The Language Of Empire

[churchill]

Chinese as a language seems quite popular in Thai education but English seems to be winning ?

"It's easy to be pessimistic about the United States' standing in the world these days. The financial crisis shamed Wall Street for reckless behavior at a time when China's economic clout is fast rising. Leaders at the G-20 called for a multi-polar world, even as their prescriptions looked to be self-fulfilling. Even the U.S. National Intelligence Council concluded that the United States "will be less dominant" a quarter of the way into the new century in last year's Global Trends 2025 report.

But for those who claim that the post-American world is a fait accompli, there is one big problem: The English language is winning hearts and minds faster than politics ever can. With the June 10 addition of "noob" (a pejorative description of a newcomer to a particular task or group) to its lexicon, English will boast one million words - twice as many as Cantonese, four times as many as Spanish, and 10 times as many as French. Half the world's people are projected to be speaking English by 2015. And so long as English is on track to become the world's unofficial language, the United States will likely be center stage.

The stats say it all. In mid-2007, the International Herald Tribune stated that "English is spoken in some form by three times as many nonnative speakers as native speakers." English is a first language for 400 million people, and a fluent second for between 300 and 500 million more, the IHT wrote. Add on top of that the 750 million who have studied English as a foreign language and you have well over 1 billion members of the English-speaking world. Every globally influential newspaper is either written in English or has an English-language version. The same is nearly true for science, where more than 90 percent of the world's major journals are printed in English. With all this at stake, it's no surprise that the global market for English-as-a-second-language training products and services is worth $50 billion (that's more than Lithuania's 2008 GDP).

Why the English explosion? It's all about upward mobility. In China, America's putative superpower replacement, learning English is considered a gateway to middle-class security; 300 million people speak it there, and another 350 million people speak it in India. According to a recent report by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, between 96 and 100 percent of people in China, Indonesia, Japan, South Korea, and Vietnam believe children should learn English. Their goal is reflected in the more than 90 percent of Japanese elementary schools that offer English programs. Children in China start learning the language in third grade and more than 50,000 English-training centers there offer further instruction. Chris Gibson, the British Council's director for South India, aims to have every South Indian speaking it by 2010, at which point he believes that English will be a codified world language (Penguin Books' operations in India, meanwhile, are salivating at what they see as the world's fastest-growing English-language market).

Asian countries aren't alone in their anglophilia. Since 1998, Argentinean students have been required to take two hours of English per week from fourth grade through high school. That same year, Chile mandated that government-run schools begin offering English instruction starting in fifth rather than seventh grade. English is the language of choice in the classrooms of many African countries. And even continental Europe has placed growing emphasis on learning English. The Dean of MBA programs at France's ESSEC Business School, Laurent Bibard, told The New York Times that the school is adopting English because "it's the language for international teaching." English, he continued, "allows students to be able to come from anyplace in the world and for our students -- the French ones -- to go everywhere."

The trends suggest that English's influence is primed to increase in the decades ahead. Consider this forecast by the Director of Asia for the McKinsey Global Institute: "By 2100, the world will go from a 7,000-language planet to a couple of hundred languages at the most...English will be the major medium of communication in many countries and the second-most prevalent in China, Japan, Korea, and much of Africa and Latin America - as it already is in most of Europe."

Language quite literally anchors human progress - it allows children to learn, authors to write, consumers to buy, companies to produce, leaders to negotiate, people to travel, and enables just about anything else that you can imagine. Whether it's Latin during the first century or French in the 18th, great powers and global lingua francas tend to go together. So while the unipolar moment may be over, the growing influence of English will ensure that the United States doesn't fade into the sunset anytime soon.

http://experts.foreignpolicy.com/posts/200...ion_by_language

[bravingbangkok]

More people speak English as a second language then any other language.

English is the language of business.

We rule.

[bigtimeali]

More people speak English as a second language then any other language.

English is the language of business.

We rule.

English is the language of engineering too!!!!! hurrah

[garyh]

Incase you did not realise English originates from England as the name suggests, not from usa. The language was spread by the British Empire not usa foriegn policy etc.

[daoyai]

yea, those were the days eh?, but the sun did set on the empire.

[Dave the Dude]

yea, those were the days eh?, but the sun did set on the empire.

As it did on every empire,Buddy.

English is also the language for I.T. and thats a big worldwide influence.

Dave

[bonobo]

Incase you did not realise English originates from England as the name suggests, not from usa. The language was spread by the British Empire not usa foriegn policy etc.

 Not to get into an "ownership" thing, English in India and Africa is certainly British-inspired (and of course, the fact that it is spoken in the US, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.)  However, the rise of English as a second language worldwide has more to do with the US economic, political, and scientific power than that of the UK.

Chinese will probably never be a world-language even if many people learn it as an aid to doing business.  The simple fact that the language is based on Chinese characters will keep the vast masses from learning it.  Couple that with the fact that Gwoyu has very few sounds when compared to English, and there is a huge propenisty for misunderstanding when it is spoken by non-native speakers (even with the same tone, a word like "jyou" has literally over 100 meanings, even if each word has a separate character.)

