The English Language in Europe (Europa, 1350-4770; V. 2, no. 3)

cover

title: author: publisher: isbn10 | asin: print isbn13: ebook isbn13: language: subject publication date: lcc: ddc: subject:

next page >

The English Language in Europe Europa, 1350-4770 ; V.2,no.3 Hartmann, Reinhard R. K. Intellect Books 1871516897 9781871516890 9780585244822 English English language--Europe. 1996 PE1128.A2.E54 1996eb 428.0071 English language--Europe.

cover

next page >

< previous page

page_i

next page > Page i

The English Language in Europe Edited by Reinhard Hartmann

< previous page

page_i

next page >

< previous page

page_ii

next page > Page ii

intellect EUROPEAN STUDIES SERIES General Editor: Keith Cameron Humour and History Edited by Keith Cameron The Nation: Myth or Reality? Edited by Keith Cameron Regionalism in Europe Edited by Peter Wagstaff Women in European Theatre Edited by Elizabeth Woodrough Children and Propaganda Judith Proud The New Russia Edited by Michael Pursglove Food in European Literature Edited by John Wilkins Theatre and Europe 1957 - 1995 Christopher McCullough Television in Europe Edited by James Coleman First Published in 1996 by Intellect EFAE, Earl Richards Road North, Exeter, EX2 6AS Copyright © 1996 Intellect Ltd. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without written permission. Cover illustration: Roger Borrington Copy editor: Rachel Armstrong Production: Rachel Carey, Alison Smith British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data Available ISBN 1-871516-89-7 Printed and bound in Great Britain by Cromwell Press, Wiltshire

< previous page

page_ii

next page >

< previous page

next page >

page_iii

Page iii

Contents Introduction Reinhard Hartmann

1

English in the World and in Europe Tom McArthur

3

English in Europe: Its Nativisation and Use as a Lingua Franca, with Special Reference to German-speaking Countries Wolfgang Viereck

16

English in the European Union Cay Dollerup

24

English as a Word Donor to Other Languages of Europe Rudolf Filipovic *

37

Societal and Individual Bilingualism with English in Europe Charlotte Hoffmann

47

< previous page

page_iii

next page >

< previous page

page_1

next page > Page 1

Introduction With regard to the role of English in Western Europe, a stage has now been reached, for a growing proportion of the population, in which a diglossia situation is rapidly approaching or already exists.1 Reinhard Hartmann is currently Head of the Department of Applied Linguistics and Director of the Dictionary Research Centre at the University of Exeter. He is the author/editor of 12 books and in 1983 organised the international conference LEXeter '83 which helped found EURALEX (the European Association for Lexicography). He is joint editor of Lexicographica Series Maior (Niemeyer) and adviser to several periodicals. A great deal has been written about English, and even more about Europe, but much less is available on the present state of the English language in Europe, and what there is is often hard to find or is relatively superficial, or tendentious. In order to understand what is happening, we need more linguistic objectivity. Norman Denison made a good start in that direction, presenting evidence for the increasing importance of English in the daily lives of many people in (Western) Europe. The term 'diglossia' in the quotation above is used not in the narrow sense of the co-existence of a high and low variety of a particular language, but signifies the availability of a second language, in this case English, alongside the native tongue for a multiplicity of daily communicative needs. Denison exemplified these additional uses to which speakers of various European languages put English, in such situations as language learning in school, reading technical literature at university, watching undubbed films and reacting to advertisements. He also explored some of the ways in which these uses may affect those languages, especially German. Other studies2 have gone on from there to document the results of the increasing penetration by English of various European languages, as well as the changes that the donor language is undergoing in the mouths and through the pens of its new speakers and writers. These are, of course, complex processes requiring careful observation in a multidisciplinary perspective. I have, therefore, invited five scholars of international renown to take part in a joint investigation of English in Europe. Tom McArthur places the English language in a global context: English is European in origin, but it is also 'owned' by a vast number of speakers in other continents. These speakers can be grouped, according to one tripartite model, into ENL, ESL and EFL users (i.e. users of English as a native, second, or foreign language). The author warns us, however, that this convenient classification may well be a simplified account that ignores the intricate realities of language contact, acquisition and use. Wolfgang Viereck draws our attention to the uneven distribution of English in Europe. It is widely used as a lingua franca (or second language) in Scandinavia and the Netherlands, while in southern and eastern Europe it is still in the main a foreign language. But as it gains ground all over Europe, it becomes adapted ('nativised') in very different ways. This adaptation depends on the functions it has to perform in various contexts; education, sex, age and attitude towards borrowing are important additional variables. Viereck also provides 1 Denison, N. 'English in Europe, with particular reference to the German-speaking area' in Pöckl, W.(ed). Europäische Mehrsprachigkeit. Festschrift zum 70. Geburtstag von Mario Wandruszka. Tübingen: M. Niemeyer. 1981, pp. 5-18. 2 For example: Viereck, W. & Bald, W.D. eds. English in Contact with Other Languages. Studies in Honour of Broder Carstensen on the Occasion of His 60th Birthday. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó. 1986. Also: Ammon, U.(ed). 'English only? in Europa/in Europe/en Europe.' Sociolinguistica 8. Tübingen: M. Niemeyer. 1994.

< previous page

page_1

next page >

< previous page

page_2

next page > Page 2

statistics based on surveys of job adverts and the publication of academic papers. The conclusion is that these trends will continue, especially as schools tend to introduce foreign-language teaching earlier on. Cay Dollerup re-expresses the tripartite division of ENL, ESL and EFL speakers in terms of expanding concentric circles and diagnoses a strong tendency from the outer circles inwards: English has not only become the first foreign language to be used all over Europe, but is now the dominant lingua franca in such fields as the mass media, technology, youth culture and travel. Within the institutions of the European Union, in spite of, or because of, their huge language services (employing over 2,000 translators), English continues to gain ground as the major working language, a trend which is likely to accelerate with current and future enlargements. Vocabulary is the most obvious outward sign of the influence of English in Europe. Rudolf Filipovic * traces the history and nature of these loan processes ('copying' may be a more accurate description than the established metaphors of 'borrowing' and 'lending', since the direction of the traffic is more often a one-way rather than a two-way street). Anglicisms are the result of adaptation at four levels: orthography or spelling, phonology or pronunciation, morphology or grammatical form, and semantics or meaning. However, the adaptations may differ from language to language depending on the domain of the lexical item, the contrasting structures of the languages, and the intensity of the contact between them. A by-product of borrowing, hinted at by Denison but investigated in detail by Fouché, Filipovic and others, can be structural change at any of the four levels in the receiving language. The locus of interlingual transfer and change is the individual speaker who is competent in two languages. Bilingualism is, therefore, the legitimate concern of Charlotte Hoffmann, herself multilingual in her native languages Danish and German, and her acquired second languages English and Spanish. She examines the spread of individual and societal bilingualism with English in Europe and its causes. Work-motivated migration promotes family bilingualism, but biliteracy and multilingual policies in schools3 also contribute significantly to the rising status and increasing use of English, confirmed in all five papers. Although the authors have developed different approaches, they have nevertheless all come to the same conclusion: that English increasingly dominates intra-European communication, in academic, commercial, bureaucratic, political and also social settings. Whether we approach the topic from the points of view of 'diglossia', 'contact', 'interference', 'translation', 'bilingualism', 'English teaching', or the organisation of 'English Studies' in different countries, the future looks as though it belongs to the English language, even though it could itself be transformed in the process. R. R. K. HARTMANN 3 Ammon, U. et al. eds. Mehrsprachigkeits-konzepte in den Schulen Europas/Multilingual Concepts in the Schools of Europe/Conceptions plurilingues dans l'enseignement européen. Sociolinguistica 7. Tübingen: M. Niemeyer. 1993.

< previous page

page_2

next page >

< previous page

page_3

next page > Page 3

I English in the World and in Europe Tom McArthur Tom McArthur studied English and Linguistics. He has worked since 1983, as editor of the journal English Today and as Honorary Research Fellow at Exeter, specialising in lexicography and the description of English. He is currently writing for Cambridge University Press, a work entitled The English Languages. Who Owns English? When Winston Churchill wrote The History of the English-Speaking Peoples1, English was widely perceived, in some serious, aboriginal sense as the property of England or, more expansively, of Britain as a whole. Communities large and small using the language elsewhere were regarded (often as much among themselves as by others) as offspring of the motherland, whose upper classes and major cultural institutions were arbiters of linguistic good taste at home and abroad. This perception generally existed regardless of how long English had been used elsewhere, how long ago political ruptures with the motherland had taken place (as with the United States), and how distant, distinct, and varied an English-using country might be (as in the case of India). With the passage of some forty years, however, the social and cultural landscape has greatly changed. In the 1990s, the English language has become, and is increasingly recognised as, a universal resource. People have begun to notice that the survival and worth of such a resource are not dependent on any single territory in which it is spoken, whether it is the traditional wellspring, as with England as part of the United Kingdom, or it is vast, has a large population, and dominates international culture, as with the United States. Two of my key aims when editing the quarterly journal English Today (Cambridge University Press, founded in 1985 and ongoing) and The Oxford Companion to the English Language2 have been to help set English firmly in its world context and to be as detached and even-handed as possible about its politics. In the process, I have sought to avoid, or at least to minimise, complaints from African, American, Asian, Australasian, and indeed mainland European readers that either the journal or the book follows too British or too English or even too Oxbridge a line on the nature and the 'ownership' of this egregiously widespread, vigorous, and varied language. Such matters were minor irritants in Churchill's day, but are currently rather delicate and certainly hot enough to prompt, in 1994, the publication of a collection of papers for teachers entitled Who Owns English?3 In their preface its editors state: This volume gives no easy answers but its many questions display the liveliness of the current debate and demonstrate the importance of our being informed members of it, as we seek to find positive ways of ensuring that our students are aware of their rights and their responsibilities in owning their English. 1 Churchill, W. A History of the English-Speaking Peoples. London. 1956-58. 2 McArthur, T. ed. The Oxford Companion to the English Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1992. 3 Hayhoe, M. & Parker, S. eds. Who Owns English? Milton Keynes: Open University Press. 1994.

< previous page

page_3

next page >

< previous page

page_4

next page > Page 4

Hayhoe and Parker are affirming here what appears to be a growing scholarly consensus worldwide: that all users of English, whoever and wherever they may be, are ultimately responsible for their own usage and that one of the aims of language education should be to make them aware of this. They should be aware that there is no Vatican to which the uncertain or insecure can turn for guaranteed ex cathedra guidance on how any English, standard or otherwise, should be used, despite the plethora of books that seek to provide guidance. Ultimately, as Hayhoe, Parker and like-minded educationists see it, the speakers and writers of the world's most massively used language are, by and large, on their own. Help exists, from teachers, books, and other sources, but the linguistic buck now stops with each individual. The Europeanness of English An unexpected by-product of my quest for objectivity, accuracy, and balance in the Companion4 was an appreciation of the underlying Europeanness of English, including on-going relationships with other European languages from Ireland to Russia. This affirmation seems to me to make the Companion different from many other books about the language, in which a North Atlantic or, as the French might say, an 'Anglo-Saxon' perspective tends to predominate. I like to think that this Europeanness, which is much more than simply Englishness or Britishness, is not touched by that rather different entity, Eurocentrism, which is as unwelcome in the 1990s as unreconstructed Anglocentrism or Britocentrism. Reprinted below are the Companion's5 four definitions of the word 'English', two of which directly link it with Europe, the third to general education everywhere, and the fourth specifically to North America. (1) The name of a European people and the adjective associated with them and with their country, England: the achievements of the English; English traditions. (2) The name of a language originating in Western Europe and the adjective relating to it: the history of English; English dialects. (3) The name of a course offered in schools, universities, and other institutions, whose aim is to provide students with skills in the use of the language, or in aspects of its literature, or both: first-year English; English as a Foreign Language; English language teaching; English Language and Literature; Business English; remedial English. (4) The adjective and noun used in Canada for speakers of English as opposed to French, regardless of ethnic origin: differences between the French and the English; English Canadians. Senses 1 (the people) and 2 (the language), it will be noted, are not tied tightly together. English is not represented as flowing from or in some supernal sense belonging to the English people as such; indeed, 4op. cit. The Oxford Companion to the English Language. 5op. cit. p. 352.

< previous page

page_4

next page >

< previous page

page_5

next page > Page 5

the sole uniting factor in the two senses is this Europeanness. Nowadays, I would argue, it makes sense to talk of English as originating in Western Europe rather than as primarily the language of the people of England for at least four reasons: (1) Naming the Language The peoples who used the language in its earliest centuries (when it may well not have had a specific, unifying name) were diverse. According to Bede, some time later, they were Angles, Saxons, and Jutes, and on the basis of other evidence there appear also to have been Franks and Frisians among them. The language took its name at a later date from the dominant group, the Angles (or Engle, as they called themselves), who were not however 'English' in any sense that would be recognised in recent centuries any more than the Romans were 'Latinos' in the sense that currently dominates discussions of Latin-American immigrants in the United States. (2) Its Early Users When the language was first used in Britain it was, as far as we can tell, the speech of specific foreign mercenaries called in by Romano-British Celts to help defend them against the Picts and Scots. However, these presumed allies took advantage of their paymasters' weakness by invading and settling in parts of the land they had been engaged to protect. Then, and for some time afterwards, the language they spoke was not marked off by name or nature from the speech of the regions from which the mercenaries and their families had come now southern Denmark, western Germany, and the northern Netherlands. (3) Its Early Distribution The geographical distribution of the language after its arrival in Britain occurred not only in what later became England but also in what later became Scotland. The variety of English from the latter descends directly from the speech of the Angles and was, therefore, known for centuries as Inglis, but later came to be called Scots. The varieties in England, however, have descended from dialects spoken by all the invaders (because of which the early forms are often grouped together by scholars as AngloSaxon). (4) Its Later Distribution The English language today has been used so widely and for so long outside Europe (since the late sixteenth century in several cases) that to say anything more specific than 'originated in Western Europe' would fail to acknowledge both this universality and the centuries of increasingly independent development in, for example, North America, the Caribbean, and West Africa. English originated in Western Europe, certainly, and developed in England crucially, but in its modern form (Modern English, virtually a distinct language complex from Middle and Old English) has developed concurrently in many places since that most seminal of periods, the time when Shakespeare was writing his plays and the King James translation of the Bible was published. On the whole, it seems rather apt that a desire for detachment and even-handedness in placing English in its proper would context, as well as a concern for owners' rights everywhere, should have resulted in

< previous page

page_5

next page >

< previous page

page_6

next page > Page 6

pointing up the ties that English has always had with the whole continent of Europe and not only with one sceptred offshore isle. The Ambiguities of 'English' The Western European roots of English are not the only issue affecting senses 1 and 2 above: the word 'English' itself is no stranger to change and ambiguity. In its ethnic-cum-national application, for example, it has shifted in meaning at least three times: (1) The Gens Anglorum The early Germanic settlers in Britain came to be known in Latin as the gens Anglorum, a phrase for which two translations are possible today: 'Angle race' and 'English people'. In the fifth century AD, the gens Anglorum organised itself into a number of kingdoms throughout southern and central Britain, statelets that fought each other as fiercely as they fought the Celts. Their Englishness as a source of solidarity was no more developed at that time than the Celticness of the aboriginal inhabitants. (2) English and Danish In the more or less established kingdom of England c.900, the name 'English' excluded the Danes who had invaded, settled in, and continued to control much of the country. These settlers would, however, later be assimilated, their separate origin effectively forgotten, and by the earlier eleventh century everyone in England was English. (3) English and French For many years after the Norman Conquest in 1066, the ruling class were called 'French' and their subjects 'English', a division that was sustained in state documents long after the Anglo-Normans ceased to be alien, have a distinct identity, or own lands abroad. It took until the fourteenth century for 'English' to become the name for all the diverse subjects of the king of England, whether their origins were Anglo-Saxon, Celtic, Danish, or Norman-French. A further source of ambiguity emerged from the sixteenth century onward: in its first phase in 1535, when Wales was incorporated into England; in its second phase in 1603, when the monarchies of England and Scotland became one (prompting the unofficial unifying title 'Great Britain'); and in its third phase in 1707, the union of the parliaments of England and Scotland (offically creating a 'United Kingdom of Great Britain'). As a result, from the eighteenth century on, the term 'English' when applied to people (but not to the language) has had three distinct referents: the inhabitants of England and their sole concerns, the inhabitants of England and Wales and their joint concerns, and the inhabitants of Great Britain (England, Wales, Scotland, and varyingly all or part of Ireland after that island was incorporated into the British state, then partitioned), and their joint concerns.

