belong-Jesus-Christ. Quaint, perhaps, but it hardly represents a desirable norm. If this is acceptable English, what is unacceptable? Wee mite az wel rite owr langwij fernetikli an hav dun with the hole biznes."

Broken down to its basic elements, language is a system of abstract and complex symbols by which we attempt to transfer content from one closed system (i.e. individual) to another. Subsequently, success in this transfer of content depends on both the receiver and the sender, not to mention the symbols employed. This is especially true for written communication, for "writing cannot gesticulate, grin, scowl, show its teeth, mutter under its breath, waggle its eyebrows, wink or stamp its feet. These are the assets of the speaker, not the writer." (Bailey)

In the end, the successful use of the English language "in the age of the Net" boils down to a delicate balance between two extremes. For those rigidly literal in their use of the language, they will fail in the communication of experience. On the other hand, for those who believe that words are merely "containers" into which we pour the meanings and feelings of the moment, they will find themselves straitjacketed, for they will fail to realize that often our memories or feelings are defined, and to some extent limited, by the words we know and use.

With the English language in decline, a certain degree of flexibility is needed among native speakers of English that takes into account the influence of other cultures and their languages. Proper language use should prevent misunderstanding and ambiguity. Contrary to common belief, this does not entail a great degree of precision or adherence to formalized (and, in many cases, fossilized) rules. Instead, as Bailey points out for those who write in English, "writing good English is a job requiring common sense and moderation."

Conclusion

English language use is fragmenting and in an inevitable state of decline. This decline follows along the lines of a natural process, and has precedents in the rise and fall of other languages, such as Latin. Although there may be some attempts to forestall this decline or even control this process, such attempts will be futile and doomed to failure in the long run.

It is important for those who use the English language at present, as either their main or sole means of communication, to acknowledge the influence of other languages and cultures, and to realize the fact that communication systems, such as the Internet, as they become global, at the same time also become multi-lingual. By taking this into account and rejecting the impulse of reverting to linguistic chauvinism, our communication systems of the future might yet end up truly reflecting the diversity that is to be found within the world.