[PeaceBlondie]

This debate reminds me of scholars arguing whether Genesis 10 is a table of spoken languages, or nationalities. This is about languages all over the world.

We could argue here also >>> http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/Silly-Argume...80&start=80

[TomBombadil]

More people speak English as a second language then any other language.

English is the language of business.

We rule.

You lose and you said so, because the others can speak English AND their mother language.

[keemapoot]

Not only is it the language of engineering, law, and business, but also the language of medicine.

If we can look into the future we will see that if only one language rules, it will most assuredly be English.

Chinese can never catch up.

[lazygourmet]

More people speak English as a second language then any other language.

English is the language of business.

We rule.

You lose and you said so, because the others can speak English AND their mother language.

Spot on...

And French (lingua franca) is the language of diplomacy.

[Ulysses G.]

Not to get into an "ownership" thing, English in India and Africa is certainly British-inspired (and of course, the fact that it is spoken in the US, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.) However, the rise of English as a second language worldwide has more to do with the US economic, political, and scientific power than that of the UK.

Sorry, but we have to share the credit, Old Chaps!

[bonobo]

Spot on...

And French (lingua franca) is the language of diplomacy.

This used to be true up until sometime in the last century.  But it is not really the case anymore.

[keemapoot]

Spot on...

And French (lingua franca) is the language of diplomacy.

This used to be true up until sometime in the last century. But it is not really the case anymore.

My God, what century is Lazygourmet living in? French hasn't been the language of diplomacy for as long as I can remember. Nobody wants to learn French today. Only English.

Edited June 10, 2009 by keemapoot

[bannork]

I wonder if the overwhelming number of non native speakers will rebel one day and demand a revision of English spelling to make it phonetic? Perhaps they'll even abolish the addition of 's' in third person singular present tense!

Talking about numbers, I once expressed admiration of the sophistication of Thai numbers to a Thai friend and he dismissed it, saying the arabic numbers were far better because of their simplicity. He then quoted the theory that arabic numbers originated in their present form because of the angles present in each number. Straightening out the numbers to form clear angles, I could see his point exactly.

Why didn't they teach me interesting stuff like that when I was at school?

[bonobo]

I wonder if the overwhelming number of non native speakers will rebel one day and demand a revision of English spelling to make it phonetic? Perhaps they'll even abolish the addition of 's' in third person singular present tense!

Talking about numbers, I once expressed admiration of the sophistication of Thai numbers to a Thai friend and he dismissed it, saying the arabic numbers were far better because of their simplicity. He then quoted the theory that arabic numbers originated in their present form because of the angles present in each number. Straightening out the numbers to form clear angles, I could see his point exactly.

Why didn't they teach me interesting stuff like that when I was at school?

English is constantly changing. It wasn't that long ago that spelling was somewhat arbitrary.  Webster changed that in the US, and both British English and American English do have set spelling.  But in the US, the spelling has become simpler, in a way:  "harbor" and "color" vice "harbour" and "colour," for example.  Add the trend towards "textspeak," and there is little doubt that over the years, the language will shift yet again.

English is a superb language for conveying exacting thoughts and phrases.  Just look at a typcial English users manual as compared to one in most other languages. But other languages offer their own advantages.  Russian, for example, conveys emotions quite well, and is probably a much better tool for writing poetry. Even Chinese offers a unique touch on poetry.  Not only do the words themselves convey meaning, but the characters offer an artistic look to poetry.

[Scott]

Ok, if English is the language of business (law, medicine, IT etc); and French is the language of diplomacy (arguably); then Thai is the language of what?

Maybe we shouldn't go there!

[bkkjames]

Ok, if English is the language of business (law, medicine, IT etc); and French is the language of diplomacy (arguably); then Thai is the language of what?

Maybe we shouldn't go there!

Maybe this whole thread should go to the Language forum, nothing to do with Thailand - despite a few veiled attempts to make it so.

[bannork]

Ok, if English is the language of business (law, medicine, IT etc); and French is the language of diplomacy (arguably); then Thai is the language of what?

Maybe we shouldn't go there!

Beauty, if you read the poems of Sunthon Phu or Naowarat Pongpaiboon who publishes a poem every week in The Daily News, the beauty of the sounds of the words combined with the meaning is masterful. Many females' real first names sound melodic, as well as evoking a beautiful image.

[polecat]

I wonder if the overwhelming number of non native speakers will rebel one day and demand a revision of English spelling to make it phonetic?

English is constantly changing. It wasn't that long ago that spelling was somewhat arbitrary.  Webster changed that in the US, and both British English and American English do have set spelling.  But in the US, the spelling has become simpler, in a way:  "harbor" and "color" vice "harbour" and "colour," for example.  

If you wanted to make English spelling phonetic, you'd need a different alphabet. Just like Thai spelling reflects the words' Pali and Sanskrit origins, so English spelling reflects French, Germanic, Latin etc roots.