< previous page

page_6

next page >

< previous page

page_7

next page > Page 7

By and large, only the first of these usages prevails when the Irish, Scots, Welsh and English are talking to, about, or with each other, although the English are notorious in the rest of Britain (and in Ireland) for using their name to cover everybody in the archipelago. Many English people use 'English' as a term for nationality-cum-ethnicity without making it clear whether they are talking about themselves alone or everyone in Great Britain (and perhaps Ireland). As far as I have been able to judge, they often do this without being clear, or feeling the need to be clear, about the coverage they intend. As a possible consequence (and certainly because of the long-term political primacy of England), Americans, mainland Europeans, and others have shared in this politically and culturally loaded synecdoche, which the following American citation strikingly illustrates: While Rafelson is a great admirer of Robert Redford, he did not think an American playing an aristocratic Englishman in Out of Africa worked. So he decided he wanted English actors and settled for two virtual unknowns. Patrick Bergin, like Burton, whom he plays, is Irish and the star of Act of Betrayal, a recent mini-series about an Irish Republican Army informer. Iain Glen, a Scotsman, who plays Speke, was in the West End production of Tom Stoppard's Hapgood early last year.'6 Such widespread, casual usage not only displeases and depresses a majority of Scots, Welsh, and (Northern) Irish people, but has repercussions in terms of the language that the English have conveniently shared for so long with the Scots, Welsh and Irish and now share with numerous other groups throughout the world. The international implication with regard to the islands of Britain and Ireland has long been that if you speak English you are English. Once one leaves those islands, however, this implication ceases to hold true. If people speak English but are Australian or American or Nigerian or Singaporean they most manifestly are not English. This semantic anomaly is a hangover from the time when the power of England and the use of English were considered co-extensive, by the English themselves, by mainland Europeans, by Americans, and finally by much of the rest of the world. The conviction of its essential truth appears to have lasted almost three hundred years, during which the Scots, Welsh, and Irish have, simultaneously and uncomfortably, been both their separate selves and also subvarieties of the English nation. The Diaspora Languages of Western Europe Most, if not all, of the world's languages have ethnic links, and many are closely associated with particular nation-states, usually because certain ethnic groups have set them up or become dominant in them. In addition, the world's major international languages, such as Arabic, Chinese, English, French, and Spanish, have by and large had geographical distributions well beyond the national entities with which they may share a name. Thus, French is used beyond France, and 6 From 'Quest for the Source of the Nile, on Film', The New York Times. February 1989.

< previous page

page_7

next page >

< previous page

page_8

next page > Page 8

Castilian (Spanish) was at first used only in one part of Spain, and is at the present time not accepted with equal serenity throughout that country. Finally, as a consequence of the sea-borne diaspora that began in Western Europe in the late fifteenth century, five of its ethnic-cum-national languages (Dutch, English, French, Portuguese, and Spanish) have been carried round the world by conquistadors, clergymen, and commercial agents. The Danish and Italian languages have also travelled extensively, but have had much less impact. In consequence, many non-European countries have strong colonial and postcolonial ties with these languages, but without, in the main, retaining close political associations with Europe. Thus, although they use French, the people of Quebec are not French, and although they use Spanish, the people of Mexico and Colombia are not Spanish. Similarly, Americans, Australians, and others are not English or European. These statements may seem obvious, yet in Europe the following related facts are by no means obvious to or accepted by all: first that more people speak English and Spanish outside Europe than within its boundaries, with serious implications for the centres of gravity of those languages; second that comparable numbers of speakers of French, Portuguese, and Dutch live outside Europe. Failure to balance the facts of linguistic life beyond Western Europe with traditional assumptions about the use of language can take curious forms. For example, since the late 1980s, the British company Linguaphone has been advertising audio materials for the study of French, German, Spanish, and other languages, with invitations to tick whichever language one wants to learn on a coupon, and send it off. However, two languages listed in the advertisement are anomalous: 'English' and 'American English'. Linguaphone has clearly felt the need to offer courses in both of the major varieties of English, but has not felt a corresponding need to label them even-handedly. Because the home variety is not called 'British English', it becomes what linguists call the unmarked term, implying that it is the real stuff, with a more fundamental and wider reference than 'American English'. Ironically, 'American English' is used by about five times as many native speakers of English as use kinds of 'British English'. A comparable, if less blatant, unmarkedness appears (with just a touch of chauvinism and a soupçon of self-satisfaction) in the following extract from the introduction to Godfrey Howard's The Good English Guide: English Usage in the 1990s.7 The Good English Guide is about British English, but American English and other varieties of English come into it many times, because there is an ever-increasing overlap. Nor is this cause for dismay. Immigrant influences, bouncing back at the language in ceaseless bombardment, have kept English on its toes as the most lively and adaptable language the world has ever known. The precise meaning of this passage is not clear. It may, like the Linguaphone advertisement, imply that the real language is alive and 7 Howard, G. The Good English Guide: English Usage in the 1990s. Basingstoke: Macmillan. 1993.

< previous page

page_8

next page >

< previous page

page_9

next page > Page 9

well and living in Britain while the other varieties are 'immigrant influences' on it, or it may mean that American English, as the Linguaphone advertisement implies, is a different language with the same kind of significant influence on (British) English that French once had. It is impossible to know just what is intended by the advertisement and the quotation. One can only note that traditional Britocentric assumptions die hard where at least this particular European diaspora language is concerned, and I suspect that the same kind of assumptions of unmarked centrality continue for the other diaspora languages as well. The Distribution of English Whatever the residual attitude of Europeans to their major diaspora languages, the worldwide spread of those languages, and in particular of English and Spanish, is phenomenal by any standard. I will not discuss the other languages further here, but list below the many territories in which English is significant. I use the word territories so as to cover not only nation-states but also remote localities deemed part of those states (such as French Caribbean islands) and colonial and other dependencies (such as Gibraltar and the Channel Islands), because many such places have distinctive patterns of language use. I use the word 'significant', rather than, say, 'major', so as not to limit the discussion to such matters as population statistics and politicoeconomic power. The territories, arranged in world regions, are as follows: Europe Belgium, the Channel Islands, Cyprus, Denmark, England (UK), Gibraltar, the Irish Republic, the Isle of Man, Malta, the Netherlands, Northern Ireland (UK), Norway, Scotland (UK), Sweden, Switzerland, Wales (UK) 16 territories (including the four parts of the UK) Africa Botswana, Cameroon, Gambia, Ghana, Egypt, Ethiopia, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Malawi, Namibia, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Africa, Sudan, Swaziland, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe 21 territories The Americas Anguilla, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Bermuda, Canada, the Cayman Islands, Costa Rica, Dominica, Grenada, Guyana, Honduras, Jamaica, Montserrat, Nicaragua, Panama, Puerto Rico, Saint Christopher and Nevis, Saint Helena, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Surinam, Trinidad and Tobago, the Turks and Caicos Islands, the US Virgin Islands, the British Virgin Islands, the United States 30 territories Asia Bahrain, Bangladesh, Brunei, Hong Kong, India, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Malaysia, Lebanon, Nepal, Oman, Pakistan, the Philippines, Qatar, Singapore, Sri Lanka, the United Arab Emirates 18 territories

< previous page

page_9

next page >

< previous page

page_10

next page > Page 10

Australasia/Pacific Ocean Australia, Belau, Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia (FSM), Fiji, Hawaii, Kiribati, the Marshall Islands, Nauru, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, the Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu, American Samoa, Western Samoa 17 territories Indian Ocean British Indian Ocean Territory, Maldives, Mauritius, Seychelles 4 territories South Atlantic Ascension (Island), the Falkland Islands, Saint Helena, Tristan da Cunha 4 territories Total 110 Territories Worldwide There is a great deal of interest about all the above territories, but here I will expand only on territories in Europe. In those constitutionally linked with the UK, such as Gibraltar and the Channel Islands, the social and cultural significance of English is self-evident, and their inhabitants have little choice in the matter of language. In the case of Belgium, however, which is not usually considered a significant Anglophone country, the cardinal factor is the role of English as one of the two working languages (the other being French) of the European Union, in which Brussels is in effect the 'capital'. The listed north-western European countries are quite different, however, because they have all made conscious, independent choices about English. The high level of bilingualism between English and the national language in Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway, and Sweden is the consequence of the successful long-term teaching of English to most of their people, who have generally been willing to cooperate. This justifies the view, which is still controversial, and sometimes troubling in those countries, that English is no longer really foreign, but a strong second language that is steadily becoming nativised. The recent advent and popularity, especially among the young, of multichannel English-language satellite television only serves to consolidate and accelerate this process. In south-western Europe, things are different. English has not directly penetrated the various populations at large, though it may yet do so. A major pointer is the massive current programmes of English-language teaching in Spain, Portugal, and Italy. Other indicators are: first the importance to the port wine industry in the Douro Valley of Portugal of a long-established group of resident British families; second in Spain, as part of large-scale recent immigration from north-western Europe, large numbers of Britons with permanent homes on the Mediterranean littoral, who do not assimilate into the local population, use English more or less exclusively, and are often served in English by local people; third a comparable but less extensive influx of Britons buying permanent or part-time homes in several favoured parts of France (where the Pas de Calais has been nicknamed Lower Kent) and of Italy (where Tuscany has been nicknamed Chiantishire). None of these pointers are significant enough to merit the inclusion of these

< previous page

page_10

next page >

< previous page

page_11

next page > Page 11

countries in the above list, but they are intriguing straws in the European wind. Elsewhere in Europe, English is a foreign language that is learned as a fashionable international lingua franca massively in many places, such as Germany and Finland, and increasingly in the former Soviet satellites of the East. This state of affairs mirrors its progression everywhere else in the world. A Tripartite Model: ENL, ESL, and EFL Although it has not proved easy to find a set of categories into which all the territories where people use and learn English can be fitted, one such set has had considerable success with linguists and teachers of English. It is the tripartite division described as follows by Barbara Strang in 19708: At the present time, English is spoken by perhaps 350 to 400m people who have it as their mother tongue. These people are scattered over the earth, in far-ranging communities of divergent status, history, cultural traditions and local affinities. I shall call them A-speakers, because they are the principal kind we think of in trying to choose a variety of English as a basis for description. The principal communities of A-speakers are those of the UK, the USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. There are many millions more for whom English may not be quite the mother tongue, but who learn it in early childhood, and who live in communities in which English has a special status (whether or not as an official national language) as a, or the, language for advanced academic work and for participation in the affairs of men at the international, and possibly even the national level. These are the B-speakers, found extensively in Asia (especially India) and Africa (especially the former colonial territories). Then there are those throughout the world for whom English is a foreign language, its study required, often as the first foreign language, as part of their country's educational curriculum, though the language has no official, or even traditional, standing in that country. These are the C-speakers. A similar three-part classification was used two years later by the grammarians Randolph Quirk, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, and Jan Svartvik9 but without Strang's ABC labels (and with a markedly different estimate of the world's population of native English speakers): English is the world's most widely used language. It is useful to distinguish three primary categories of use: as a native language, as a second language, and as a foreign language. English is spoken as a native language by nearly three hundred million people. Since then, the tripartite model has become well known among linguists and language teachers. The use of the letters A, B, and C did not catch on, and generally the categories have been referred to by the 8 Strang, B. A History of English. London: Methuen. 1970. 9 Quirk, R. A. Greenbaum, S. Leech, G. & Svatvik, J. A Grammar of Contemporary English. London: Longman. 1972.

< previous page

page_11

next page >

< previous page

page_12

next page > Page 12

abbreviations ENL, ESL, and EFL. At the end of the twentieth century, all the territories of the world belong in one or other of these categories, under which they can be listed as follows: (1) The ENL Territories The majority of people in these localities have English as their first and generally their only language. The territories can be divided into two groups: those in which English (whatever its form) is the sole significant language, and those where it co-exists with one or more other major languages: The Sole Significant Language Anguilla, Antigua and Barbuda, Ascension (Island), Australia, Bahamas, Barbados, Bermuda, the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT), Dominica, England (UK), the Falkland Islands, Grenada, Guyana, Liberia, Jamaica, the Irish Republic, the Isle of Man, Montserrat, New Zealand, Northern Ireland (UK), Saint Christopher and Nevis, Saint Helena, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Scotland (UK), Trinidad and Tobago, Tristan da Cunha, the United States [but see next paragraph], the Virgin Islands (British), the Virgin Islands (US) 30 territories With One or More Other Major Languages Belize (Spanish), Canada (French), Channel Islands (French), Gibraltar (Spanish), South Africa (Afrikaans, Xhosa, Zulu, etc.), Wales (UK: Welsh) [It can be argued that the United States belongs here, with Spanish as its second language.] 6 territories (2) The ESL Territories Many people in these localities use English for specific social and professional purposes, and in some places it has an official, educational, or other role. Competence may vary from native-like fluency to 'broken English'. The language may be generally accepted, or may to varying degrees be a controversial (and politicised) issue: Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belau, Botswana, Brunei, Cameroon, Cook Islands, Egypt, the Federated States of Micronesia (FSM), Fiji, Gambia, Ghana, Hong Kong, India, Israel, Jordan, Kenya, Kiribati, Kuwait, Lebanon, Lesotho, Malaysia, Malawi, Malta, the Marshall Islands, Mauritius, Namibia, Nauru, Nigeria, the Northern Marianas, Oman, Puerto Rico, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, the Philippines, Qatar, Samoa (American), Samoa (Western), Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, the Solomon Islands, Surinam, Sri Lanka, Swaziland, Tanzania, Tuvalu, Uganda, Vanuatu, Zambia, Zimbabwe 51 territories (3) The EFL Territories Many people in these localities learn English formally (using a British or American model) for occupational reasons; others may acquire it more casually, in the family, at a place of work, or on the street, etc. Competence varies from fluency to survival level. The territories can be divided into two groups:

< previous page

page_12

next page >

< previous page

page_13

next page > Page 13

Virtually a Second Language Argentina, Belgium, Burma/Myanmar, Costa Rica, Denmark, Ethiopia, the Faroe Islands, Honduras, Lebanon, Nepal, the Netherlands, Nicaragua, Norway, Panama, Somalia, Sudan, Surinam, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Arab Emirates 20 territories Learned as the Global Lingua Franca Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Armenia, Aruba, Azerbaijan, the Azores, the Balearic Islands, Belarus, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, the Canary Islands, Cape Verde, the Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, the Comoros Islands, Congo, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Djibouti, the Dominican Republic, East Timor, Ecuador, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Estonia, Finland, France, French Guiana, Gabon, Georgia, Germany, Goa, Greece, Greenland, Guadeloupe, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Iran, Italy, the Ivory Coast, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kirghizia, Korea (North), Korea (South), Laos, Latvia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Macau, Macedonia, Madagascar, Madeira, Martinique, Mozambique, Mauritania, Mexico, Moldavia, Monaco, Mongolia, Morocco, the Netherlands Antilles, New Caledonia, Niger, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Pondicherry, Portugal, Réunion, Romania, Russia, Rwanda, Saint Pierre et Miquelon, San Marino, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, the Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Switzerland, Syria, Taiwan, Tajikistan, Thailand, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Vatican City, Venezuela, Vietnam, the Wallis and Futuna Islands, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire 121 territories Total 228 Territories The tripartite model has proved to be a productive rule-of-thumb by means of which the complexity of world English can be managed. However, at least the following four provisos have to be borne in mind while working with the model: (1) The Question of Mutual ENL Intelligibility The kinds of usage identified as 'English' in ENL territories vary widely in the extent to which they are mutually intelligible. For example, in the UK, standard English and the various forms of traditional Scots in widespread use in Scotland are often far apart in their phonology, syntax, and lexis; in the US, mainstream English and the various forms of Black English Vernacular are very different, especially syntactically. A territory's membership of the ENL group is no guarantee, therefore, that everyone speaks 'the same' English or that all the inhabitants easily understand each other, whether or not they consider that they are using standard English at any time. (2) The Wide Distribution of Pidgins and Creoles English-based pidgins and creoles can be found across the spectrum of the tripartite model. Creoles are massively present in the ENL territories of the Caribbean and are also found in the southern states of

< previous page

page_13

next page >

< previous page

page_14

next page > Page 14

the US. Pidgins and creoles are widespread across the ESL territories of West Africa, and can be found in ESL and EFL countries in both the Caribbean region (the Dominican Republic, Nicaragua, Surinam) and West Africa (Togo). In the ESL territories of Papua New Guinea, the Solomon Islands, and Vanuatu, local Melanesian languages are used alongside both standard English and the English-based creoles Tok Pisin, Pijin, and Bislama respectively. (3) The Presence of ENL Speakers in ESL/EFL Territories, and of ESL/EFL Speakers in ENL Territories Large numbers of native speakers of English can be found in ESL territories, such as the Anglo-Indian community in India, and in EFL territories, such as the Anglo-Argentine community in South America. Comparably, large numbers of non-native speakers can be found in ENL territories, such as immigrant Latino and Québécois communities in the US) and immigrant South Asian communities (in particular Indian, Pakistani, and Bangladeshi) in the UK. (4) The Growth of Code-mixing and Hybridisation Although the model allows for the co-existence of English with other languages in various territories, it does not take into consideration the often massive influence of English on such languages, or the similarly massive influence of these languages on English. In addition, it ignores the high level of code-mixing, code-switching, and hybridisation that goes on, for example between English and Welsh in Wales, English and French in Cameroon and Canada, English and Spanish in Texas, and English and Malay in Malaysia (see Chapter V below). These four factors serve to remind us that, although English serves as a global lingua franca, there are many areas of difficulty with regard to homogeneity and overall intelligibility. Dialectal and other variation in ENL territories, creoles serving as everyday mother tongues in various ENL, ESL, and EFL territories, the mix of language capacities across all three categories, and the increase in hybridisation between English and many other highly significant languages all point as much to problems in communication as to fluent use of a shared universal asset. What is shared worldwide, in fact, is not the language at large but a standard variety common to the media, business, and what one is constrained to call, for want of a better phrase, a Westerneducated international elite. Conclusion In addition to provisos directly related to the tripartite model, there are issues concerned with how English is officially recognised in different countries. Paradoxes abound, as for example when we find that English may not even be explicitly official in the countries where it is most profoundly dominant perhaps indeed for that very reason. Thus, in neither the UK nor the US is it the acknowledged official language: its status as the language of administration, education, and so forth is de facto, not de jure. In the US, however, there is a campaign to amend the constitution so that English becomes the official national language, and the main reason for this movement (which has had no success to date)

