English as a Vehicular Language: a Case of Globalization or Linguistic Imperialism?

Judith Munat
University of Pisa English today is considered as the international lingua franca and, according to some estimates, is spoken (at various levels of competence) by more than 2,000 million people around the globe, including native speakers (over 380 million) and those who learn it as a second or foreign language. It is the language of air and maritime navigation, of the worldwide web and of diplomacy, as well as the vehicle for international scientific exchange, and its pervasive presence can be felt in pop culture and the worldwide media. This article is an attempt to discuss some of the many consequences of this linguistic globalization. An initial distinction is made between the effects of language imposition on populations where the use of English is enforced by the Institutions, thus declassing the local language(s) and culture, leading to the suppression of national and ethnic identity. This situation is contrasted with the less deleterious effects of English on those populations where English is chosen spontaneously as a means of communication with other nations. In this second case, English permits greater mobility of the population, as well as the reduction of costs for translation and interpreting, but we must not overlook the negative aspects of linguistic globalization. The use of English creates inequality, where native speakers are at an advantage with respect to foreign speakers having an imperfect mastery of the language. English remains the language of the elite ruling classes and a marker of social status. A final consideration is the real danger of losing some of the more than 6,000 indigenous languages spoken in the world today as English takes over. The loss of any single language signifies the loss of the knowledge and culture of an entire population. Already today 97% of the worlds population speaks only 4% of the worlds languages (UNESCO 2003), and further language loss would signify a great cultural and historical impoverishment.

Judith Munat completed her studies at Columbia University in New York and the University of Reading in England. She has taught English syntax, morphology and stylistics at the University of Pisa since 1986. Her current research interests are lexical creativity, bias and stereotypes in the media and inter-cultural communication. Her most recent articles are: Iconic Functions of Phraseological Units and Metaphor (Amsterdam, 2005) and Stereotypical Language in literary dialogue (Tbingen, 2005).

English as a vehicular language

International Languages. From Communication to Power

143

English is destined to be in the next and succeeding centuries more generally the language of the world than Latin was in the last or French is in the present age (John Adams, 1780)

INTRODUCTION
The theme of this chapter is English, considered in its present-day role as the international vehicular language. It would appear that John Adams, the second president of the newly-formed United States, was particularly foresightful in his statement of 1780, predicting what would come to pass two centuries later. Perhaps those of us who have witnessed, even participated in, this spread of English as a second or foreign language, find it more than natural that English has stolen the scene. However, on closer examination of the situation, this dominance was not at all self-evident two centuries ago, at least not in the way that it has actually come to pass. Additionally, this spread of English merits careful analysis if we are to draw the maximum benefit from its use, while attempting to mitigate the negative effects of such linguistic globalization. The majority of participants present at the Pisa workshop, in fact, used English in order to communicate with other participants from language communities whose tongues are not as widely known and do not have the undisputed role achieved by English in the international arena. Few would question this dominance of English as a lingua franca 1 today, and it might legitimately be asked, What more is there to say? It would seem that we have little choice but to own up to the reality and bite the bullet: those who wish to navigate in international waters must have at least a basic command of English. It is the language of air traffic control, of the worldwide web, of computer technology, of diplomacy, and much more. While some of us may question the legitimacy of that primacy and stubbornly insist that our own national idiom is to be protected from the infiltration of insidious foreign terminology, we are nonetheless forced to succumb to this dominance and learn English unless we choose to be accompanied by a costly personal interpreter when we venture into foreign environments. But, in my role as a teacher of the language and, more significantly, as a researcher in the field of linguistics, there are a series of questions that I would like to raise: in this general demand for English, what English are we teaching? And what English is being learned? What are the learners needs? And what functions is English to fulfill? Even further, we might wish to investigate how and why English has achieved its present primacy. And whether this role is to be encouraged and implemented, or whether it should, instead, be contrasted. What are the dangers inherent in such linguistic globalization? I would like to begin by briefly considering the meaning of vehicular. What is generally understood by this term? By combining the definitions of vehicle and vehicular (in Websters New World Dictionary and Chambers English Dictionary) I have come up with the following definition: serving as a means by which thoughts are expressed or made known; a medium, a means of conveyance or transmission. I think we would all agree that the very nature of language, of any language, is to transmit thoughts, feelings, knowledge and ultimately, culture. When I speak of English as vehicular, then, I intend that it serves as a means of transmitting information between speakers of different
144 Judith Munat