Webster? A half-arsed attempt at spelling reform. Basically gave up when he realised it was an impossible job.

A fish called ghoti, anyone?

[bonobo]

I wonder if the overwhelming number of non native speakers will rebel one day and demand a revision of English spelling to make it phonetic?

English is constantly changing. It wasn't that long ago that spelling was somewhat arbitrary.  Webster changed that in the US, and both British English and American English do have set spelling.  But in the US, the spelling has become simpler, in a way:  "harbor" and "color" vice "harbour" and "colour," for example.  

If you wanted to make English spelling phonetic, you'd need a different alphabet. Just like Thai spelling reflects the words' Pali and Sanskrit origins, so English spelling reflects French, Germanic, Latin etc roots.

Webster? A half-arsed attempt at spelling reform. Basically gave up when he realised it was an impossible job.

A fish called ghoti, anyone?

A half-assed job at spelling reform?  Well, it pretty much did the trick.  We have very few words in American English, at least, that have more than one accepted spelling.  Webster took the torch from Benjamin Franklin and built upon Samuel Johnson's orthography, so he didn't actually create much on his own, and many of his suggestions in A Compendious Dictionary of the English Language were not accepted by the public, but he essentially popularized the movement into standardizing American English.

[Scott]

Slight, but careful simplification of English spelling might be OK, but phonetic would be a real nightmare. There are way too many regional differences in spoken English to make that feasible.

Enuf said!

[bannork]

Slight, but careful simplification of English spelling might be OK, but phonetic would be a real nightmare. There are way too many regional differences in spoken English to make that feasible.

Enuf said!

That's true, I once visited Windsor carstle but when I went up north it was to Newcassle.

[bonobo]

Slight, but careful simplification of English spelling might be OK, but phonetic would be a real nightmare. There are way too many regional differences in spoken English to make that feasible.

Enuf said!

Good point. On the other hand, many regional differences are narrowing with the advent of television and movies.  These serve to homogenize the language.

[polecat]

A half-assed job at spelling reform?  Well, it pretty much did the trick.  

As you said, the whole concept of standardizing English spelling has been around for a long time before Webster, and only a few of his suggestions got through. Hence "half arsed"

Take the "u" out of colour, but leave the "b" in debt?

Change "though", but don't change "cough"?

It just doesn't make sense. His spelling reforms ignore the roots of the language and attempt to simplify them into a cod-phonetic style that would have to be adopted wholesale in order to function. As I said before, the alphabet we use just isn't the right tool. A couple of hundred (maybe) words subjected to Webster's reform have sustained, but American English spelling is still far from phonetic.

How can that be regarded as a success?

[bonobo]

A half-assed job at spelling reform?  Well, it pretty much did the trick.  

As you said, the whole concept of standardizing English spelling has been around for a long time before Webster, and only a few of his suggestions got through. Hence "half arsed"

Take the "u" out of colour, but leave the "b" in debt?

Change "though", but don't change "cough"?

It just doesn't make sense. His spelling reforms ignore the roots of the language and attempt to simplify them into a cod-phonetic style that would have to be adopted wholesale in order to function. As I said before, the alphabet we use just isn't the right tool. A couple of hundred (maybe) words subjected to Webster's reform have sustained, but American English spelling is still far from phonetic.

How can that be regarded as a success?

It was a success in that it brought to the public's ("publick's" before Webster) attention that something had to be done.  Samuel Johnson's orthography probably had a bigger impact as to actual spelling, and Benjamin Franklin had the pulpit but never really did anything with that pulpit.  What Webster did was propose that American English was different from British English, and he garnered public support for standardizing spelling even in some of his fixes were eventually rejected.

You are right in that our alphabet is not suited to cover the extreme variations in English usage.  However English's poor phonemic orthography can be addressed, and Webster was probably the first to successfully address this as an issue in the US.

I am retiring this month as a Marine reserve colonel.  But when you speak the word, it is pronounced "kernal."  Our alphabet does have the capability to handle that sort of change.

[polecat]

But when you speak the word, it is pronounced "kernal."  Our alphabet does have the capability to handle that sort of change.

But "kernal" means something else! (I'm only pulling your leg.)

I guess we disagree about the worth of Webster's reforms, but kongrachulayshens on your imminent retirement.

[eyebee]

Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn`t mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae. the rset can be a totalo mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm. tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe.

[bonobo]

But when you speak the word, it is pronounced "kernal."  Our alphabet does have the capability to handle that sort of change.

But "kernal" means something else! (I'm only pulling your leg.)

I guess we disagree about the worth of Webster's reforms, but kongrachulayshens on your imminent retirement.

Thanks on the kongrachulayshens!

Actually, after re-reading your posts, I would have to agree that 'ole Webster was not successful in much of his initial aim, and English still has a very poor phonemic orthography.  My initial intended point was that he was a large factor in us now having a codifed, accepted method of spelling (with all due respects to Samuel Johnson.)

[bravingbangkok]

French is the language of love and that is about it.