< previous page

page_14

next page >

< previous page

page_15

next page > Page 15

appears to be the growth of Spanish as a second language across the nation. At the same time, of the 50 states of the Union, while 33 have no laws relating to the status of English, in 17 it is recognised by statute as the official state language. In one of these, Hawaii, it is co-official with Hawaiian, but this is cosmetic rather than demographically significant. Paradoxically, English is far more likely to be legally recognised in ESL territories, especially where it was once the language of colonial administration and has been carried over into postcolonial times for specific local reasons. In Nigeria, for example, it is the sole official language because it is the only medium common to the many and varied ethnolinguistic communities making up the nation. The permutations are legion. In some places, the situation is comparable to Nigeria. English is the sole official language, for example, in Gambia, Sierra Leone, Uganda, Zambia, and Zimbabwe, although few people speak it as a first language, and most people are in any case multilingual. In other places, English is co-official with one or more other language: with Gaelic in the Irish Republic, French in Canada and Cameroon, Spanish in Puerto Rico, Swahili in Tanzania, Sesotho in Lesotho, Chichewa in Malawi, Cantonese in Hong Kong, with Malay, Mandarin Chinese, and Tamil in Singapore, with Afrikaans and the nine indigenous languages (Ndebele, Pedi, Northern Sotho, Southern Sotho, Swati, Tsonga, Venda, Xhosa, and Zulu) in South Africa, with two pidgin languages, Tok Pisin (based on English) and Hiri Motu (based on local languages) in Papua-New Guinea. The most complex situation is India, in which English has three roles: associate official language, Hindi being the official language; a national language, like Bengali, Hindi, and Gujerati, etc., because it is the state language of the four states Manipur, Meghalaya, Nagaland, and Tripura; and the official language of eight Union territories: the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Arunachal Pradesh, Chandigarh, Dadra and Nagar Haveli, Delhi, Lakshwadip, Mizoram, and Pondicherry. Such facts demonstrate that the tripartite model, while immensely useful, falls short of providing a solid foundation for the description of English at the present time or for the foreseeable future. There is so much more to the world role of the language at present than a traditional division of its users into a primary 'birthright' group and two further 'acquisition' groups. Indeed, the massed everyday activities of the English-using world are beyond the reach of any model currently devised. The use of English at the end of the twentieth century dwarfs all past experience with any language anywhere.

< previous page

page_15

next page >

< previous page

page_16

next page > Page 16

II English in Europe: Its Nativisation and Use as a Lingua Franca, with Special Reference to German-speaking Countries Wolfgang Viereck Wolfgang Viereck studied English, French, Politics and Habilitation. Since 1978 he has been Professor of English Linguistics and Medieval Studies at the University of Bamberg where he specialises in the dialectology and sociolinguistics of English. He organised the 1990 International Congress of Dialectologists. European English(es) To describe the cultural and linguistic context of English on a European level would require a substantial book-length study. I will concentrate here on the German-speaking countries, without, however, losing sight of the European dimension. With regard to the use and the users of English in Europe there is a noticeable north-south divide. Whereas English today has clearly reached the status of a language of wider communication or lingua franca in the Scandinavian countries and in the Netherlands, it is very much a foreign language in southern Europe. It is helpful, even advisable, to have a basic knowledge of French, Italian and Spanish when travelling in France, Italy and Spain, while English is quite sufficient to manage comfortably in northern Europe. In central Europe, Germany, multilingual Switzerland and Austria occupy a middle position. The knowledge of English is, generally speaking, higher in these countries than in southern Europe, yet not nearly as high as in the north of Europe: it is still largely a foreign language but on its way to attaining lingua franca status. In eastern Europe English has been gaining ground since the fall of the Iron Curtain and it is increasingly pushing aside German, especially among its youth. Just as it has become accepted practice to speak of African English and Asian English one can also refer to European English or Euro-English bearing in mind that sub-varieties exist, such as Italian English or German English. These are due to the same nativisation processes of English in the respective countries that provide very different and quite distinctive language-specific and culture-specific contact features on all linguistic levels. Much has been written on the results of the various borrowing processes involving German in Austria1, in Germany (both east and west)2 and in Switzerland3. A number of other languages used in 1 See Viereck, K. 'The influence of English on Austrian German' in Viereck, W. & Bald, W.I). eds. English in Contact with other Languages. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó. 1986, pp. 159-177. 2 See Lehnert, M. Anglo-Amerikanisches im Sprachgebrauch der DDR. Berlin: Akademie Verlag. 1990 and Viereck, W. 'The Influence of English on German in the past and in the Federal Republic of Germany' in Viereck & Bald ibid. pp. 107128. 3 See Dalcher, P. 'Anglicisms in Swiss German: The evaluation by computer of a survey conducted in 1964/5' in Viereck & Bald op. cit. pp. 179-206. and Dürmüller, U. 'The changing status of English in Switzerland' in Ammon, U. & Hellinger, M. eds. Status Change of Languages. Berlin: de Gruyter. 1992, pp. 355-370.

< previous page

page_16

next page >

< previous page

page_17

next page > Page 17

Europe and beyond have also been studied.4 Future research on a geography of European loanwords, on the typologies of borrowings and usage norms can be based on all these case studies.5 In an article by Viereck6 the impact of (American) English on several European languages in politics and technology is discussed. Dominance of English terms in these and other domains is linked with the status of English as a world language and this, in turn, is due to England's intensive participation in what Golo Mann called the 'Europeanisation of the World'. This is in contrast to German speaking lands that could not boast of a nation state then and consequently did not take part in this development. Language Functions In the discussion of language functions, it is useful to follow Braj Kachru's framework, which he established to describe the sociocultural facets of English in non-native contexts and the degree of its nativisation.7 He differentiates between the depth and range of functions that English serves in non-native contexts. The term 'depth' is used to mean the degree of proficiency attained in English at various social levels; within the range of functions, Kachru distinguishes between interpersonal, instrumental and imaginative/innovative. These are discussed in turn below. Although the close contact between English and German is little more than half a century old, the above-mentioned studies reveal this to be a sufficient length of time for English to leave its mark on German. This influence may also be attributed to what The Times in 1960 called 'the linguistic submissiveness' of the Germans, a characteristic that has a long history in Germany. Thus French made considerable inroads in German speaking lands in the 17th and 18th centuries, much greater than English has made so far in present day Germany. Grandmothers of post-war Germans walked on the Trottoir instead of on the Bürgersteig (pavement, sidewalk); their fathers wrote Hartung for Januar in 1940 and they themselves buy flowers in the Gartencenter today. It is highly doubtful whether various polemic treatises against the 'corruption' of German will have any effect. Legal measures would have even less effect in Germany than they have in France. There, the latest attempt to ban the English impact on French resulted in a law in 1994 threatening to fine the users of 3,500 words such as marketing, airbag and software (for which mercantique, sac gonflable and logiciels had to be used8. The constitutional court, however, later declared that, according to the declaration of human rights of 1789, the French people at large cannot be forced to use certain expressions, only the civil servants can. Also, in state publications, language regulations can be enforced. In Spain, strong tendencies can be observed now to keep public institutions, the radio and television free from 'los barbarismos' above all English expressions. 4 See Viereck & Bald eds. op. cit. 5 See Filipovic *, this issue and Görlach, M. 'A Usage Dictionary of Anglicisms in Selected European Languages'. International Journal of Lexicography 7:223-246. 1994. 6 Viereck, W. 'The political and technological impact of the United States of America in the 1950s and early 1960s as reflected in several European languages'. Folia Liniguistica 22:141-152 (plus one folding map). 1988. 7 Kachru, B.B. 'Models for non-native Englishes' in Kachru, B.B. The Other Tongue: English across Cultures. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1982, pp. 31-57 and Kachru, B.B. The Indianization of English: The English Language in India. Delhi: Oxford University Press. 1983. 8 See for example 'Une loi contre le franglais'. Revue de la Presse 41:1. April, 1994.

< previous page

page_17

next page >

< previous page

page_18

next page > Page 18

The Imaginative/Innovative Function The imaginative/innovative function has already been referred to above, since it concerns the different results that nativisation of English can yield in German, as shown by the various processes of borrowing, in pseudo-loans, hybridisation and shortenings. The following are but a few examples of the most important categories: Morphological nativisation processes (shortenings): German English Profi professional (pro) last not least last but not least Happy-End happy ending Semantic nativisation processes (an Anglicism takes on a meaning in German that is unknown in English): German English Slip briefs (pants, underpants, panties) Gangway steps, ramp Start take-off Oldtimer veteran car Mobbing harassment by other (groups of) colleagues in the workplace Zapping channel hopping Handy portable phone Lexical nativisation processes (words look like borrowings from English but are unknown in English; these are the 'classical' pseudoloans): German English Dressman(n) male model, male mannequin Showmaster master of ceremonies Coverboy male model photographed for the front of a magazine The words used in German(y) could also have been formed byanalogy to existing English words, namely: 'stuntman,' 'quizmaster' and 'covergirl' in the above cases. Mixed compounds /hybridisation (some compounds have an English model, others do not; the latter are marked here with an asterisk): German English Krisenmanagement crisis management Hollywood-Schaukel *Hollywood swing Heimtrainer exercise bicycle Managerkrankheit *manager['s] disease Loan translations: English silent majority

German schweigende Mehrheit

soft landing soap opera one-arm(ed) bandits

weiche Landung Seifenoper einarmige Banditen

It has been shown repeatedly that the nativisation of English also depends on education, sex, age and attitude towards borrowings9. Within the imaginative/innovative function, the following can also be 9 In an Austro-German context by Viereck, W. 'Empirische Untersuchungen inbesondere zum Verständnis und Gebrauch von Anglizismen im Deutschen' in Viereck, W. ed. Studien zum Einflub des Englischen auf die deutsche Sprache (Studies on the Influence of the English Language on German). Tübingen: Narr. 1980, pp. 237-321 and in the Federal Republic of Germany by Carstensen, B. & Hengstenberg, P. 'Zur Rezeption von Anglizismen im Deutschen'. Germanistische Linguistik 1-4 (82):67-118. 1983.

< previous page

page_18

next page >

< previous page

page_19

next page > Page 19

counted: the use of English expressions for various stylistic reasons in German literature10; with German youth, to create solidarity among speakers. Who is speaking to, or writing for, whom must also be addressed in this connection. English borrowings, whether nativised or not, are, after all, one way of expressing the cultural affiliation of the users. This is as true of the yuppies as it is of consumers of a certain type of music, to mention just two examples. The Interpersonal Function (1) English in the Job Market In addition to the imaginative/innovative function, there is English for wider communication and for special purposes, such as economics, politics and the arts and sciences. Within Kachru's model this type belongs to the interpersonal function. A knowledge of English is increasingly required, for example, in the job market. The following figures are taken from a survey of 10,000 classified advertisements in each of the five countries in which a knowledge of a foreign language was specifically requested. These advertisements appeared in leading national daily newspapers during the second half of 1991. The percentages are as follows:11 France Italy Spain Hungary Poland

English 71.09% 68.83% 60.1% 36.68% 46.42%

German 10.64% 6.17% 7.48% 39.97% 25.55%

French 9.42% 20.99% 3.35% 6.59%

Spanish 5.39% -

With the exception of Hungary where, for historical reasons, German has enjoyed a special status, the demand for English is highest by far in every country. Not surprisingly, the demand for a knowledge of foreign languages in the job market in Great Britain is quite low: French leads with 15.28% followed by German with 6.94% and Spanish with 5.56%.12 Since the above survey had been carried out to reveal the demand for German, Germany and Austria do not figure in the list. But even some crude checking showed that in both the 'positions offered' and 'positions sought' sections of advertisements in national dailies and weeklies, a knowledge of English is often part of the job qualification in Germany and Austria, even for less prestigious positions such as in tourism. In a 1985 survey 'between 16.6% (Italian Swiss) and 30.6% (German Swiss) of the young men indicated that they were making use of English orally either occasionally or frequently at their workplace.'13 In multilingual Switzerland with its four national languages the expectations for young men with regard to English compared with those for the three official languages (L2) are: German Swiss English 21.9% French 11.8% German -

French Swiss 29.0% 20.2%

Italian Swiss 18.3% 5.1% 15.5%

10 See Galinsky, H. 'Stylistic aspects of linguistic borrowing: A stylistic view of American elements in modern German' in Carstensen, B. & Galinsky, H. Amerikanismen der deutschen Gegenwartssprache. Entlehnungsvorgänge und ihre stilistischen Aspekte. Heidelberg: Winter. 1975, pp.35-78. 11 Ammon, U. 'Empirische Untersuchungen zur Stellung der deutschen Sprache in Europa in Wirtschaft, Wissenschaft und Politik' in Born, J. & Stickel, G. eds. Deutsch als Verkehrssprache in Eoropa. Institut fur deutsche Sprache Jahrbuch 1993, pp. 38-53. 12 Ammon. ibid. p.43. 13 Dürmüller, U. 'The changing status of English in Switzerland' in Ammon, U. & Hellinger, M. eds. Status Change of Languages. Berlin: de Gruyter. 1992, p.367.

< previous page

page_19

next page >

< previous page

page_20

next page > Page 20

As can be seen, English attains the highest values in all three language groups. This means that, unofficially, English has won the L2 position already among the young14. (2) English in Academic Publishing With regard to the academic field, the question is 'Publish in English or perish?' That this issue is controversially debated in Germany is understandable as not too long ago German was a very important language in science. Until the late 1920s it was the internationally leading language in science. English borrowed a great number of scientific terms coined in German(y) especially between the late 19th century and the end of the first quarter of the present century.15 The leading role of German science is also documented by the Nobel prizes. As the figure below reveals, German scientists won most of the Nobel prizes until the late 1920s. The great increase in the number of scholars thus honoured is due to the fact that since the end of the Second World War, prizes are shared more and more often among several scientists. Since that time, the leading role of the United States of America, however, is quite apparent.

Figure 1 Division of Nobel prize awards.16 Consequently English has replaced German to a large extent, as is also evidenced in the renaming of journals. The well-known Archiv für Kreislaufforschung is now called Basic Research in Cardiology, while the Zeitschrift für Kinderheilkunde has become the European Journal of Pediatrics. In 1950 all contributions to the Zeitschrift für Tierpsychologie, the oldest specialist journal in the field of behavioural science, a German domain, appeared in German, while in 1984 95% of the papers were written in English. In 1986 the title changed to Ethology. The Österreichische Botanische Zeitschrift, a journal over a century old, is now called Plant Systematics and Evolution. In 1994 the Board of the Association of German Chemists decided to publish only articles 14 Dürmüller. ibid. p. 368. 15 See Pfeffer, A. J. & Cannon, G. German Loanwords in English: An Historical Dictionary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1994. 16 Mitteilungen des Deutschen Hochschulverbandes 12 p. 545. 1994

< previous page

page_20

next page >

< previous page

page_21

next page > Page 21

written in English in three of its journals in order to increase the international acceptance of the journals and to further the world-wide diffusion of German research results.17 It is difficult to say whether one can see the aftermath of the two World Wars as having a direct influence on the decline of German, since other languages, too, had to give way to English. The Italian physics journal Nuovo Cimento, for example, has also accepted since 1950 contributions in languages other than Italian, with the result that the proportion of contributions in Italian has dropped within the span of 20 years to zero, while that of contributions in English has increased from zero to 100%. In the journal Astronomy and Astrophysics, two thirds of the French scientists publish in English, while all articles in the official organ of the Agence Internationale de l' Energie Atomique, Nuclear Fusion, are written in English, despite the fact that the authority is subsidised by the French Government. In her dissertation, published in 1990, Skudlik's aim was to determine the use of German and English among German-speaking scientists. Her empirical investigations led her to conclude that English is the lingua franca of modern scholarship in any discipline.18 The following differentiations are worth noting. In the pure sciences, medicine and mathematics, English is the only language of communication. In the applied natural sciences, such as geology or forestry as well as in veterinary science the tendencies are the same, but the situation is not so extreme as in the pure sciences. . . . In the social sciences there is also a clear trend towards more English, but there are still domains for German, for example topics of German tradition or of regional interest. Finally, the humanities group (history, literature, theology, philosophy, anthropology, classical studies etc.) remains essentially a domain of national languages. Only if there is a clearly defined foreign address is an article written in a foreign language, which can be French or Italian as well as English. . . . Of course, English is the international language most often used, for example at international congresses, but this does not exclude other languages.19 It may clarify the differences of status which English has in different disciplines to look at the reasons mentioned for using English in publications. In the following table, 'the first column shows the percentage of those scientists who think it important to publish in English, and, therefore, checked one or more of the reasons. The choices were: a) English is de facto the working language of our discipline. b) English, for better terminology, stylistic possibilities etc. c) English, to ensure the international information flow. d) English, because important results might not be noticed if they are not published in an international language. e) English, to address a certain group of scientists. 17 On the use of German in chemistry see also Michels, S. 'Recent changes in the status of German as a language of chemistry' in Ammon, U. & Hellinger, M. op.cit. pp.408-420. 18 Skudlik, S. Sprachen in den Wissenschaften: Deutsch und English in der internationalen Kommunikation. Tübingen: Narr. 1990. 19 Skudlik, S. 'The status of German as a language of science and the importance of the English language for Germanspeaking scientists' in Ammon, U. & Hellinger, M. op. cit. pp.391-407.