languages, above and beyond its basic role as a tool of phatic communion 2. The most common communicative functions served by English in international scenarios are those of seeking food, hotels, directions, information of various sorts. And it is generally considered that a speaker has achieved the level of competence necessary for basic survival when he or she has acquired 1500 words of core vocabulary along with elementary notions of grammar. It is my well-founded guess that the average language ability of the participants in the CLIOHnet workshop is considerably above this basic survival level. Otherwise, it would be a problem to communicate conceptual information and the specialized content which was the focus of the workshop. In fact, what is considered as core vocabulary allows little more than rudimentary survival skills. When communication veers toward other topic-specific or disciplinary areas, this level of competence is no longer adequate. After these initial considerations, I wish to examine some of the factors which have contributed to the imposition of English as the international lingua franca, but as I make no claim to having all the answers, I will in effect raise a series of questions, food for thought so to speak, and leave the definitive replies (if, indeed, these exist) to my audience. The fundamental questions which will serve to illuminate the problem, I think, are the following:
Why English as a lingua franca? What is Standard English and who sets the standards? Is the English of international communication standard English? What cultural presuppositions does the use of English (or any other language) entail? Does a language impose a particular mindset on those who speak it? Can any language be totally a-cultural?

WHY ENGLISH?
Political motivations
During the relatively recent history of mankind, there have been several more or less universal languages or lingua francas, such as Latin in the Roman empire, mediaeval Latin in Western Europe, later French and now English. Universality of a given language is of course relative, as it refers to the known or civilized world, or to the empire in question. No language has been truly universal (in a global sense), but the current role of English perhaps comes closest. The position of a so-called universal language has always been a by-product of military and political imperialism: when a nation conquers or controls a large geographical area composed of different language communities, it assimilates them and ultimately imposes its own culture, including the language. Thus, with the 19th century expansion of the British Empire into far corners of the world (India, Australia, Asia, Africa), followed by the 20th century political and economic dominance of the United States on a worldwide level, English has become a necessity for commerce and for diplomatic purposes. This dominance has been further reinforced by the worldwide web, as Internet rapidly planted its roots in all fields of human life in the latter part of the 20th century, including
English as a vehicular language International Languages. From Communication to Power 145

those of research and education, but also marketing and trade as well as entertainment and lesiure activities. This means that, as Internet has become a necessity if we are to keep up with the times, it has consequently become imperative to read, write and speak English.

Linguistic motivation
We might ask whether English is really as easy as it is claimed to be (see the source for the students replies to this question on the questionnaire that was distributed). Let us consider its systemic structure. The script is easily learned, at least by those members of the worlds language communities who are already familiar with the Latin script, thus overlooking millions of speakers whose language is written in Cyrillic characters or Hebrew or Arabic script or Chinese radicals, to name only a few of the worlds writing systems. The phonological structure of English is believed to be relatively easy, entailing as it does about 42 different phonemes (approximately 18 vowel sounds and 24 consonant sounds, excluding some non distinctive regional variations) which correspond to 26 alphabetic characters. This orthographic system is admittedly an imperfect representation of the single phonemes and causes considerable difficulties when passing from the oral to the written medium or vice-versa. The two systems, in fact, must be learned as separate entities. From the grammatical point of view, English is intrinsically simple by comparison with a host of other languages, having lost its case system and having reduced gender markers to only a few pronouns. The system of verbal tenses is rudimentary, at least by comparison with the major European languages, in that it has only a present and past tense. All other time references are constructed from a variety of auxiliaries and modals along with participles, a source of great confusion for most learners, especially those coming from languages having a more complete inflectional system. However, when we consider the lexicon, English reveals its true complexity in the wealth of idiomatic expressions, phrasal verbs, and newly-coined jargon which allows a speaker to express infinite nuances of meaning. English possesses a vast and ever-changing lexicon that requires even a native speaker to constantly update his or her mental dictionary. It is this rich and variegated lexicon which is the true bane of the language learner. But let us say that, at a basic or survival level, English can be acquired within a reasonably short time, depending, naturally, on several variables, such as the individual disposition toward language acquisition, the amount of time available for study, the learners motivation and other psychological, cognitive and social factors. Can the success of English on a global level be attributed exclusively to this deceptive simplicity? Can we assume that there is no easier language among the 6000 or so living languages that populate our planet? I think not.

