Language and communication: reciprocal influences

Michael Skapinker's article "Whose language?" on the online Financial Times emphasizes language's role as a tool for communications, and how language itself is being shaped by communication while it is shaping global communication. This parallels quite nicely with language's other relationship with thought to remind us that language's communication function is just as important as its role in thought and thought expression.

Language's communication function is so important, indeed, that millions of people are spending hefty amounts on learning English--the language of commerce and globalization--these days. Many private firms teaching English to Asian students are rapidly growing and earning huge profits, and Korean presidential candidate Chung Dong-young himself is making quality-English instruction his vote-gaining campaign commitment, promising "a vast increase in English teaching so that young Koreans do not have to go abroad to learn the language." The article estimates that about 1.5 million people can "communicate reasonably well" in English today; that's about a quarter of the world's population, and about three non-native speakers out of every four. This number will only grow, and will reach 2 million in 15 to 20 years.

We all have some sense of English's immense influence on the world. What I found especially about the article, however, is its presentation of the world's influence on English, specifically its vocabulary and grammar. As we have already discussed in class, there are many variants of English spoken around the world today, from American English and British English to Trinidadian English. As English gains new speakers and fragments even further, the variants become more and more different. Even though most people who learn English for economic reasons probably learned either American or British English, I would expect each country to add its language's flavors to create its own version of English (Singlish or Kinglish, to name a few), and that it would therefore by much easier for non-native speakers to communicate with a native American or British--for a variant to communicate with an original, rather than for non natives from two different English variants to communicate with each other. This, as the article points out, is however not true. "Native speakers are often poor at ensuring that they are understood in international discussions. They tend to think they need to avoid longer words, when comprehension problems are more often caused by their use of colloquial and metaphorical English." In fact, many non-native speakers prefer to and do discuss business with other non-natives rather than a native. Non-native speaking patterns, such as adding or leaving out articles in wrong places or adding "s" to words like "information," "knowledge," or "advice" to create the plurals, are common at these discussions. As long as the non-native partners can understand each other, they often don't bother with correct English. Interestingly enough, even native speakers begin to speak in similar, non-native patterns after working with non-native colleagues for some time. As English transforms the world, then, the world is in turn transforming English, not only through non-native but through native speakers as well.

Sources:
Article: Whose Language?