< previous page

page_21

next page >

< previous page

next page >

page_22

Page 22 f) Science in English-speaking countries is the most active, prosperous and successful. g) There is no adequate German journal for my publications. Table 1: Reasons for choosing English as language of publication (percentage of authors) authors a) b) c) d) e) spec. f) g) indicating work. E. int. nothing address research no reasons lang. lang. info. overlook % best Germ. % % better % % % journal % % 100 78 3 91 78 31 16 9 1 MATHEMATICS 98 98 11 93 76 36 16 11 2 PHYSICS 98 83 12 90 76 33 24 12 3 CHEMISTRY 98 81 11 92 83 30 13 11 4 BIOLOGY 5 MEDICAL SC. 97 6 VETERINARY 7 FORESTRY 8 EARTH SCI.

72

9 ECONOMICS 100 77 10 LAW 100 11 PSYCHOLOGY 84 12 PEDAGOGY 96 13 SOCIOLOGY 100 14 SPORTS SCI. 90 15 LINGUISTICS 16 LITERATURE 17 CLASSICAL ST. 18 THEOLOGY 19 PHILOSOPHY 20 HISTORY 21 ALL DISCIP.

77

91

91 78 9 82 71 0 80 45 9 91 70

33

17

8 81

91 61 4 69 38 13 90 65

27 72 40 35

9 84 7 67 0 100 10 87

89 85 94

12 53 55 76

48

13

23

22 40 30

41 57 40 52

18 18 15 24

30

9 5 3 0

35 29

8 35

4 10

14 26 20 35

23 26 0 35

5 7 20 16

23

11

0

62

17

74 40 0 53 38

76 89

12 56

0 6

76 83

47 56

18 28

0 22

0 22

83

20

0

74

41

28

9

7

58

0

21

8

84

63

19

29

9

19

10

Of course, reason c) was checked most often, since it is the one every scientist can certainly underline. But it is interesting to see that for many natural scientists English is de facto the working language (a). One reason also mentioned was: ''Because it is good for my scientific career'20. A look into the future is not risky in this area. English will continue to dominate in science, technology and a number of other fields. There will also be announcements of new journals such as Biomedical Science, an English language journal reporting Russian research by Russian scientists. I agree with Cromer when she says: The newer formats of electronic communication have the potential to influence the situation. The more informal media, electronic mail and bulletin boards, could facilitate English language communication for non-native speakers. More and more of the world is being connected and it is possible to have the kind of question and answer exchange found at conferences, but with the luxury of more time for composition and responses. This will encourage the hesitant non-native speaker to join the conversation.21 20 Skudlik, S. ibid. 1992. p.401 21 Cromer, D.E. 'English: The lingua franca of international scientific communication'. Science & Technology Libraries 12:21-34. 1991.

< previous page

page_22

next page >

< previous page

page_23

next page > Page 23

The Instrumental Function It remains to comment on what Kachru calls the instrumental function of English, i.e. the status English has in the educational system. With regard to Switzerland, Dürmüller notes: Already now in French and German speaking Switzerland the motivation of the young to learn English is much higher than that to learn a second national language . . . . the competence in English will be better than that in the second national language. This above all, because the acquisition of English is not restricted to the schoolroom but takes place outside school as well . . . 22 This is also true of Austria and Germany. In both countries English is an obligatory subject and the primary foreign language at school. English instruction is likely to be introduced in Germany for all pupils in primary schools from the third or fourth grade on. Moreover, the modest beginnings in bilingual and multicultural learning and communication will have to be strongly intensified in order to prepare young people in the best possible way for the challenges presented by an increasingly mobile European society. Conclusion Politicians have been talking about these things and it is to be hoped that their words will have consequences. The labour market does not end at the borders of a country. In ten or fifteen years' time there will be no national labour markets any more. Then an engineer from England or France will work in Frankfurt and a German engineer in Rome. These are no small challenges for both schools and universities. Not least due to this European perspective, English will undoubtedly gain in importance. Contrary to what Görlach & Schröder23 have maintained, the English taught in schools and spoken in and outside the classroom is not only determined by an external norm. Reality shows and will show in the future that norms may be mixed (between British and American English) and the English regionally marked or nativised. This is an additional justification to speak, for example, of a German English or an Austrian English. 22 Dürmüller, U. 'The changing status of English in Switzerland' in Ammon, U. & Hellinger, M. eds. Status Change of Languages. Berlin: de Gruyter. 1992, p.369. 23 Görlach, M. & Schröder, K. "'Good usage" in an EFL context' in Greenbaum, S. ed. The English Language Today: Public Attitudes towards the English Language. Oxford: Pergamon Press. 1984, pp.227-232.

< previous page

page_23

next page >

< previous page

page_24

next page > Page 24

III English in the European Union Cay Dollerup Cay Dollerup studied Spanish and English as consultant for the interpreting services of the European Commission. He chaired the Danish National Association of University Teachers (1978-81) and organised three Language International conferences on Teaching translation and interpreting at Elsinore, Denmark. Users and Uses of English An assessment of the status of English for official and unofficial work at the European Union, with special reference to the future, calls for some introductory remarks. One must bear in mind that, although the European Union (EU) organisations are political, their work, and the status of English in this framework, is intimately connected with the recent history of Europe, as well as developments in the various national societies. Languages, national as well as international, do not exist independently of their users, and users do not exist independently of language communities. Worldwide, English spread in the wake of British conquests. It was diffused as the language of the peoples of North America. And in African and Asian colonies it often came into use as the language of communication with the original population, and, later on even after independence, often as the common vehicle for communication.1 Yet it is a veritable newcomer on the European Continent. There are additional points: the present-day situation where, irrespective of class and occupation, nearly all Europeans have some familiarity with foreign languages, is a relatively modern phenomenon. Despite the existence of Latin church services all over Europe until the reformation (and until quite recently in Roman Catholic countries), few people were previously aware of foreign languages as something relevant to their own everyday life. For most of the time, even in epochs held forth as periods of foreign language influence such as the eighteenth century when French became the language of the cultured elite, it was only a fraction of the population of any European country which would ever hear a foreign language spoken. Large-scale and systematic foreign-language teaching made its appearance slowly in the course of the nineteenth century and in the first half of the twentieth. It coincided with the rise of the middle classes and their opportunities for foreign contacts, which were, in turn, the outcome of improved national infrastructures and consequent international mobility. Until the middle of the present century, the first foreign language taught would, roughly speaking, be the language spoken by the nearest major nation: in Britain, students learnt French (and still do); in Germany French; in Spain French. This also applied to the small nations, only that students were told to learn the languages of several of their bigger neighbours. Thus in the Danish senior grades more than thirty years ago, my classmates and I were expected to learn three or four foreign languages (English, German, French, Latin) on the 1 This notion is due to Henrik Gottlieb (in private discussion)

< previous page

page_24

next page >

< previous page

page_25

next page > Page 25

(unquestioned) assumption that it was more polite to address foreigners (implicitly nationals from large states) in their own language than in our melodious and expressive mother tongue. Many factors thus intertwine in an assessment of the use of the English language in Europe. Braj Kachru2 has set up three categories of users of English: (a) the 'inner circle' of native speakers (e.g. the British, Americans, Canadians, Australians) for whom the language is the mother tongue, and, to most of these users, also the only language they know; (b) the 'outer circle' comprising second-language speakers who use English as the 'other' tongue in much everyday communication (e.g. people in administration, education and the like in former British colonies), and (c) the 'expanding circle' of people who use English as 'another' tongue, i.e. a foreign language. Kachru's idea could be illustrated as in Figure 1 (which is not identical with Kachru's own version.3 for a slightly different tripartite model, see McArthur's chapter above) In the Continental European context, English is 'another tongue' in the 'expanding circle', but in the course of very few years it has become by far the dominant one. A discussion of English in the context of the European Union thus focuses on the 'inner' and the 'expanding' circles, whereas the 'outer circle' is largely irrelevant.

Figure 1 Different users of English This state of affairs is due to a variety of factors which are not easily disentangled. They do not always belong to the same dimension, and they even vary from country to country depending on local conditions ranging from financial constraints to political decisions at the highest national level. The latter is best exemplified by the deliberate French promotion of the 2 Kachru, B. The Other Tongue. English across Cultures. 2nd edn. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press. 1992, pp.356-357. 3ibid. p.356.

< previous page

page_25

next page >

< previous page

page_26

next page > Page 26

French language, both within France, e.g. in the official discouragement of the use of loanwords, and abroad by means of l'Institut français. The reverse situation in minor speech communities where people's living rooms are invaded by a veritable flood of foreign languages is due to a simple question of finance namely that imported television programmes cost much less than domestic productions and that, in turn, subtitling costs less than a tenth of the dubbing practised in large countries.4 The Emergence of English as the First Foreign Language in Europe To the best of my knowledge there are no systematic studies and no statistics that have been put together to prove the following points. Nevertheless, most of the factors will be within recent memory of most readers. The present hegemony of English in Europe is primarily due to the entertainment industry, and only secondarily to war, technological lead, science and political domination. It also varies from profession to profession, country to country, and district to district. Chronologically speaking, the beginning of the establishment of English as the first foreign language began, I suggest, with the introduction of the talkies (1927-1928). Minor language communities would subtitle films as a matter of course because the small-audience market would not justify the expenses involved in dubbing. In itself this did not lead to an improved command of English, only to a heightened awareness of its existence. The Second World War, however, caused more radical changes. The first physical factor of importance to the improved knowledge of English was the placement of American and British troops in Germany, though it is hard to assess the linguistic effect. The role of German, however, changed overnight. From being a powerful nation whose language was important in industry and the natural sciences, Germany was reduced to rubble not only literally, but also in terms of political influence and importance in scientific affairs. In schools all over northern Europe, English became the unchallenged second language within a decade or two. In southern Europe, French continued to dominate until the 1970s. Whereas the First World War had still been fought by national armies largely under the command of their own generals, the Second World War was fought, especially in the Western hemisphere, by the Allied Forces, with English as the main language of command because the supreme command and most troops were Anglophone (Americans, British, Canadians, Australians etc.). The importance of the goodwill among most Europeans towards the liberation should not be underestimated as preparing the ground for the rise of English, and thus providing the all-important motivation for learning English and using it in international communication between Continental nationalities. American advances in technology, industry and advertising do not really seem to have promoted the cause of English substantially before the Second World War. But I suggest that after the Second World War, the determined American drive to establish institutions of basic research 4 Luyken, cited (footnote 20, p.118) in Gottlieb, H. 'Subtitling: diagonal translation.' Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 2:101-121. 1994.

< previous page

page_26

next page >

< previous page

page_27

next page > Page 27

(most spectacularly demonstrated in the massive effort leading to the explosion of the atom bombs over Hiroshima and Nagasaki) quickly led to the fact that major advances and discoveries in the natural sciences and medicine were published almost exclusively in English. This meant that scientists all over the world were obliged to accept English as their lingua franca. This acceptance, however, was not independent of what happened in other areas in the national communities. In the 1950s, the advent of a new mass medium, television, brought about another upheaval. Once again the minor speech communities (the Netherlands, Belgium, and the Nordic countries, to mention only a few) used subtitling, while the bigger nations (France, Spain, Italy, Germany) stuck to synchronisation of the imported entertainment programmes (especially films). An intuitive estimate is that by now more than 80% of the films and television serials in most European countries are imported from Anglophone countries (especially the US). As opposed to subtitling, the use of dubbing in large language communities implies that the main impact of television is primarily visual and hence less obvious or at least confined to cultural and lifestyle spheres rather than to language influence. The real turning point for the pervasive and permanent English influence is, in my view, the establishment of a specific youth culture and the propagation of popular music. The existence of a self-contained and independent youth culture started with the Californian beatnik-movement which had a ripple effect in Europe among the intellectuals and was then overshadowed in the socially much more influential rock-and-roll music. It was the latter which heralded the epoch where Anglophone productions came to dominate the international music market in the 1950s and 1960s with Elvis Presley (international breakthrough: 1956, Heartbreak hotel and Love me tender), Bob Dylan (international breakthrough: 1963, Blowin' in the wind), the Beatles (international breakthrough: 1964, I want to hold your hand), the Doors (international breakthrough: 1967, The Doors), and others. Such lyrics appealed directly to target audiences with the original words irrespective of television translation policies. I suggest that the pervasive use of English in songs had a lasting effect in terms of motivation for learning English, not only in Europe, but, indeed, all over the world where it gained a foothold. In turn, this motivation was immeasurably increased for the average European by the realisation that 'English' in the broad sense can be used as a lingua franca on trips, for business or pleasure. In so far as there was a choice, English became the language preferred. Witness its popularity in European schools: it is a recognised but often overlooked fact that Continental teachers of English have no problems motivating students to learn. Educational authorities have probably not been swayed by the popularity of television and pop songs. Once again the switch to an emphasis on English as the first foreign language is due to a variety of reasons in each nation, but some of the major factors must have been the dominance in politics, industry and science of the Anglophone societies. At all events, the overall outcome is that English teaching has gained ground. In terms of international politics, English has had a dominant role at least since the establishment of the League of Nations (1919) where it

< previous page

page_27

next page >

< previous page

page_28

next page > Page 28

was one of the working languages, and even more so since the establishment of the UN (1945), its multitudinous subsidiary agencies (the UNESCO, the WHO), and other international bodies. In this diplomatic world, English is today the only working language always represented and has thus replaced the role of French. The first Anglophone political commitment in a European context came with the establishment of NATO (1949) which is dominated by Anglophone societies (UK and US) and where English is therefore the main language, even at its headquarters in Brussels. The next major political step was the British entry in the European Union (1973) where English became a working language, technically on a par with languages like Danish, Italian, and Dutch. This was thanks to the fact that it was already established as an international lingua franca in other contexts, and in wider usage, especially at an informal level. The Institutions and Languages in the European Union The EU was originally founded back in 1952 (as the Coal and Steel Community). Today it comprises several institutions, but in most contexts, including this one, it is sufficient to focus on the following three: (a) The European Parliament, which has 636 elected politicians from the 12 member states, Belgium, Denmark, France, Ireland, Italy, Germany, Greece, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, and the United Kingdom. (b) The non-partisan Commission, which can take initiatives and see them through the process of decision and later supervises the execution of these decisions in the member states. (c) The Council of Ministers, which consists of any meeting of ministers in specific fields (e.g. ministers of science, foreign ministers, ministers of agriculture). Each of these bodies has its own administration and its own translation service. The official languages used at the EU are the national languages of the member states. So, when founded by the original six nations, the EU had four official languages: Dutch, French, German, Italian. Two of these, French and German, were the recognised working languages a subtle distinction to outsiders, but of great importance to the administration (and translation work). The first expansion in 1973 brought in Danish and English, the latter language tacitly but naturally taking over the role of German as the second working language. In 1981 Greek was added. In 1986 Spanish and Portuguese were brought in. And in 1995 the entry of Austria, Sweden and Finland added more official languages, Swedish and Finnish, thus swelling the number of official languages to eleven (and the official working languages to three: English, German and French). Translational activity has followed these developments. Figure 2 shows the growth in the number of pages translated annually in the EU.

< previous page

page_28

next page >

< previous page

page_29

next page > Page 29

Figure 2 Number of pages translated per year in the EU.5 Translation (and interpreting) staff in the institutions of the EU are by far the largest group of language professionals in the world, and far outnumber those of any other international body as is amply demonstrated in Figure 3:

Figure 3 Number of staff translators employed by the EU institutions and by various international organisations.6 5 European Commission. A Multilingual Community at Work. The European Commission's Translation Service. June 1994. 6ibid.

< previous page

page_29

next page >

< previous page

page_30

next page > Page 30

In order to explain the language work at the EU properly, it is useful briefly to present the ideal procedure for creating a regulation, e.g. about the use of additives in food. The draft is (a) in French. It is (b) translated into all the languages. The draft is (c) discussed, and changes are suggested, in the member states. There are (d) meetings in Brussels using interpreting where the written documents are discussed. The meetings are followed by (e) new translations and (f) new national hearings. The directive is (g) finalised at the Commission and then (h) passed for decision by the Council of Ministers. It is finally (i) used in national legislation. In principle, all languages should be involved to the same extent at all stages in this process. This, however, is not the case: at the Parliament more than 40% of all documents are originally prepared in French which is the working language among the permanent EU staff in Brussels, Luxembourg, and Strasbourg. But the statistics show that English is steadily gaining ground, and is now close on the heels of French.7 The situation at the Commission is shown in Figure 4 which also provides evidence of translations from non-member states.