Socio-cultural motivations
Just as we recognize the political and economic factors that have brought English to centre stage, we must also acknowledge that the creative flexibility of contemporary English and its presence in pop culture (music, cinema, advertising, the media) has contributed to its fascination for masses of young people around the world. English words and neologisms have invaded most languages
146 Judith Munat

of the planet. Is there anyone who doesnt know the words hamburger or Big Mac? But even while I acknowledge this state of affairs, I am not necessarily giving it my endorsement. This popular English is the metaphorical tsunami which has flooded the world, bringing with it a series of consequences, both negative and positive.

WHAT IS STANDARD ENGLISH AND WHO SETS THE STANDARDS?

Having considered some of the reasons for which English has stolen the spotlight over the past century, let us now consider the linguistic standards which are being set. There is an on-going debate over the various national varieties of English that are being taught, learned and spoken around the globe, in particular Indian English and the English spoken by some of the emerging African nations, but also the American black vernacular spoken within the United States 3. Some purists might claim that these are not standard varieties of English in that they do not respect all of the basic grammatical rules of the language. Some of these national or regional varieties also present lexical items which are not known or used in the Standard English of Great Britain or the United States (the two nations that advance claims of proprietorship). Often the pronunciation of these varieties is decidedly distant from RP (or British Received Pronunciation that was, until the second half of the 20th century, considered the most prestigious standard of speech in the U.K., the pronunciation taught in public schools and used by the BBC). One such purist was George Orwell, who wrote in 1946 that: the English language is in a bad way. He reasons that the decline of a language must ultimately have political and economic causes [] The English language he tells us, becomes ugly and inaccurate because our thoughts are foolish, but the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts. According to Orwell, if we improve the way we write and speak English, we will think more clearly, and this, in turn, will lead to political regeneration. But Orwell wrote these words when English had not yet gained general favour as the language of international communication and he evidently had a somewhat rigid standard for good English. I have little doubt that he would strongly disapprove of what is bandied about today as vehicular English.

Fig. 1 George Orwell. English as a vehicular language International Languages. From Communication to Power 147

It is estimated that there are as many as 380 million native speakers of English (living principally in the U.K., USA, Ireland, Canada, Australia and New Zealand), as well as up to 500 million speakers of English as a second language in Singapore, India and more than fifty other territories where English is used in the countrys institutions 4. Finally, the ever-extending circle of English involves between 500-1000 million people in nations such as China, Japan, Russia, that are increasingly concentrating their foreign language study on English 5. It is immediately evident that, on a global basis, non-native speakers of English now outnumber native speakers. But are they all speakers of Standard English? Standard English (SE) according to Crystal (2003) presents five essential characteristics: 1) it is a variety of English, like a dialect; 2) the linguistic features are chiefly matters of grammar, vocabulary and orthography, and not a matter of pronunciation; 3) SE is the variety of English which carries most prestige within a country; 4) the prestige attached to SE is recognised by adult members of the (English-speaking) community, and it is the norm of leading institutions, such as the government, law courts and the media; 5) finally, although SE is widely understood, it is not widely produced. So who sets these standards? What is the minimum standard and who is to be the final judge? Indeed, who can even presume to impose a standard on the millions of non-native speakers who succeed in communicating efficiently in an English that we might consider as sub-standard? Clearly, as a living language, English is in a constant state of flux and we would be hard put to say that any variety of language spoken and comprehended by the interlocutors is unacceptable. It would be chauvinistic to cling to a conservative view of what is proper English and disdain all other varieties. In the present trend toward descriptive grammars, Standard English is seen as the variety used by the majority of educated native speakers and writers (regardless of their pronunciation). In other words, it is the speakers of the language who set the standards. Over the last century the norms have changed considerably, from a rigid, British-imposed standard of correctness to a much looser acceptance of non-standard Englishes. As Coulmas points out, unlike other languages, English has a plural. In fact, we speak of World Englishes, and this has now become a legitimate field of academic study and research. Pluricentric is the term that has been coined to describe those languages which have multiple centres in which distinct varieties have developed according to Clyne 6. Among these are Spanish, Portuguese, Mandarin Chinese and, of course, English, which has several central reference norms, besides those of British English and Standard American. Various varieties of English are now recognized as self-contained systems and English is no longer under the cultural hegemony of the nations where it was first spoken.

CONSEQUENCES OF LINGUISTIC IMPOSITION

While the need for a so-called neutral universal language has long been felt and this is testified by the attempt to impose Esperanto, an artificially constructed language that was intended to serve for international communication such a rational choice seems unlikely to gain general popularity. The fact is that a language grows and changes as a natural offshoot of a given culture, and like
148 Judith Munat

a living organism, cannot be constructed but must develop spontaneously from the surrounding environment. The numerous cultural values implicit in a natural language make any imposition of a language on a society a violation of that society. It has been suggested that where a non-native language dominates a given milieu, this may create an enduring inferiority complex and a feeling of powerlessness. In particular, in those countries where English is enforced as the language of instruction, the native language is reduced to the language of intimate and personal exchanges, thus automatically declassed in that it is no longer the bearer of national culture. The national and ethnic identity which is an intrinsic element of the native tongue of a people is thereby marginalized, along with the literature, history, etc. of the population, while the foreign culture is imposed through the language which dominates the educational system. Ultimately, the significant historical and sociopolitical forces which have shaped the native culture will be lost. But the somewhat dramatic image of cultural colonisation depicted above is not necessarily the case when English is used as an international lingua franca. The distinction to be made is whether English is actually a free choice, spontaneously chosen by the speakers, or whether it is imposed from above.

IN FAVOUR OF GLOBISH 7
English today is often referred to as a global language. The definitional criteria for a global language include considerations of dialect (in other words, it is not necessarily the Queens English, but a simplified variety that is easily understood by speakers of diverse origins). The vast number of people who are in command of this international dialect of English includes, as we have seen, both native speakers and those who have learned English as a foreign language. As stated earlier, there are infinite varieties and dialects; each society molds the language to its own needs and new languages take shape from the single dialects. English, being notoriously malleable, lends itself well to these infinite adaptations to meet the particular needs of different communities. What is commonly referred to as Global English has its own, somewhat simplified, grammar and lexicon, in order to achieve communicative efficiency. And various manuals of style aim to guarantee a minimum standard of clear writing. Among the more specifically linguistic advice appearing on a website are the following suggestions: Conveying meaning is more important than correct grammar (!) Keep sentences short Avoid words with multiple meanings Avoid metaphors, slang Avoid variation of synonyms Use common words (but not too common) Make sure that it is unambiguous Avoid using nouns as adjectives

(www. audiencedialogue.org(english2.html)
English as a vehicular language International Languages. From Communication to Power 149