Figure 4 Breakdown of languages in which documents are originally prepared.8 The Language Services are the backbone of the EU, which is, after all, a voluntary federation of free and independent states united in peaceful cooperation. Most international bodies have two to four official languages, the UN has a staggering six (English, French, Russian, Chinese, Arabic, Spanish), the EU has nine (11 from 1995). Each of these has its own staff and its own administration, all in all more than 2000 highly qualified professionals. This language situation has become increasingly complex with progressive enlargements. In the original Community, diligent staff members could, by an incredible and unsung heroic effort, hope to attain some degree of mastery of all the languages and thus to become plurilingual, but now they usually give up, faced with the multilingualism of the institution as it is today. 7 Karker, A. Dansk i EF - en situationsrapport om sproget (Nordisk Spraksekretariats Skrifter 16). Copenhagen and Oslo: Gad. 1993, p.37. 8 European Commission. op. cit.

< previous page

page_30

next page >

< previous page

page_31

next page > Page 31

Given the fact that all countries, and, consequently, their national languages, are equal at the EU, there are executive bodies where all languages must be treated on an equal footing. The same goes for meetings in the European Parliament and for politically important meetings in the Council of Ministers, where national ministers use their national languages and interpreting is provided from and into all languages, as illustrated in Figure 5. The illustration shows the set-up for a meeting with interpreting from and into nine languages at meetings (that is, before 1995) at the European Commission. Commission staff head the table, and the national delegates are seated in alphabetical order. Behind the participants are the booths for the interpreters, who render the proceedings into their mother tongues.

Figure 5 Interpretation set-up for meetings at the European Commission. Enlargement Given this complexity and the high number of official languages, many people have voiced their concern about the Language Services at the EU, especially as the Union is about to admit new members. The entry of Sweden and Finland, both of which have, without any raising of an eyebrow, had their national languages acknowledged as official languages on a par with the previous nine, brought the number of languages up to eleven and added nearly 500 people to the Language Services.9 The official EU policy statement runs as follows: Enlargement will bring additional languages to the [European Union], thus enriching its cultural diversity. But more languages will also complicate its work. In the [Union] of 12 members there are 9 official 9 Reuter, Bruxelles, as quoted in Politiken 4 September 1994.

< previous page

page_31

next page >

< previous page

page_32

next page > Page 32

languages in normal use: In a [Union] of 20 members there could be as many as 15 languages; with 30 members there could be as many as 25 languages. For reasons of principle, legal acts and important documents should continue to be translated into the official languages of all member states. To ensure effective communication in meetings, pragmatic solutions will have to be found by each of the institutions.10 Scared by the burdensome administration, appalled by the cost (which is high), and daunted by physical obstacles, some people have argued that 'a decision must be reached', or, as Christian Heynold has put it, 'the moment of truth will come'.11 The EU has been much criticised, especially in northern Europe, and this makes it hard for many North Europeans to appreciate that they are indeed part of a world power and a peaceful one at that in embryo. In the early years the member states went in for harmonisation at levels which were open to ridicule (and sometimes, but not always, rightly so, as when time was spent on discussing the shape of cucumbers). But for all its set-backs and internal bickering, the progress made is impressive: common legislation facilitates movement of individuals and goods, a common parliament with supranational power is slowly emerging, and a common currency is within reach. Although there are fine visions underlying the EU which are slowly being realised, the day-to-day routine is based on pragmatic solutions. I am disinclined to believe that there will ever be a showdown a 'moment of truth' on the language issue. The pragmatic attitude will see to it that this is avoided, for the main conflict of interest is essentially between French and English, and for this there will be no obvious solution as long as the main institutions of the Union are placed in Francophone regions. There are no signs that this will change in the foreseeable future. So instead of a major political confrontation we will see a set of pragmatic solutions at the practical level. These solutions will be adapted to the mode of communication (translation, interpreting, discussion), to the institution involved (Parliament, Commission, Council of Ministers), to the type of work done, and they will take into account the realities of what can be done (e.g. the time available for translation work, or the number of booths which can realistically be used simultaneously). There is, clearly a slow change in the air: in 1993, the reunited Germany insisted on its status (as it originally was) as a working language in full use, which in itself has shifted some emphasis back to German. Yet English is indeed gaining ground. Translation In terms of translation, the road ahead is fairly obvious: work at the EU will be streamlined in a number of ways: staff and delegates will be reminded that brevity is the soul of wit and asked to cut down the texts to be translated as much as possible. In addition, the Union will pursue its goal of harmonisation not by direct regulations (which become national law in their respective translated forms), but by a stronger emphasis on directives, which are the common guidelines used for implementing 10 European Commission. Europe and the Challenge of Enlargement. 24 June 1992. 11 Heynold, C. 'Interpreting at the European Commission' in Dollerup, C. & Lindegaard, A. eds. Teaching Translation and Interpreting 2: Insights, Aims, Visions. Papers from the Second Language International Conference, Elsinore, Denmark 4-6 June 1993. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 1994, pp. 11-18.

< previous page

page_32

next page >

< previous page

page_33

next page > Page 33

national legislation, where the actual wording and phrasing is the responsibility of each member state.12 The EU's use of machine translation, which is at present used sparingly, will increase, especially with texts that are repetitive (either in their actual contents, or because they incorporate previously translated material). More translation work will be done on a freelance basis and new member states will themselves be responsible for preparing most of the essential translations, e.g. of the treaties. I believe that they may also, in the long run, have to do most translations at the local and national level rather than within the EU institutions. Interpreting The two main problems in keeping up with further enlargements as far as interpreting is concerned are (a) the practical and architectural problem of having the appropriate number of booths: it seems as if twelve is the absolute top limit (and this may be too optimistic) and (b) the training, maintenance and administration of staff of adequate size. Many people familiar with interpreting also consider the use of relay a major obstacle. Relay is used when interpreters do not understand the language spoken by the delegate, and therefore switch onto a colleague's rendition. For instance, when an English delegate speaks there is ordinarily no relay: all interpreters understand directly and interpret into their various languages. However, when a Greek delegate speaks, this may be understood only by e.g. the Italian interpreter whose rendition then serves the needs of, say, the French, English, Portuguese, and German booths, while the Danes and the Dutch manage through two relays (perhaps Italian and English). This is shown in Figure 6: the Greek delegate speaks. He is understood by the Italian interpreter. The Italian rendition is used by the other booths.

Figure 6 An illustration of relay. 12 For a more detailed description, see Dollerup. C.'Language work at the European Union' in Rose, M.G. ed. Translation Horizons. Beyond the Boundaries of Translation, Forthcoming

< previous page

page_33

next page >

< previous page

page_34

next page > Page 34

It is often claimed that relay makes for distortion, but although this an understandable view, it is not correct. Errors in interpreting are nearly always due to the first interpreter's non-comprehension (for instance because the delegate does not speak into the microphone or uses dialect, slang, and the like), but not to misunderstandings between the professional interpreters who are trained in making smooth and easily understood oral presentations. Relays however, produce time lags, so that, for instance, the point of jokes is made at different times (several seconds apart) with speakers of different languages, or new speakers start before all renditions are finished. This is primarily a problem of management which can to some extent be solved by careful chairmanship. The Danish foreign minister has publicly stated that Denmark may dispense with interpreting at specific meetings (Weekendavisen 14 May 1993), thus pointing the way for other minor speech communities. Despite this opening, I do not think any member state is going to accept publicly that its language becomes second-class by giving up all claims to interpreting services. Such an action can only be considered a slighting of the national language, unless there are (at least symbolic) concessions from the French, who would have to accept that even French is not indispensable, and this I find unlikely. The political forums, especially the European Parliament, are even less likely to accept a reduction in the access to interpreting for the simple reason that the politicians are not elected by voters according to their mastery of foreign languages, but because of their political views. There is no doubt that speakers of minor languages will occasionally have to make do without interpreting, perhaps even without translation, and it will do no good to demonstrate anger by walking out of meetings as has sometimes been practised, since this results only in loss of influence. In other cases, and these will probably happen before the turn of the century unless some miracle architect dreams up a solution, we may see meetings where some politicians (for instance from states applying for membership) have to rely on their own interpreters, with or without equipment, in ways which are eminently clear to the public, for instance by using whispered interpreting. Continental English(es) I have already made the point that the EU is a pragmatic organisation. So most working groups made up of permanent staff use French and occasionally English. Other working groups cut down the number of languages used to two or three, and then only call for interpreting in cases where they face an important delegation which could participate without interpreting. The main problem is, of course, that in terms of democratic equality, the native speakers may have an unfair advantage. This point has, at least in one case, led to the adoption of a working language (Italian) which was not the native language of any member of that particular group.13 But by and large the expert groups (which consist mostly of delegates flown in from the member states) tend to use English and French, and possibly German, although English seems to be gaining ground here as well. 13 Karker, A. op.cit., p. 21.

< previous page

page_34

next page >

< previous page

page_35

next page > Page 35

Delegates working with languages other than their mother tongue sometimes perform well, and at other times not. Some are aware of the handicap ('We say what we can and not what we wish to say'), others are not. Any lack of interpreting is, to some extent at least, made up by the fact that in most cases committees function for long periods and members get to know one another, so that they get a feeling of the intention.14 But of course misunderstandings and snarl-ups can still occur at meetings. I have witnessed a meeting without Danish interpreting where the mistaken use of want for wish by a Danish delegate led to an unnecessary one-hour debate.15 But snarl-ups may also happen with interpreting, as when the Italian booth had major problems with explaining to the Italian delegates the concept of goodwill as part of the value of firms in industry. Let me add that I have here focused on the formal aspects only. Roughly speaking, in informal talks, French is primarily used by the permanent staff and English by the delegates who attend meetings from the national countries. In this case, we must return to the question of motivation. English is the truly global language of international communication, and from their national schools, English is already the foreign language most delegates have learnt best. All told English is slowly but surely gaining ground as the major working language at meetings, formally as well as informally. The expansion in 1995 will strengthen the position of English further. I also suggest that any future expansion of the EU will, in fact, also tend to boost the position of English for work. This, however, is not due to central political decisions, but to the changed status of English in other contexts: in science, in business, in travel, in foreign-language teaching and in the entertainment industry. All contribute substantially to make sure that English is the means of communication, and consequently the language people want to learn, to practise, and to use in international communication. The delegates will, willy-nilly, exert peer-pressure on one another to talk English and, in so doing, they, too, will contribute to the diffusion of English, and its traces (in terms of loan words) all over Europe. In other works16, I have discussed the fact that Danes connected with the EU have developed an 'EU-sociolect'17. In itself, this is on a par with the type of language which is developed by any group of professionals working with English who are not native speakers. I am in no doubt that, in the long run, delegates of all languages who use English (and to some extent the permanent staff) will develop a kind (or several kinds) of EU-English. The most marked feature about these sociolects will be their vocabulary, and one can make a strong case for calling them 'languages for special purposes'. As far as their syntax is concerned, I would guess that they will have longer sentences than ordinary British English (because of legalese, German, and French influence), but we wait for future linguists to come up with detailed descriptions of these sociolects as they develop and grow. Perhaps we are going to see several such domain-oriented Englishes on the European continentone example is that of the common man whose English is affected by the language of entertainment (Henrik Gottlieb, private communication). Other Englishes are those of the 14 Dollerup. op. cit. 15 Dollerup, C. 'Enkommentar til EF-problemerne.' Translatøren 39:58-61. 1977. 16 Dollerup, C. Omkring sproglig transmission. Copenhagen: Anglica et Americana. 1978. Also Dollerup. Forthcoming, op. cit. 17 The term 'Eurospeak' is used much too indiscriminately to be of use for this discussion.

< previous page

page_35

next page >

< previous page

page_36

next page > Page 36

scientists in their separate fields. Yet others are those of the Eurocrats in Brussels and Strasbourg. The emergence of such EUEnglishes which are distinct from the separate national second-language Englishes is somewhat ironical in an organisation committed so thoroughly to democracy and equality. Conclusion It will have been noticed that I have at no stage considered English the only working (let alone official) language of the EU. I consider this possibility unrealistic it would go against the ideology of co-operation, and at the same time reality dictates that the Union cannot continue to expand with the same Language Services that mediate between the core languages at present. I believe that the recent reassertion in 1992 of German as an official working language may have some effect, especially since German has a fairly strong standing in some of the nations which may enter the EU within the next twenty years. However, I doubt that German will remain a strong force in the EU in fifty years' time. For geographical reasons, French will remain strong within the foreseeable future and consequently there will be a stand-off, possibly leading to a compromise where French and English do in fact become the main working languages and the others are hitched on to the extent that is necessary. In terms of sheer bulk, time is on the side of English, because more and more contacts are established with nations where English is or has recently become the first foreign language taught. These nations will themselves have to provide the language work which is today offered centrally at the EU, and they may have problems if their foreign-language teaching is not up to the task. The importance of foreign-language teaching has, as far as I can see, not really dawned on Greek and Portuguese politicians. But some of the states who will be applying for membership in the future seem to be more aware of it. The battles for influence in Europe will be fought in the primary grades of the respective national educational systems. Let me finally stress that the usage discussed here has been of English in what Kachru (cited at the beginning of the chapter) termed the 'expanding circle'. The EU is not only part of that circle, but will also add to its enlargement. In this context, English is not used as a mother tongue, and it will take a long time, in my view more than a generation, before it ever becomes a second or 'other language' used in everyday life within any member state. At present it is not even used for the promotion of English but for securing adequate, if not perfect, communication between democratic states. And in that process it may well, right now, be on the way to becoming the common European working language outside the institutionalised European Union.18 18 I am indebted to Peter Auro, Henrik Gottlieb, R.R.K. Hartmann and Wittus Nielsen for incisive criticism and information. I wish to thank Peter Florentsen for making the illustrative drawings.

< previous page

page_36

next page >

< previous page

page_37

next page > Page 37

IV English as a Word Donor to Other Languages of Europe Rudolf Filipovic * Rudolf Filipovic studied English, French, Croatian and Phonetics. He is Director of the Linguistic Research Institute of the Croatian Academy of Arts and Sciences, specialising in the theory of languages in contact, and revised editions of his English-Croatian Dictionary. He has acted as President of FIPLV and SLE and is editor of two Croatian Academy series. Early Contacts From having been one of the most hospitable languages of the world in its acceptance of foreign loans, English has developed into the most generous donor of words to other languages. Books and articles have been written to prove its hospitality in accepting words from various languages. This process of borrowing has gone on for centuries and evidence can be found not only in etymological dictionaries of English but also in every general dictionary of English that denotes the origin of source of words recorded in it. The generosity of English as a donor language began much later and some authors1 state that prior to 1900 the influence of English on other languages was modest. Sapir in his book Language is more explicit when he says that . . . it is a little disappointing to learn that the general cultural influence of English has so far been all but negligible. The English language itself is spreading because the English have colonized immense territories. But there is nothing to show that it is anywhere entering into the lexical heart of other languages . . . 2 By the end of the sixteenth century (in 1582), Richard Mulcaster wrote that 'the English tongue is of small reach, stretching no further than this island of ours, nay not there over all'.3 Logan Pearsall Smith4 believes that 'to the great vocabulary of European civilization . . . our country [England] made no additions before a comparatively late date towards the end of the seventeenth century'. However, he admits that 'during the Middle Ages . . . a few English words connected with trade and with the sea found their way into the French language, and in the sixteenth and the greater part of the seventeenth century the terms that were borrowed are of some unimportant kind. The only English word borrowed in the sixteenth century which has become a general European term is dog'.5 Towards the end of the seventeenth and in the first half of the eighteenth century a remarkable change took place. Foreign nations began to borrow English words in ever increasing numbers, not merely terms from trades and shipping, but words of a much more important kind. This linguistic fact corresponds very accurately in date to that great historical event which has been called 'the discovery of England'6. After that there followed a great movement of English words in the 1 For example Haugen, E. 'The influence of English: A transatlantic perspective.' Folia Linguistica XXII, 1-2: 3-9. 1988. 2 Sapir, E. Language. New York: Harcourt Brace & Co. 1921, p. 207. 3 Jespersen, O. Growth and Structure of the English Language. 9th edn. Oxford: Blackwell. 1945, p. 232. 4 Smith, L. P. Words and Idioms. 5th edn. London: Constable. 1948. 5Ibid. pp. 43-44. 6op. cit. p. 44.