If it is true that this global English has become the official language adopted for treaties, government documents, air and maritime traffic, etc., I am not so sure that these basic, even simplistic, rules of thumb will serve to facilitate comprehensible international exchange and the transmission of knowledge. It must be said that, in many cases, the choice of English as an official language is dictated by financial considerations, in the attempt to render costly interpreting facilities and translators unnecessary 8. A single official language of the EU would appear to be an extremely desirable choice, given the portion of the budget which is allocated to translation and interpretation among the twenty official languages of the Union. But, on the other hand, as Crystal reminds us, we must also calculate the cost of public education if we are to assure an adequate level of instruction in English as a foreign language. If English is to become a truly global tool of communication, then vast numbers of citizens worldwide must have access to an educational system that will enable them to become competent speakers. One further consideration: the widespread use of an international language will allow greater mobility among populations, especially where migration in search of employment is facilitated by the presence of a common tongue. It is claimed, whether rightly or wrongly, that North Americans are a mobile population by comparison with Europeans, precisely because of the linguistic unity of the vast geographical area which is represented by the United States and Canada.

DANGERS INHERENT IN LINGUISTIC GLOBALIZATION

But underlying this globalization Raley sees a tacit hegemonic system that is sustained by and represents a cultural elite, a new world order in which English is the sine qua non of world information. While we recognize, from a purely pragmatic perspective, that the use of a common language facilitates migration as well as international exchange, and that it promotes understanding between populations (here we have only to consider the vast quantity of scientific and technical materials which are produced in English throughout the world), the reverse side of the coin must also be considered. The use of English creates inequality, where native speakers are at an advantage with respect to those speakers of English as a second or foreign language who have struggled to master the language, possibly achieving only a modest competence. English remains the language of the educated elite and, as such, is a marker of social status. We may liken global English to genetically modified organisms which reduce biodiversity on our planet, where global English risks reducing cultural diversity. There is a substantial movement today to protect indigenous languages, as the loss of any single language signifies the loss of knowledge and culture of an entire population. It is estimated that 15,000 years ago (with a minute world population by comparison with that of today), there were some 10,000 languages spoken 10. Given the tendency over the last century toward colonization, nationalism and, most recently, globalization, there now exist fewer than 7,000 living languages (the estimate varies from 6,000 to 7,200). However, 97% of the worlds population speaks 4% of the worlds languages (a figure reported by UNESCO in 2003), and it is feared that as many as 90 % of these living languages could disappear within the coming century, with consequent dramatic cultural loss. Another possible scenario that emerges is that the cultures of the British and American populations that have shaped the language through centuries of use, risk being trampled in the dust. When English
150 Judith Munat

is transformed into a non-standard variety by speakers of other communities in which it serves as a lingua franca, it risks losing important cultural connotations. According to the German philosopher, Herder, a language is rooted in the soil, it is the spirit of a people (volkgeist). How, then, can this spirit be maintained in the multifaceted worldwide communicative milieu? Is English becoming a language without a culture? How are we to maintain important associations between the language and national identity once the language becomes an instrument of global communication? It is of primary importance to remember that a national language is a bearer of political identity (as students of history, you are familiar with the many nations which have splintered or been reunited on the basis of linguistic and ethnic identity, and others which carry on their struggle for statehood on the basis of cultural and linguistic identity). Even if we do not subscribe to Herders view of language as volkgeist, or the Sapir-Whorf theory of linguistic relativity, according to which each language reflects a particular mindset and the way we speak affects the way we think about reality, it is nonetheless an undisputed fact that there exists a biunivocal relation between language and culture.

CLOSING CONSIDERATIONS
I have only surveyed some of the principal practical, cultural and ethical issues which emerge in considering linguistic globalization, but much more remains to be said. The political hegemony represented by English as the language of the ruling classes can be contrasted with both the positive and negative aspects of nationalism. Matt Luby equates linguistic nationalism with ethnic chauvinism, and warns of the dangerous equation between citizenship and language, while Vior questions the assumption, implicit in the spread of English, that the American way of life is evidently desirable for all people and universally valid. I end with a question. What are the possible alternatives to a monolithic global language, whether this be English or Esperanto? As Chilton reminds us the choice of one language rather than another, just as a particular lexical choice or a regional accent, is an implicitly political distinction, reflecting social or national identities. In the final analysis, and this is perhaps the fundamental consideration, our goal must be that of seeking the best way to promote solidarity and respect between diverse populations as a necessary prelude to world peace. Is English the answer?