< previous page

page_37

next page >

< previous page

page_38

next page > Page 38

course of the eighteenth century which led L.P. Smith to say that 'there is perhaps nothing in linguistic history more striking than the contrast between the great English words which reached the continent at that period, and the humble trade terms, the names of boats and fishes, which had been borrowed in the previous centuries'.7 The interest in England, in English opinion, fashions and even English games which appeared about 1750 in some European countries, first in France, and then spread to the rest of Europe, particularly to Italy, was called 'Anglomania'.8 The infiltration of English words into French (at that time the universal language) led to their adoption by other European languages. The Italians followed the continental Anglomania, borrowing the same words and imitating the same sentiments. The Germans got their first knowledge of England from France. The main deposit of English words in French and German during the eighteenth century is much the same in the other languages of Europe regardless of whether they had direct or indirect contact with French and German which acted as important intermediaries. In the nineteenth century, English contributions to the vocabulary of European languages became more numerous and more widely spread, covering all main European languages: (a) Romance: French, Italian, Spanish and Portuguese; (b) Germanic: German, Dutch, Danish, Swedish and Norwegian; (c) Slavonic: Russian, Polish and Croatian. Twentieth Century Contact In the twentieth century the contact of English with other languages of Europe became closer due to new means of communication. The result was a very free and versatile linguistic borrowing of English words by European languages. In the course of the three previous centuries (from the seventeenth to the nineteenth) there was a continuous linguistic intertraffic which was almost entirely governed by cultural relations and by the direct or indirect influence of England on other European countries. To study the linguistic links in the twentieth century means, in fact, to investigate the degree of cultural and economic contact with England (and, more recently with America) because this influence is mostly reflected in English loan-words in European languages. Although the degree of English contact with other languages of Europe depends on various factors, the consequences of the contact can be best illustrated by the number and the kind of loan-words taken from English. The most obvious result of the linguistic contact of English with other languages of Europe is the transfer of English words into other European languages. Their vocabulary is directly enriched through the transfer which can be direct or indirect. Direct transfer is performed when two languages, English as a giving language and a European language as a receiving language, have such close geographic, cultural, sociological, political etc. ties that the borrowed objects, ideas or notions require their names to be transferred into the borrowing language. On the other hand, when there is no direct contact between the two 7op. cit. p. 46. 8 Graf, A.L'Anglomania l'influsso inglese in Italia nel secolo XVIII. Torino. 1911.

< previous page

page_38

next page >

< previous page

page_39

next page > Page 39

countries and their languages, there is no direct transfer of words needed to name borrowed objects, ideas, notions etc. This indirect transfer is performed through various media and the process is called indirect borrowing. The contact between the two languages in question can also be established through a third language called an intermediary language. English loan-words reflect all these elements and in the receiving language they may have a direct influence on the vocabulary and the form of the receiving language. This specific feature is analysed below as a part of the adaptation of Anglicisms in the receiving language. The Study of Anglicisms The vocabulary of any receiving language after it has been in the direct or indirect contact with the giving language, English, is enriched in the various fields of human knowledge to which Anglicisms belong. Our work on the project The English Element in the European Languages9, which analyses about twenty European languages, has proved that nearly all fields of human knowledge have been represented in our dictionaries of Anglicisms.10 The kinds of Anglicisms and their number are not the same in various European languages. They depend on the human activities of various nations and their contact with the English culture and civilisation. The more linked they are, the bigger number and more versatile the fields of contact are. An average contact between English and a European language results in 1500 to 2000 Anglicisms. It is quite difficult to enumerate all the fields of human activities of European nations on which English has exercised an influence. The result of English influence is that the receiving languages of Europe borrow English loans, adapt them as Anglicisms and subsequently integrate them into their vocabulary. It is impossible in this limited space to quote all the languages of Europe and all the fields of human knowledge from which Anglicisms were borrowed. We can quote only a limited number of English source words in the selected fields which were adapted into Anglicisms: (a) food and drink, (b) animals, (c) sports, (d) clothing, (e) economy, banking and money, (f) trade and measures, (g) language and literature, (h) journalism, politics and law, (i) philosophy and religion, (j) medicine, (k) science and natural science; (l) sea terms and navigation, (m) technical terms etc. In order to illustrate these, we will illustrate each thematic group by a few examples of the English source words from which Anglicisms in individual languages were developed and adapted according to the linguistic system of each receiving language. The existing dictionaries of Anglicisms in the main European languages document the way in which an English source word is adapted into an Anglicism. (The principles of adaptation are discussed below). 9 Filipovic *, R. ed. The English Element in European Languages (vol. 3, Reports and Studies). Institute of Linguistics, University of Zagreb 1991. 10 Filipovic, R. Anglicizmi u hrvatskom ili srpskom jeziku: porijeklo-razvoj-znacenje* (Anglicisms in Croatian or Serbian: origin-development-meaning). Djela JAZU, knjiga 70, Jugoslavenska akademija znanosti i umjetnosti - Skolska* knjiga, Zagreb. 1990 and Filipovic, R. 'Some problems in compiling an etymological dictionary of anglicisms' in Winter, W. ed On Languages and Language. SLE Presidential Addresses. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 1994, pp. 127-143.

< previous page

page_39

next page >

< previous page

page_40

next page > Page 40

Thematic fields

English source words

food drink animals

bacon, beefsteak, jam, pudding, sandwich brandy, bourbon, grapefruit, juice, whisk(e)y alligator, antelope, bulldog, dog, kangaroo, mustang, skunk sports ace, back, bantam, boxer, football, tennis clothing bikini, blazer, cardigan, pullover, raglan, trench coat, Ulster economy boycott, broker, budget, dumping, export, import, inflation, strike banking and bank note, cent, check, dollar, penny, safe money measures acre, bushel, foot, gallon, ounce, pint, watt, yard language and slang, alliteration, blank verse, digest, essay, pidgin, literature reprint, Yiddish journalism art director, interview, column, leader, magazine politics apartheid, conformism, dominion, imperialism, isolationism, labourist, liberal, loyalist, parliament, Tory law affadavit, jury, kidnap, lend-lease, lynch, petition philosophy acculturation, behaviourism, Darwinism religion Adventist, Anglican, Mormon, pantheism music and band, beat, blues, bebop, break dance, twist dance transport antifreeze, airbus, bus, car ferry, channel, container, freight, tramway, trolley bus, waggon sea terms ballast, barge, steamer, computer ALGOL, assembler, bit, byte, chip, clone, terms COBOL, computer, disc, PASCAL, ROM technical amplifier, blister, bloom, cracking, cable, derrick, terms lazer, lift, ingot, radar medicine aids, anaesthesia, antibiotic, bypass, mumps, pacemaker, penicillin, vitamin science aberration, gravitation, isotope social life bar, bridge, club, hobby, poker film, radio, cable TV, cameraman, cinemascope, cinerama, TV film, live, Oscar, radio, transmitter, television, western weather blizzard, cyclone, hurricane, monsoon, typhoon miscellaneousaccident, all right, camp, comfort, cowboy, dandy, flirt, folklore, park, nylon, picnic, plastic Figure 1 A list of thematic fields and examples of English source words Adaptation of Anglicisms The integration of a great number of Anglicisms into the receiving languages of Europe, whose linguistic systems are different from that of English, requires a linguistic analysis to explain how the process is performed. English source words in passing from one system into several others must be adapted before they can be integrated. The analysis of every Anglicism in our dictionaries of Anglicisms in

< previous page

page_40

next page >

< previous page

page_41

next page > Page 41

European languages11 is organised so that it defines: (a) the origin of the Anglicism (i.e. from which English model-source it was developed), (b) its pronunciation in the receiving language, (c) its morphological categories (parts of speech and gender), and (d) its meaning. To achieve this, the analysis is performed on four levels: (a) the orthographic level, to show how the spelling of an English source word is adapted into the orthography of the receiving language, (b) the phonological level, to explain the pronunciation of the Anglicism especially when it differs from the English source word, (c) the morphological level, to show how the citation form of the Anglicism (and, if it is a noun, its gender, indicated by sb-m/f/n) are determined, (d) the semantic level, to determine which meaning of the English source word is transferred into the corresponding Anglicism. The Orthography of Anglicisms The adaptation of an English source word into an Anglicism begins on the orthographic level in order to determine the spelling of the Anglicism (the citation form) and its relation to the orthography of the model (the English source). There are four possibilities: (1) the orthography of the Anglicism is formed on the basis of the pronunciation of the model: E Team /ti:m/ - Croatian: tim E Cooly

- German: Kuli

E Boom /bu:m/ - Russian:

/bum/

(2) the orthography of the Anglicism follows the orthography of the model without any change: E Bard /ba:d/ - Croatian: bard E Gangster E Ulster

- French: gangster - German: Ulster

E Napalm

- Russian:

/napalm/

(3) the orthography of the Anglicism follows partly the pronunciation and partly the spelling of the model in either order: E Interview

- Croatian: intervju

E Bowling green E Business

- French: boulingrin - Russian:

/biznes/

(4) the orthography of the Anglicism is formed under the influence of an intermediary language through which the English source word has passed on its way to the receiving language: E Strike /'straIk/ - Croatian: strajk * (through German) E Jury

- Croatian: ziri* (through French)

E Final

- Croatian: finale (through Italian)

E Check

- German: Scheck (through French)

E Budget

- German: Budget (through French)

E Cashmere E Bluff

- Italian: cachemire (through French) - Russian:

/blef/ (through German)

11 Filipovic*. 1994, ibid.

< previous page

page_41

next page >

< previous page

page_42

next page > Page 42

The Phonology of Anglicisms The pronunciation is determined on the phonological level according to the similarity and dissimilarity of the phonological systems of English and the receiving languages. (1) if both systems of pronunciation have the elements equally described, then the substitution is complete and the Anglicism is pronounced in the way of the receiving language. Since there is no change, we call this process 'zero transphonemisation'12: E Chief

- Croatian: cif *

E Zoom /zu:m/ - French: zoom /zum/ E Brunch

- German: Branch

E Boom /bu:m/ - Italian: boom /bum/ E Groom /gru:m/ - Russian:

/grum/

(2) if some elements of the receiving language are different by their description, the pronunciation of the Anglicism is only partially equal to the English source word: the process is called 'partial' or 'compromise transphonemisation': E Spot E Galley E Dandy E Tennis E Jam

- Croatian: spot /spöt/ - French: galley /gale/ - German: Dandy /'dendi/ - Italian: tennis /'tennis/ - Russian:

(3) if the pronunciation of the English source word consists of elements which do not have equivalents in the sound system of the receiving language, then the substitution is free: this process is called 'free transphonemisation'13: E Thriller E Catgut

- Croatian: triler /trìler/ - French: catgut /katgyt/

E Weekend /wi:k'end/ - German: Weekend /'vi:kent/ E Clipper E Flirt

- Italian: clipper /'klipper/ - Russian

/fl'irt/

The Morphology of Anglicisms (1) the citation form of an Anglicism can have the same form as the English source word. This means that no suffix (bound morpheme) of the receiving language is added. This process is called 'zero transmorphemisation'14: E Bridge, sb-n - Croatian: bridz*, sb-m E Nurse, sb-f - French: nurse, sb-f E Bluff, sb-n - German: Bluff, sb-m E Charleston, sb-n - Italian: charleston, sb-m E Finish, sb-n - Russian:

, sb-m

(2) if the Anglicism preserves the English suffix of the source word, the process is called 'compromise transmorphemisation': E Farmer, sb-m - Croatian: farmer, sb-m E Speaker, sb-m - French: speaker, sb-m 12 Filipovic*, R. ''Transphonemization. substitution on the phonological level reinterpreted' in Pöckl, W. ed. Europäische Mehrsprachigkeit. Tübingen: Niemeyer. 1981, pp. 125-133. 13 Filipovic, R. Teorija jezika u kontaktu. Uvod u lingvistiku jeziCnih* dodira (Theory of Languages in Contact. An Introduction to Contact Linguistics). Jugoslavenska akademija znanosti i umjetnosti - Skolska* knjiga, Zagreb. 1986. and Filipovic, R. 1990. op. cit. 14 Filipovic, R. 'Transmorphemization: substitution on the morphological level reinterpreted.' Studia Romanica et Anglica Zagrabiensia 25:1-8. 1980.

< previous page

page_42

next page >

< previous page

next page >

page_43

Page 43 E Chopper, sb-n - Italian: chopper, sb-m E Starter, sb-m - Russian: cmapmep /starter/, sb-m (3) the English suffix of the source word can be replaced by a suffix of the receiving language with the same function and meaning as the original English suffix. This process is called 'complete transmorphemisation': E Boxer - Croatian: boksac *, sb-m E Planter - French: planteur, sb-m E Constable - German: Konstabler, sb-m E Coalition - Italian: coalizione, sb-fE Vegetarian - Russian:

/vegetarjanets/,sb-m

(4) adaptation of verbs and adjectives usually follows the rules of word-formation of the receiving language15: Verbs E Box, vt/vi - Croatian: boks-a-ti, vt/vi E Bluff, vt/vi - Croatian: blef-ir-a-ti, vt/vi E Test, vt/vi - French: test-er, vt E Boycott, vt - German: boykott-ier-en, vt E Check, vt/vi - German: check-en, vt E Zoom, vt - Italian: zoom-are, vt E Speak, vt/vi - Russian:

, vi/vt

E Start, vt - Russian:

, vi/vt

Adjectives E Bar, sb - Croatian: bar-ski, adj E Bard, sb - Croatian: bard-ov, adj E Folklore, sb - Croatian: folklor-an, adj E Vector, sb - French: vector-i-el, adj E Totem, sb - French: totém-ique, adj E Vegetarian, sb - French: végétar-ien, adj E Nondirective, adj - French: non-direct-if, adj E Boxer, sb - German: boxer-isch, adj E Funk, sb - German: funk-ig, adj E Sport, sb - German: sport-lich, adj E Dandy, sb - German: dandy-haft, adj E Clown, sb - Italian: clown-esco, adj E Golf, sb - Italian: golf-istico, adj E Newton, sb - Italian: newton-iano, adj E Sport, sb - Italian: sport-ivo, adj E Vitamin(e), sb - Russian: E Gangster, sb - Russian: E Tweed, sb - Russian:

, adj /gangsterski/, adj , adj

The gender of Anglicisms is generally determined by the so-called masculine tendency which means that the majority of Anglicisms are of masculine gender.16 15 Filipovic*, R. 1994. op. cit. 16 Filipovic, R. 1986. op. cit. and 1990. op.cit.

< previous page

page_43

next page >

< previous page

page_44

next page > Page 44

English differs from the majority of European languages in having natural gender; this is replaced in Anglicisms by grammatical gender. In the adaptation of gender three criteria are applied: (1) in substantives denoting human creatures gender is determined by their sex: E Farmer, sb-m - Croatian: farmer, sb-m E Barman, sb-m - French: barman, sb-m E Air hostess, sb-f - German: Airhostess, sb-f E Superman, sb-m - Italian: il superman, sb-m E Steward, sb-m - Russian:

/stjuard/, sb-m

(2) the masculine tendency: E Bar, sb-n - Croatian: bar, sb-m E Magazine, sb-n - French: magazine, sb-m E Vamp, sb-f - German: Vamp, sb-m E Workshop, sb-n - Italian: il workshop, sb-m E Laser, sb-n - Russian:

/lazer/, sb-m

(3) contamination: E Farm, sb-n - Croatian: farma, sb-f (analogy with suma *, sb-f) E Star, sb-n - French: star, sb-f (analogy with étoile, sb-f) E Call girl, sb-f - German: Callgirl, sb-n (analogy with Mädchen, sb-n) E Body art, sb-n - Italian: una body art, sb-f (analogy with l'arte, sb-f) The Semantics of Anglicisms Anglicisms form two groups, the first consists of words adapted from English which have only one meaning: E Bridge, sb-n (1) - Croatian: bridz*, sb-m (1) E Beefsteak, sb-n (1) - French: bifteck, sb-m (1) E Beefsteak, sb-n (1) - German: Beefsteak, sb-n (1) E Coca-Cola, sb-n (1) - Italian: Coca Cola, sb-f (1) E Boycott, sb-n (1) - Russian:

, sb-m (1)

This meaning can be restricted or expanded. The second group consists of those Anglicisms whose meaning is adapted from English source words which have more than one meaning. Most common are those cases when an Anglicism takes over one of several meanings (indicated in dictionaries by sense numbers) of the English source word. This process is called 'restriction of meaning in number': E Folklore, sb-n (3) - Croatian: folklor, sb-m (1.) E Timing, sb-n (2/4/) - French: timing, sb-m (1.) E Feeder, sb-n (9/20/) - German: Feeder, sb-m (1.) E Cockney, sb-m, n (3/7/) - Italian: cockney, sb-m (2.a, 2.b) E Bookmaker, sb-m (2/3/) -Russian:

< previous page

/ bukmeker/, sb-m (2.)

page_44

next page >

< previous page

page_45

next page > Page 45

There are also cases when an Anglicism expands the number of its meanings after it has been integrated into the receiving language. This process is called 'expansion of meaning in number': E Nylon, sb-n (3) - Croatian: najlon, sb-m(new meaning: plastic) E Termite, sb-n (1) - French: termite, sb-m(additional meaning: hidden, destructive work) E Hand, sb-n (21/37/) - German: Hands, sb-n(additional meaning in soccer: breaking the rule) E Girl, sb-f (2/7/) - Italian: girl, sb-f(additional meaning: a dancer in a cabaret) If the expansion of meaning takes place within a semantic field, then the word acquires a new meaning which is different from either the source word or the original Anglicism. This process is called 'expansion of meaning in a semantic field'17: E Corner, sb-n (4) - Croatian: korner, sb-m(additional meaning: the space over the goal-line) E Training, sb-n (3/5/) - French: training, sb-m(additional meaning: clothes for training) E Rib, sb-n (4/18/) - German: Rips, sb-m(additional meaning: a kind of cloth) Conclusion Although our analysis of Anglicisms is limited to about twenty languages of Europe, the rich literature on linguistic borrowing points in the same direction, proving the motto of this chapter: from having been one of the most hospitable languages of the world in accepting foreign loans, English has become a most generous donor of words to other languages not only of Europe but also of other continents. The historical survey given above shows that the function of English as a donor depended on various factors and conditions; the result was a limited number of Anglicisms linked with specific human activities both in England and on the Continent. It was not until the middle of the twentieth century that the process of borrowing from English expanded vigorously. The number of fields of human knowledge and activities was so much increased that it would be difficult to find any which has not contributed to the variety of Anglicisms in the vocabulary of receiving languages. Dictionaries of Anglicisms in various European and non-European languages are the best proof of the function of English as a donor language. English source words required adaptation on a minimum of four levels to explain the linguistic change through which an English word passes to become an Anglicism. The adaptation depends primarily on the similarities and differences between the linguistic systems of the donor and receiver language. The fact that so many Anglicisms have been integrated into the vocabulary of European languages leads us to examine not only the vocabulary of a receiving language from the point of view of its 17 Filipovic *, R. 1986. op. cit. and 1990. op. cit. pp. 37-41.