NOTES
1

A lingua franca is generally defined as a neutral language (not the native language of either of the speakers) chosen as a medium of communication among speakers of different languages, a hybrid. Lingua Franca was originally a pidgin, thus a spoken language, used around the Mediterranean for purposes of trading, having a limited vocabulary and a simplified grammar (e.g., verbs were in the infinitive) but it disappeared without a trace in the 19th century. Phatic communion is the term adopted by Malinowski [The problem of meaning in primitive languages, in C.K. Ogden - I.A. Richards (eds.), The Meaning of Meaning, London 1923] to indicate the type of conversational exchange that serves merely to preserve social relations, in which the (ritual) social function dominates over referential content. This includes many conventional greetings such as hello, and statements or observations about the weather such as Isnt it a nice day? In their study of English around the world, P. Trudgill and J. Hannah (International English: A Guide to the varieties of Standard English, London 2002), recognize, alongside the two major national varieties (British and American English) as Standard the International Languages. From Communication to Power 151

English as a vehicular language

English of Ireland and Scotland, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and West India, in addition to the second language varieties spoken in West Africa, East Africa, India and Singapore.
4

These figures, cited by D. Crystal (English as a Global Language, 2nd edn. Cambridge 2003), are drawn from the UNESCO statistical yearbook and the Encyclopaedia Britannica yearbook. Within the EU alone, German has the greatest number of native speakers, 24% by comparison with 16% of native English speakers, but the total population of the EU that is estimated to speak English (thus including those who have learned it as a foreign language) is 47%, by comparison with only 32% who speak German. M. Clyne (ed.), Pluricentric Language, Berlin 1992 (Introduction, article and epilogue); Id., Pluricentric Languages and National identities an antipodean view, in E. Schneider (ed.), Englishes around the world, Amsterdam 1997, pp. 287 ff. Globish is actually the trademark of a variety of English which has been developed and promoted by a Frenchman, Jean-Paul Neirire. He specifies that this is a means of communication and not a vehicle of culture. Its characterizing features are that it is limited to 1500 core woords, has an elementary syntax, and is accompained by a number of fixed formulas to assure comprehensibly correct communication, both written and oral. A news item which appeared in the Italian press in June 2005 reported that in France the Toubon law of 1994 was recently applied in a case which obliges General Electric to translate all their English documents into French, costing them a total of 2.29 milion euro. If this legislation should spread to other multinationals who operate on French soil such as Colgate, Euro Disney, etc. the economic consequences would be considerable. This statistic was originally reported by Leuprecht in 1998 and later cited by hedley.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Chilton P., Analysing Political Discourse, London 2004. Clyne M. (ed.), Pluricentric Language, Berlin 1992. Clyne M., Pluricentric Languages and National identitiesan antipodean view, in Schneider E. (ed.) Englishes around the world, Amsterdam 1997, pp. 287 ff. Coulmas F., Sociolinguistics: the study of speakers choices, Cambridge 2005. Crystal D., English as a Global Language, 2nd edn., Cambridge 2003. Leuprecht P., Canadian Language Model Thoughts of a European, 1998, cited in Hedley A., Sustainable Development Through Biocultural Diversity, at X Linguapax Congress, Barcelona, May 2004. Luby M., The Virtues of Nationalism, in The Sentinel, Ohio State University, Jan. 22, 2005. Malinowski B., The problem of meaning in primitive languages, in Ogden C.K. - Richards I.A. (eds.), The Meaning of Meaning, London 1923. Orwell G., Politics and the English Language, Horizon, April 1946. Raley R., What is Global English?, www.english.ucsb.edu/faculty/rraley/research/global-English.html, 2000. Trudgill P. - Hannah J., International English: A Guide to the varieties of Standard English, London 2002. Vior E., Visions of the Americas and Policies of Translation, in Herbrechter S. (ed.), Cultural Studies, Interdisciplinarity and Translation, Amsterdam 2002. www.uwm.edu/~corre/franca/edition2/lingua.2.html www.languagemagazine.com/internetedition/ma97/fld29.html