< previous page

page_45

next page >

< previous page

page_46

next page > Page 46

constituent parts, but also the problem of whether these imported elements have had any effect on the linguistic system of the borrowing languages. Our research so far has proved several innovations in the phonological systems of receiving languages as a result of borrowing. The number of final consonant clusters in the Croatian phonological system has been greatly increased as the result of the integration of Anglicisms. To the original Croatian four clusters (-st, -zd, -st *, -zd*) several more have been added: e.g. -bl (Cr debl < E double) -ft (Cr lift < E lift) -jl (Cr koktejl < E cocktail) -lf (Cr golf < E golf) -mp (Cr kamp < E camp) -nd (Cr trend < E trend) -rd (Cr lord < E lord) Fouché18 describing consonantism in the French phonological system, says that one new phoneme , a velar nasal, has been added to the list of consonants from the English suffix -ing, and that it penetrated the French phonological system by way of borrowing.19 There are two innovations in the Russian phonological system as a result of borrowing from English: a) before the phoneme /e/ some non-palatalised consonants can be used in Anglicisms. In Russian words they are palatalised: e.g.

/'derb'i/ and /'d'erb'i/

b) in an unstressed syllable there is no reduction of vowels in Anglicisms (which is obligatory in Russian words): e.g.

/detek't'if/ and not

A more detailed analysis of the process of borrowing and adaptation of Anglicisms would require much more space. However, the basic approach to the problem explained in this paper can serve, we believe, as an initial stage for further, more sophisticated and scientifically more elaborate studies of language contact in general. 18. Fouché, P. Traité de la prononciation française. Paris. 1958. 19. See also Filipovic*, R. 'Phonologization and activation of latent phonemes in linguistic borrowing.' Journal of International Phonetic Association 12, 1:36-47. 1982.

< previous page

page_46

next page >

< previous page

page_47

next page > Page 47

V Societal and Individual Bilingualism with English in Europe Charlotte Hoffmann Defining Bilingualism Charlotte Hoffmann, studied English, Spanish, Law and Linguistics Since 1980 she has been a Lecturer in Modern Languages at the University of Salford where she specialises in German, Sociolinguistics and Psycholinguistics. She is the author of Introduction to Bilingualism (Longman, 1991) and a number of papers on aspects of bilingualism. Bilingualism refers to the establishment, maintenance and use of two languages in an individual either on more or less equal terms with each other or with one language being dominant but with the other strong enough for the individual to function in this language. 'Individual bilingualism' can be defined in many different ways depending on which criteria are used as the basis of the definition, e.g. when or how the languages were acquired, what functions and uses the languages serve, or what degree of competence is reached.1 For the purposes of this discussion, however, the general description above should suffice. By contrast, one uses the term 'societal bilingualism' to refer to the phenomenon found among communities where two languages are habitually employed by a considerable number of its members, though not necessarily all of them. In bilingual communities there are always people who are mainly monolingual in either of the two languages involved and who rely on the group's bilinguals as interpreters in a broad sense. There may be a geographical and/or historical link with the location of such a community, as is the case among many of Europe's old, indigenous minorities, for instance in the Welsh-speaking parts of Wales. However, this need not be so. We can talk about societal bilingualism in the context of the Punjabi-speaking communities in several parts of the British Isles. Some of the members of these communities are monolingual Punjabi speakers, a few are monolingual English speakers while the majority are bilingual users with varying degrees of competence and patterns of language use in the two languages. The consideration of societal and individual bilingualism in Europe where one of the languages is English can simply be seen as a subsection of the study of bilingualism that covers this area. There is no requirement to establish separate theoretical parameters. What makes the consideration of bilingualism with English worthy of separate attention is the fact that it is a recent and growing phenomenon, attributable to the fact that English is fast becoming an important (probably the most important) language for people of different linguistic backgrounds in the industrially advanced nations today. One can approach the study of bilingualism from either the point of view of the dominant language versus the weaker one (when considering individual bilingualism), or the majority versus the 1. For a detailed account, see Hoffmann, C An Introduction to Bilingualism. London Longman. 1991.

< previous page

page_47

next page >

< previous page

page_48

next page > Page 48

minority language (in the context of societal bilingualism). I shall look at bilingualism with English first with my feet in the English-speaking camp (i.e. English plus another language among groups and in individuals), and then examine various constellations of bilingualism involving another language plus English in continental Europe. With regard to the former there is already a well-established body of research, e.g. on bilingualism in Wales, among immigrant communities in Britain, or case studies of individual bilingual children. With respect to the latter, however, one has to rely mainly on one's own evaluation of the situation. Europe's political, economic, social and cultural conditions have undergone far-reaching changes since the end of the last world war. Some of these have influenced the spread of English, which in turn has caused new and interesting developments in the sociolinguistic situation of many Northern and Western European states. Some of the more influential factors are discussed in more detail elsewhere in this book (e.g. in the chapters by Tom McArthur and Cay Dollerup), so I refer the reader in passing to the many effects and implications that increased mobility and international cooperation have had on the means and media of communication between people with different mother tongues. Apart from the British Isles there have been, and still are, territories in Europe where English is the official language (e.g. Gibraltar) just as there are areas where English is co-official with one or two other national languages, as in Malta and the Republic of Ireland. In some territories English is widely used in official circles even though it does not enjoy official status, as for example in Cyprus or the enclaves of the American or British Armed Forces in Germany and elsewhere. The more recent developments in Europe concerning the use of English, however, are attributable to the ever increasing number of people who use this language as a vehicle of communication with native speakers of English as well as a lingua franca in their contacts with many others who have a non-English native language. Indeed, the need for English has become so widespread, and the access to and provision for it so varied, that it is now possible to talk about 'bilingualism with English' rather than just the use of that language by people who normally speak another one. My aim in this contribution is to examine the spread of bilingualism in Europe (referring mainly to member states of the European Union) and suggest that it falls into different patterns according to the way English is acquired and used, and the role it plays for the individual, for bilingual families and for the communities. As will become evident, education and schooling play a significant role in establishing and maintaining bilingualism, and in the acquisition of biliteracy. Although different patterns of bilingualism with English exist in Europe today, it is justified to say, I think, that in the majority of cases this bilingualism is of a particular kind: it is 'achieved bilingualism', i.e. it is not naturally acquired bilingualism; it is neither popular bilingualism (found among vast numbers of the population) nor can it be labelled as elite

< previous page

page_48

next page >

< previous page

page_49

next page > Page 49

bilingualism. It is being embraced by growing numbers of people who require it for their daily communicative functions or who consider that they, or their children, have a potential need for it. For the sake of simplicity I have arranged what follows in this section according to geographical considerations; that is, I address the question of where in Europe bilingualism with English is found. Areas Where English is the Main Language I will start by looking at the British Isles where English is the majority language and sizeable communities have another language which they also use. In Wales bilingualism has official status and legislation exists which guarantees the use of Welsh in public life and as a language used in education, either together with English as in the bilingual schools, or as the sole medium of instruction, or as an optional subject to be studied. Bilingualism is usually acquired in the home and reinforced in the community; schools play an important role in its further development and maintainance, and in the establishment of biliteracy. It is probably true to say that attitudes towards Welsh and towards bilingualism itself by the mainstream English-speaking society are more positive today than they were some 30 or 40 years ago. However, the number of Welsh speakers, and hence bilinguals (there are no Welsh monolingual speakers any more in Wales), is still declining. Britain's new, non-indigenous minorities (the groups of people who were born elsewhere and settled here mainly during the second half of this century, and their descendants) are commonly known as ethnic minorities, although there is no logical reason why this term should be used, as it seems to suggest that the majority English have no ethnicity at all. In the foreword to a book on multilingualism in the British Isles, Debi Pattanayak poignantly remarks on another terminological improbability found in Britain: 'Identities are so apportioned between the majorities and minorities in the UK that the majority has no mother tongue. "Mother tongue" refers to minority languages.'2 This use of terminology is obviously a reflection of mainstream society's attitudes towards the new immigrant minorities they are considered to be 'different'. Linguistically, too, the new minority communities are in a different position from the old minorities like the Welsh. Some members may be monolingual in either English or in the community language (e.g. Urdu or Punjabi), whereas a large number of them may be bilingual with varying degrees of competence in their two languages. They may have acquired English from a variety of sources either as a second language in their countries of origin, or simply from being exposed to English in their new country of residence, or as a result of school attendance. If they want to survive and progress in society then they need to become proficient in English; they may also be under considerable pressure from members of their families or communities to maintain their native language. What distinguishes them from the older minorities is that the state will make no provision for them to maintain their language. More often than not there is no official 2. Pattanayak, D 'Foreword' in Alladina, S & Edwards, V eds Multilingualism in the British Isles. London: Longman. 1991, p.ix.

< previous page

page_49

next page >

< previous page

page_50

next page > Page 50

support and no provision for their children to receive schooling through the medium of their language or to achieve literacy in it. The maintenance of both individual and societal bilingualism thus depends totally on individual or collective volition and effort. As 'minority' or (as they are called) 'community' languages, they do not enjoy much prestige among British mainstream society, and any bilingualism in these languages plus English does not normally receive much societal approval either. A third, much smaller, category of bilinguals consists of children from bilingual families who grow up with two different home languages (one of which may or may not be English) or whose parents both speak a language other than English. In such families bilingualism is usually the product of the conscious decision taken by the parents to raise their offspring bilingually. In many of the reported cases considerable effort and expense was devoted to the pursuance of such a goal. In quite a number of places parental initiatives have led to the establishment of, for instance, French, Spanish, German, Dutch, Finnish or Swedish clubs or playgroups. Some national groups, such as the Polish, Ukrainian and Italian ones, also have a long tradition of Saturday Schools. There have been doubts expressed as to whether such ventures actively promote bilingualism in the children, as it has been observed that they tend to use English rather than these languages to each other, but the contributions they make in serving as a focal point for parents and children and in providing an opportunity to experience the other language and culture are beyond question. A small number of such bilingual children may gain access to primary and, perhaps more significantly, secondary education in the non-local or foreign language there are the French, German and Spanish schools in London, sometimes with branches in other places (as there are elsewhere in Europe), and in some of the International Schools part of the curriculum may be imparted in a language other than English. But, generally speaking, it can be said that, if they live and attend school in Britain, such children will grow up with English as their strongest language; whether they also maintain their other language(s) depends largely on the sustained efforts of their parents. Finally, I should just mention a small group of children who are quietly becoming bilingual in Britain without most of us noticing. I refer to those foreign pupils who receive all or a good part of their education, mostly in private schools, in Britain and Ireland. Their number is, of course, far too small to make a quantitatively significant contribution towards bilingualism in Europe, but it has risen quite markedly in the last two decades. And when these young people return to their countries of origin they will not only have become fluent speakers of English, they are also quite likely to display positive attitudes towards the English language and bilingualism in general. They may well be influential in passing on this positive attitude to others at some time in their lives, to a degree disproportionate to their actual numbers.

< previous page

page_50

next page >

< previous page

page_51

next page > Page 51

Areas Where English is Co-Official with Another Language I mentioned in the introduction some areas in Europe where English is one of two or more official languages. In such territories, often remnants of Britain's colonial past, societal bilingualism has been established as a result of political decisions. In some of these areas bilingualism may have been a reality of life for many people even before English was introduced there, as for example in Malta. Generally speaking, attitudes towards bilingualism and English tend to be positive in these cases, although not all the members of such societies may be bilingual themselves. While in some places bilingualism with English may be a matter of family background and education (e.g. in Malta), in others monolingualism in English, or bilingualism with English, may be due to the status, prestige or personal circumstances of individuals, as for instance on Cyprus or in Gibraltar. In the Republic of Ireland English is co-official with Irish Gaelic but, as we know, the vast majority of the Irish are monolingual in English. For the remainder of this study I intend to focus on what I consider to be a new type of bilingualism in Europe, the kind of societal bilingualism where considerations of geography and historical antecedent are unimportant or, perhaps, can be seen as incidental. English in Parts of Europe Where It Has No Official Status To begin with, I shall mention in passing those English speakers abroad who often form small, rather self-contained communities and who may be, but often are not, bilingual. They form the enclaves of expatriates, many of them retired or working either from home or in other ways, to be found in parts of Spain, France, Italy, Switzerland and other countries, as well as those who are part of the American and British Armed Forces headquarters in Germany. There is no particular pressure on them to learn the language of their new, or temporary, country of residence. Their children may become educated through the medium of English only, as is particularly the case of the children of American military personnel, or they may attend local schools. There are now many more English-speaking people living in Europe than there were in the past, and if they do not learn and use the language of the country where they have settled they will use English wherever they go. This, of course, means that those who have contact with them will have to use English in their dealings with them. The most interesting groups of people for my observations here are those who make up the international communities that have sprung up everywhere in Europe where international organisations or companies have become established. There are multinational commercial enterprises in virtually every European country, and there are the many institutions belonging to NATO, the UN, the Council of Europe and, most prominently, the European Union. Major cities like-Geneva, Brussels, Luxembourg and Paris have international communities that contain many thousands of members, and there are other regions where such communities exist, perhaps fewer in number but still amounting to hundreds or thousands of people with different

< previous page

page_51

next page >

< previous page

page_52

next page > Page 52

mother tongues. In all cases English is used as a working language, either the only one or one of several. (Cay Dollerups's chapter illustrates vividly what the position of English within the European Union is in terms of its use as a working language and also with regard to its future role within an enlarged Union.) What in fact has happened for many people who come from different linguistic backgrounds is that English has become the language of work and also of part of their leisure time. In addition, for their children English often plays an important role in their education. Everywhere in Europe there is a strong demand for English from secondary school onwards this language is seen as an essential requirement for a successful career which for many will have an international component. A survey of these international communities would be likely to confirm one's impression that the majority of their members become bilinguals with English through education and praxis, although there are, of course, also those for whom English is either the mother tongue or a language acquired naturally in childhood. Elsewhere in this book such speakers of English are referred to as speakers of English as a second language, or users of English as a lingua franca. I choose to refer to them as bilinguals not only because they fall within the remit of the working definition proposed at the outset of this article (i.e. people who habitually use two or more languages in their daily lives), but also because their group includes members, of different ages, who have become bilingual by growing up in a bilingual family setting. In order to see what types of bilingualism with English are found in Europe I shall now take a closer look at the two most common routes that lead to bilingualism: growing up in a bilingual family and schooling. Family Bilingualism with English The family is usually the primary source of bilingualism. This is just as true for individual bilingualism as it is in the context of societal bilingualism. There are no figures to suggest what proportion of bilingual families are necessary to ensure language maintenance within the community, although there has been a good deal of research into language maintenance and language loss among particular bilingual communities and family settings that show what conditions and factors are likely to foster (or hinder) the development of bilingualism, on an individual as well as a societal scale. There is no doubt that family bilingualism is greatly enhanced if it is backed up in some form or other by the community. This can take the form of institutionalised bilingualism, where the two languages are used in all spheres of public life and in education, as is the case in some regions of Wales. With regard to continental Europe any support for the family that does exist is, of course, on a much smaller scale. The most localised of such efforts are playgroups, clubs and support associations that are organised by those who are directly concerned with the raising of bilingual children, i.e. the parents

< previous page

page_52

next page >

< previous page

page_53

next page > Page 53

themselves. A browse through several years' backcopies of the Bilingual Family Newsletter, a publication aimed primarily at parents which has world-wide distribution, shows an ever growing number of such ventures springing up among British families or communities in a number of towns in countries such as Greece, the Czech Republic, Germany, Luxembourg, Belgium, Sweden and France. Just as with their counterparts in Britain, the primary function of such groups is to provide a cultural and linguistic focus for parents and children alike. It should not be forgotten that parents need as much support and encouragement in their endeavours to raise their offspring bilingually as do the children themselves. Play and support groups also serve the practical purpose of providing interesting materials in English, such as books, cassettes, videos, etc., and of creating opportunities to engage in activities where English is used. Some of these groups are more ambitious than others in that they try to provide access to literacy in English, or even an English school education. In view of the many problems that such enterprises may encounter (costs, changing membership, conflict of home and group interests, the sheer amount of effort required from the parents, to name but a few), the fact that they exist at all and seem to grow in number must be seen as a reflection of the determination of many families to raise their children as bilingual speakers of English. It must be said that, for many families, whether they do or do not have outside support, the establishment and, perhaps even more, the maintenance of their children's bilingualism can be quite hard. I speak here from personal experience. Understandably, there are very few published accounts of failed attempts to raise children bilingually. But a large proportion of bilingual families would probably agree that it is often much easier to use one language only within the family. Bilingualism within the family is no doubt also costly (providing stimulating material, frequent trips to the other-language-speaking country etc).Writing about the benefit of television, particularly cable and satellite, for bilingual children, Ciaran O'Hagan3 describes enthusiastically the various advantages television programmes and videos in the family's non-majority language have. But he is also honest enough to concede that '...raising bilingual children is certainly easier for the rich!' Family bilingualism where one of the languages is English can take many forms. Depending on the particular linguistic constellation and family arrangements, the patterns of language use within the family can vary widely. There are those families at one end of the scale where English is spoken by both parents within the family all the time, and also those who follow the one-parent-one-language rule consistently, while at the other end there are those who use English only occasionally when they have the time and opportunity to do so (the 'Sunday people' as one English mother living in Norway calls them). The type of bilingualism involved varies accordingly, from family to family and also from time to time within individual families. It may be more active or more passive depending on the pattern of use 3. O'Hagan, C. 'In praise of television'. The Bilingual Family Newsletter 9, 1 1-2. 1992.

< previous page

page_53

next page >

< previous page

page_54

next page > Page 54

of the two languages, it may encompass oral and written skills in both languages or only a small degree of literacy in the family minority language, or none at all. Unlike the case of bilingual families in Britain (whose family language may be a non-English community language), bilingual families in continental Europe who have English as a home language are unlikely to encounter any negative attitudes towards their bilingualism by the dominant outside community, as English enjoys high prestige. It is, of course, precisely this prestige factor that contributes towards the continued spread of English in the world, as Tom McArthur points out in Chapter I. So, again, we find that bilingualism with English (plus another language of the European Union) is special because the social and cultural attributes of English are considered to be exceptional. Bilingualism with English: The Role of Education I have already indicated that schools are very significant contributors towards bilingualism in Europe. Education with the minority language as the medium of instruction, or with it being used to teach part of the curriculum, provides access to a number of registers and uses of language that the young person does not otherwise experience. And there is no doubt that motivation and attitudes towards bilingualism are positively affected if the minority language is seen to be prestigious enough to be used as a language of education. This has been well documented in the Welsh context, where Welsh-medium schools and bilingual schools are acknowledged to have played an important role in the spread and maintenance of Welsh and also in changing attitudes towards the language.4 In contrast, the British mainstream education system has no commitment to fostering bilingualism among its pupils, be it in one of the community languages and English or in one of the languages of the European Union. (The teaching of modern languages is a requirement of the National Curriculum; however, by comparison to other European states Britain's commitment to learning foreign languages must be seen as lukewarm.) The efforts of individual communities to have a linguistic and educational input in the form of Saturday schools or after-school lessons are, of course, laudable. But whether they lead to success depends to a large extent on how adept they are in overcoming the perennial problems caused by a shortage of suitable materials and trained teachers resources that are geared towards addressing the specific educational and linguistic needs of bilingual children who live in a given situation, namely that of being surrounded and acculturated by, and educated in, the dominant majority language. What happens all too often is that these bilingual children are taught by teachers who use methods and materials which are known to be suitable for monolingual children who grow up in a monolingual and monocultural environment. Such materials are often linguistically (and sometimes culturally) inadequate for bilingual children. When this is noticed, in the effort to make linguistic adjustments, materials designed for younger monolingual children are chosen, with the result that the emotional 4. See for example Baker, C. Key Issues in Bilingualism and Bilingual Education. Clevedon. Multilingual Matters. 1988 and Baker, C. Foundations of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. Clevedon Multilingual Matters. 1993.

< previous page

page_54

next page >

< previous page

page_55

next page > Page 55

and cognitive maturity of the bilingual learner is neglected, so that, for instance, a reader for primary schools is used to teach the teenage bilingual to read and write in the minority language a sure killer of motivation, if ever there was one, for a child who is already giving up his or her leisure time in order to become literate in his or her other language. In mainland Europe the conditions for bilingual education involving English seem to be more varied and more favourable. There are a number of well-established institutions which use English for all, or part, of their pupils' education. And it is quite exciting to see the growing number of educational projects and ventures that aim to establish a degree of bilingualism with English in national education systems that hitherto have been monolingual. At the moment this trend is primarily affecting the children of people who are politically, economically and socially quite influential. But the process in continental European societies (which are probably more egalitarian than the British) appears to be that, whenever an educational advantage is possessed by a privileged minority, it becomes desirable for the majority, and eventually it also becomes obtainable for them, at least to some extent. Of the institutions committed to bilingual education, the International Schools are the oldest foundations. They exist in a number of countries, catering for children with international backgrounds (e.g. in Luxembourg, where a large number of pupils' parents work for multinational or European institutions). They are open to local children as well, if their parents are keen to provide them with an education with an international dimension in a non-national medium of instruction. But admission may depend on academic ability, and school fees may have to be met by the parents. In many cases the language of the school is English and the qualification awarded after successful completion of schooling is the International Baccalaureate. There are also, sometimes running under the name of International Schools, the English Sections of mainstream national schools found, for instance, in France and Switzerland (near big English-speaking commercial enterprises). This type of schooling aims to enable children to obtain English qualifications in some subjects, typically in English language and literature, alongside the national ones of their school (e.g. the French or Swiss baccalaureates). The European Schools are a particularly good example of education designed to establish and maintain bilingualism. These schools grew out of parental initiative in the 1950s after the European Coal and Steel Community was founded and employees of different nationalities went to work at its headquarters in Luxembourg. Today there are European Schools in Italy, Germany, Belgium, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and England, catering for some 15,000 children.5 The parents of the pupils attending these schools usually work for one of the institutions or organisations of the European Union, and they tend to be fairly mobile. Given the nature of the parents' occupations there tends to be a preponderance of children from middle-class backgrounds in 5. Baker, C. Le Parlement européen. Document du travail (PE 205 672). Commission de la Jeunesse de l'Education et des Médias 1993.

< previous page

page_55

next page >

< previous page

page_56

next page > Page 56

these schools, although children from all social classes can, and do, attend them. Pupils may well have to move school during the period of their education, perhaps within the European Union, or they may be required to re-insert themselves into the education system of their country of origin. This means that they need to be educated in their native language. Hence the European School model is designed primarily as a language-maintenance programme. In their primary years children receive instruction in their native language (primary education is offered in seven languages, although all language sections share the same curriculum and time-table), but they are also introduced to a second language, chosen from English, French or German. In their secondary schooling pupils are taught partly in their native language and partly in the language they learnt as a second language, which is known as a 'vehicular language'. In addition, pupils attend so-called 'European hours' during which the vehicular language is used among mixed groups from different linguistic backgrounds. These periods are intended to promote cross-cultural understanding and unity rather than impart subject-specific knowledge. Also, a third language has to be learnt. The success of these schools is measured not only in terms of a high pass rate (90%, it is claimed) of the final examination, the European Baccalaureate, but also in the attainment of high linguistic accuracy and good literacy skills in the child's two languages.6 There are other factors that contribute to the success of these schools. One of them is that in many cases one of the vehicular languages is also the language of the community in which the child finds himself (e.g. French in Brussels). In those cases where the vehicular language of the school is English, the student will normally become an educated bilingual with a language that represents part of his or her European identity, one that is endowed with a great deal of prestige and one that is likely to be of use. Many European School pupils have access to English media, especially television, and appreciate becoming fluent in the language that is so closely associated with the international youth culture of sport, pop and entertainment. The importance of the International and European Schools often goes beyond the field of education. Children who have recently experienced being moved from one country to another may find that their school provides the familiarity and security they do not find in their new environment outside the school. Therefore they tend to return to the school after school hours for extracurricular and recreational activities. In this way the school becomes a social environment within which the vehicular language of the school serves also as the language of common interaction between children of different linguistic backgrounds. A number of newly established Montessori Schools in several European countries can be counted among the newer developments in multilingual education as they introduce preschool and primary-school children to a new language. They are, naturally, not very significant in terms of the numbers of bilinguals they help produce, but 6. For further discussion of the European School Model and comparison with the Canadian Immersion Model, see Baetens Beardsmore, H. & Swain, M. 'Designing bilingual education: aspects of immersion and ''European School" models' Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 6, 1:1-15. 1985.

< previous page

page_56

next page >

< previous page

page_57

next page > Page 57

where they exist they make a contribution to the individual child's bilingualism and can enhance its standing among the community. Clearly, schools that are designed with the linguistic and cultural needs of bilingual children in mind must be good for bilingualism. They provide a homogeneous environment which makes use of the advantages of being bilingual. A further merit of such schools is that they cater for children with varied educational profiles and needs at the same time as they have an impact on the child's bilingual development. Pupils not only benefit from the curriculum and facilities the schools offer, they also profit from their contact with other children who are in the same situation as they are. Outside the school the child may find himself or herself to be different from the children of mainstream society, as an isolated case or a member of a minority. But within these schools he or she is not like the typical minority child in other parts of the world, constantly under pressure to conform to majority standards and expectations. In these schools, among the student body, the children are all in the same boat and that must be a reassuring experience. These various models of education are all designed primarily for children with different linguistic backgrounds who, for reasons of their parents' employment, cannot attend school in their countries of origin. There are, however, also other types of bilingual education in Europe that aim at introducing majority children in mainstream education to a second language. They do not affect large numbers of children, and it is far too early to say whether they will result in life-long bilingualism for those who have attended the schools concerned, but they are interesting projects well worthy of attention. The fact that in a number of countries educational authorities are now willing to support bilingual projects must be seen as recognition of the importance of foreign languages and in most cases the language in question is English. In certain German Länder, experiments with bilingual education started in the 1960s following special cultural agreements between Germany and France. The aim was to integrate certain elements of the French and German education systems in German and French schools so as to enable pupils in the two countries to study at each other's universities. So-called bilinguale Züge/sections bilingues, bilingual streams in mainstream schools at secondary level, were set up in which children received part of their lessons in the other language. In Germany, from the 1980s onwards there has been a growing number of schools that use this form of bilingual education with German/English. In fact, today those schools offering bilinguale Züge with English far outnumber those offering French, and in some places, for instance Berlin (and, incidentally, also Vienna) the model is now also used at primary level. The aim of these programmes is to encourage German-speaking pupils to see English not only as a foreign language that is an object of study, but also to learn to accept it as a vehicle for acquiring new skills and insights. To this end pupils first receive intensive tuition in English, and then English is used as the language of instruction in those subjects

< previous page

page_57

next page >

< previous page

page_58

next page > Page 58

that are of a more practical, activity-based nature and where the language required to teach the subject is not too technical. The subjects judged most suitable to be taught in English are in the arts and social sciences; in addition, apparently biology is increasingly being included as a subject for this kind of bilingual education with a subject combination of Biology-GeographyPolitics in the German-English streams becoming the standard choice.7 As can be imagined, the staffing of such bilingual streams presents major headaches for schools. It is obviously not easy to find suitably trained German subject teachers who also possess the linguistic competence to teach their subject in English, or native English teachers with a good command of German and a subject qualification equivalent to that of a German subject teacher at a Gymnasium. In order to comply with German school curriculum regulations it is considered necessary to give preference to the subject (rather than the language) qualification, but considerable resources are being spent on in-service language training for qualified teachers and on the production of suitable guidelines and materials. The fact that these provisions are becoming increasingly popular among parents and pupils, and are made available by the local (or State) education authorities, is a strong indicator that there exists considerable popular interest in, as well as an official commitment to, the learning of foreign languages, especially English. What contribution do these bilingual streams make towards bilingualism? In view of the problems involved, and the artificiality of the linguistic situation that children find themselves in (English is reinforced neither in the family nor in the community around them), one ought to be cautious in one's expectations. In most cases English is taught and used as the subject language by non-native speakers, and it is not known whether it is actually being used in the classroom all the time. It should, of course, be remembered that this kind of bilingual education does not purport to be as language-intensive as that of immersion programmes (like the ones we find in Wales or Canada). It is not unreasonable to assume that for a significant minority of German pupils their access to English is both qualitatively and quantitatively enhanced. As a result of this, and of the motivation it probably engenders, fluency, competence and confidence in using English are more likely to develop than if the child simply attended English-language classes. One should, therefore, assess the bilinguale Züge primarily as important innovations in foreign language teaching and learning. In most European countries English is also of considerable importance in higher education. For many academic careers a degree of competence in English is a prerequisite, as extensive use of material published in this language is required. In such cases students, and especially members of university staff, need to be at least passive bilinguals with English, although, of course, very many of them are also highly efficient users of written standard English and competent oral communicators in the language. I will refrain from delving into other areas where the use of English by non-native speakers is 7. Klapper, J. 'Germany's bilinguale Züge'. German Teaching 10.29-34. 1994.

< previous page

page_58

next page >

< previous page

page_59

next page > Page 59

known to be required, and encountered, such as the worlds of business (particulalry export and marketing), entertainment and, above all, the media (covering films, television, music, computers, telecommunications and many areas of information technology). The desire to become a participant in such fields of activity may provide the initial motivation to acquire English, or to become more proficient. It does not, of course, necessarily lead to active bilingualism, although in many instances it may constitute a first step towards it. Conclusion The situation regarding bilingualism with English in Europe is very varied. In terms of when, how, where, why and to what degree of competence English is acquired and used alongside another language, there are many different patterns to be found. It is useful to make a broad distinction between the societal and individual bilingualism existing in the British Isles and that to be encountered elsewhere in Europe, for the simple reason that virtually everybody has exposure to the language in the former, whereas in the case of mainland Europe access to English is more limited. Most bilinguals (or trilinguals) in Britain have become so by a process of natural acquisition consisting of contact with both (or the three) languages, or through schooling. For most of them English is the dominant language, the one for which they have most use and in which they are most proficient, and in which they possess literacy skills. While there is a long tradition of bilingualism in Ireland and in Wales, for the majority of British people bilingualism is neither necessary nor looked upon as particularly desirable. Those who are seen to be bilingual in a community language and English are often considered to belong to socially less favoured or prestigious groups and therefore their particular linguistic attributes, namely bi- or, often, multi-lingualism, do not enjoy much social prestige either. In fact, there seems to exist an enduring suspicion of bilingualism and the potential harm it may do to a child's intellectual and social development that is only slowly being dispelled. Bilingual families with Welsh or another European language are making a valuable contribution here. In continental Europe where English is not part of mainstream society, societal bilingualism with English is found among communities of native speakers of English and also among international communities who choose English as the language of their own intergroup communication. The reason for this is, of course, that English has become established as the world's most prominent language of international communication. As such the language enjoys exceptional social prestige, and as a consequence of this any bilingualism that encompasses English is also seen as desirable and it is met with positive attitudes. The high status of English, combined with its proven usefulness, naturally enhances the budding bilingual's motivation to master this language. We find, therefore that, in Europe as a whole, English is acquired either in adulthood or in (early or late) childhood, either in a natural

< previous page

page_59

next page >

< previous page

page_60 Page 60

context (family bilingualism or simple exposure) or through schooling. School bilingualism in this case does not only refer to the place where the second language is added to the mother tongue. The kind of school attended may also, to some extent, determine the linguistic models the non-native learner of English is exposed to. The teachers and other pupils may be either native or non-native speakers of English, and their language may display varying degrees of native-speaker authenticity. The spoken varieties may have American or British or other (including non-native) features. This is not the place to speculate about the possible implications of this, nor about the wider issues of ownership of English.8 Another characteristic of school bilingualism is that the individuals involved learn to read and write in the two languages. This is quite different in the case of the popular bilingualism that is found among many migrant and immigrant communities, where a large number of bilinguals are literate only in one of their languages. It also means that this kind of bilingualism with English implies familiarity with the written standard variety of English in fact, it is often the case that the use such bilinguals make is heavily dependent on the written medium. There is evidently a growing demand for English in Europe, and this demand is being met in various ways. For a relatively small but significant and influential minority of Europeans bilingualism is becoming a fact of life as habitual use of English is found to be either essential or potentially necessary. One may perhaps go so far as to say that in order to partake in Europe, both to contribute to and benefit from the European Union politically, economically and socially, it is desirable to have English. Since the number of those becoming fluent and habitual users of English is growing steadily, and people from diverse social backgrounds are obtaining access to this language, one can no longer refer to the outcome of this development as elite bilingualism. It is a form of societal bilingualism, albeit a novel one. The paradox is that it is the language which originated in what is now one of Europe's most reluctant members that has acquired such wide currency. 8. For a discussion on this topic, see Widdowson, H. 'The Ownership of English' TESOL Quarterly 28, 2:377-389

< previous page

page_60