152

Judith Munat

SOURCE
As a source we give here below the questionnaire filled out by the participants in the CLIOH Workshop and a summary ofthe replies. Questionnaire 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. What is your native language (the language spoken in your home)? What is the language of instruction in your country? How many languages do you speak? Which? How many years have you studied English? In what occasions do you normally use English? What is your principal communicative need for English? Reading? Writing? Speaking? Listening? 7. In your opinion, why has English become the language of international communication? 8. Do you think English is intrinsically easier (or more difficult) than the other languages you know? Explain why. 9. Is there another language that you think would be preferable as a vehicular language? Why? Name___________________________ Country of origin_____________________ Summary of replies: Native speakers of English 4 Number of other languages represented 19 It is interesting to note that, among the native English speakers, three had a command of only one other language: German, Spanish, Gaelic (the fourth spoke only English). Of the 22 speakers of other tongues, five had only English as a foreign language, while the average number of foreign languages spoken by the rest was 2.5. The more peripheral the native language (e.g., Bulgarian, Romanian, Estonian, Czech, Slovene), the greater the familiarity with foreign languages. The foreign languages most frequently studied (besides English) are: French, German, Russian, Italian, Spanish (in that order). Those who were nationals of Scandinavian countries claimed some familiarity with bordering Scandinavian languages. There were no speakers of extra-European languages such as Arabic or Chinese. One further consideration of interest: those who claimed to have some degree of familiarity with numerous foreign languages (upwards of three) came from northern or eastern Europe (Sweden, Denmark, Holland, Germany, Iceland, Latvia, Estonia, Czech Republic and Hungary the only exception being Portugal). Average years of English study 8 years, the exception was a Maltese student who had studied English for 18 years. In only two cases English was used as the language of instruction: in Malta and in some areas of Denmark. The principal need for English was expressed as: Reading, followed at some distance by speaking, while writing and listening were conside-

English as a vehicular language

International Languages. From Communication to Power

153

rably behind the other abilities, but this is in sharp contrast with the answers given to the following question: On what occasions do you use English? Of the 22 non-native speakers, all but one professed to use English as a tool of oral communication (for travel, talking with friends from other countries, giving information to tourists, at conferences, meetings, etc.). Reading and study were specifically mentioned in 12 replies, followed by computers/internet/ e-mail (3 students), and work (2 students); music and TV received one mention each. Opinions expressed as to why English has become an international language: Dominance of British military power and US economic and political power (18) Cultural dominance/presence of mass media and American pop culture (9) English grammar is easy (5) International trade (1) Internet (2) Globalization (2) Due to spread of English to America, Canada, Australia (1) Language of science (1) Special status of language within the EU (1) American influence in Europe after WW II (1) Founding of UN agencies in USA (1) Only one student (from an Eastern European country) expressed the opinion that English carries with it Positive connotations of democracy. The majority of respondents believe that English has an easier grammar than other languages, but several expressed the conviction that English is easy at a basic communicative level and difficult at a more advanced level. Conflicting opinions as to whether vocabulary acquisition is easy or difficult. The major factor which facilitates the learning of English is its pervasive presence (music, films, TV) which leads to general familiarity and greater motivation to learn. Other languages that might be preferable as a global language? Possibly Russian (in Eastern Europe) French or German (in Western Europe) Esperanto Chinese or Japanese (for economic reasons) Spanish

154

Judith Munat