The problem with linguae francae

[nooj]

In Spain (and in Portugal), many languages cohabit the peninsula. The primary one is Spanish however, and the problem there is that basically everyone who speaks a regional language is bilingual in Spanish, the lingua franca as well as that regional language. This has serious effects on multilingualism, and I don't just mean between Spanish and Catalan, Basque, Galician, Asturian, Aragonese etc, but between these languages themselves.

When a Basque person and a Catalan meet, most of the time they will communicate in Spanish, not Catalan or Basque. A lingua franca takes away this opportunity and incentive for multilingualism. Why would a Catalan learn Basque or a Basque learn Catalan? Of course it does happen, but less often than you'd like. If you look at the tools available for such a thing to take place, the Basque-Catalan dictionaries are few and far between (though they do exist) and the grammars even fewer. If you're interested in a general introduction, please read the recent Basc per a catalanoparlants by Beatriz Fernández and Anna Pineda.

It even seems to be happening for languages like Danish and Norwegian and so forth, that in theory are mutually intelligible with some good will, where people switch to English to talk to each other. That just seems to me to be really lazy, and I don't like that word lazy, but here I'll use it, because come on.

French people living in North Africa, West Africa or Sub-Saharan Africa, how big of an incentive do they have of actually learning and speaking *any* language other than that of French? What about Russians in Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Estonia, or heck, Russians living in the Tuvan Republic in Russia itself? What about the Han Chinese in Xinjiang? What would motivate a Persian speaking Iranian to learn Turkmen?

Has anyone worried about this?

[Theodisce]

We need to clearly separate two cases: 1. non natives resorting to a lingua franca 2. a native speaker of a lingua franca (NaLF) speaking it with another person who is not a native speaker of a lingua franca. In the second case, we can further differentiate based on the context in which a NaLF finds him- or herself: 1. at home (which is largely and/or historically) monolingual 2. at home where there are substantial and/or historical populations speaking a non lingua franca language 3. aboard, where a given lingua franca is not natively spoken. Now, it is only 3. that I find disturbing, having met personally people who hadn't learned a language of the country they had been living in for years if not for their entire life. I found it challenging not to think of them as being arrogant. (Post)imperial thinking seems to be a problem as well, as some of your examples clearly show.

More personally: I'm interested in languages mostly for the content that is accessible to their speakers. Unsurprisingly, there are more audiobooks in Russian than in Slovene, but the latter happens to be a dialect with an army and, what is more important, state or private run institutions of culture and education behind it. If I chose to learn Slovene, I can be sure it won't disappear from the face of earth before I will. This does not apply to Sorbian, which I may try to read from time to time, but which suffers under extreme scarcity of content of interest.

[Speakeasy]

To my mind, the assertion that the use of linguae francae represents problem is an example of a strawman argument. Irrespective of the number of languages that one learns, the essential purpose of all languages is to facilitate communication. Learning a lingua franca does not represent a problem, it represents a perfectly valid approach to a common real-world problem.

[jeff_lindqvist]

It even seems to be happening for languages like Danish and Norwegian and so forth, that in theory are mutually intelligible with some good will, where people switch to English to talk to each other. That just seems to me to be really lazy, and I don't like that word lazy, but here I'll use it, because come on.

This has to be a rare exception. Outside polyglot events where any language can be a bridge language, I've only spoken English to fellow Scandinavians when speakers of other languages have been present (and nobody wants anybody else to be excluded). It has happened twice in my life - once with Danes and once with Norwegians. (See this thread.)

[zenmonkey]

To my mind, the assertion that the use of linguae francae represents problem is an example of a strawman argument. Irrespective of the number of languages that one learns, the essential purpose of all languages is to facilitate communication. Learning a lingua franca does not represent a problem, it represents a perfectly valid approach to a common real-world problem.

Within my social sphere English is the linguae francae of Europe - you can pretty much work and live in most (Northern) European countries with it, if you also carry some specialised skills. Having said that, no one that I know that is happily participating in the local environment isn't making some effort to learn the local language.

I agree that a LF doesn't represent a problem but an opportunity to not only facilitate communication but to also get into a situation where learning the local language is possible. If I didn't speak English - I would have never have had the opportunity to move to Germany to learn German. I can work with my Catalan and Basque colleagues BECAUSE we all speak Spanish which lets them create value and have a robust economic exchange that would not occur if they only spoke Catalan and Basque with each other.

[nooj]

To my mind, the assertion that the use of linguae francae represents problem is an example of a strawman argument. Irrespective of the number of languages that one learns, the essential purpose of all languages is to facilitate communication. Learning a lingua franca does not represent a problem, it represents a perfectly valid approach to a common real-world problem.

That's true. It is a perfectly valid and even sensible approach.

However my point of departure, the underlying ideological base that shapes my philosophy of life, is that multilingualism is a good thing and I wish it to be a pervasive phenomenon, more so than it already is. And I don't mean just multilingualism in terms of L1 native language and L2 lingua franca, I mean L1 native language, L2 other language, L3 other language, L4 lingua franca etc. You may not agree with it, but I feel that given the current situation in the world, where a handful of languages/countries dominate the world and create deep inequalities, profound multilingualism is a solution. Pace the intentions of common auxiliary language like Esperanto.

The overwhelming power of a lingua franca, in my opinion, may make this scenario harder to occur. Let me quote someone I read:

De todos los extranjeros que viven en Tirana (Albania), donde yo vivo, pocos, muy pocos, saben decir algo en albanés, ¿para qué?, piensan. Trabajan en inglés, sus compañeros albaneses hablan inglés, la chica de la panadería sabe inglés, hasta el viejito que les indica como llegar a la playa cercana habla inglés... Eso es ponerse en contacto con otras culturas, sí señor. El inglés global, este "globish" que chapurreamos todos, no sirve para poner en contacto culturas, sirve para comprar, para reservar una habitación en un hotel, para decir de dónde es uno, para decir OK!... Y sirve para crear ciudadanos de primera y de segunda, como dice Viktoro. No es lengua común, es lengua impuesta.

Where I live in Tirana, Albania, very few foreigners know how to say anything in Albanian. Why should I, they think. They work in English, their Albanian workmates speak English, the girl at the bakery speaks English, even the old man who tells them how to get to the beach speaks English...and this is "getting into contact with other cultures", uh-huh. Global English, this Globish that we all speak more or less, doesn't help us to get into contact with other cultures, we use it to buy, to reserve a room in a hotel, to say where we are from, to say ok. And it's used to create first class and second class citizens, as Viktoro said above. It is not a common language, it is an imposed language.

Isn't it the case that Albanians learn English in order to learn more about English speakers (if that, as the poster points out, because it has a far more instrumental purpose).

When do English speakers use their English to learn about Albanians? The kind of cultural communication that ideally we would like a lingua franca to open up seems to be primarily one way. Anglo-American media pumps Africa with English related material, but English related material from Africa doesn't hit us.

[Speakeasy]

Nooj, thank you for your comments. As I understand things, you are arguing for an idealized situation that is informed by your own world view.

There are innumerable reasons for inequality in the world. The phenomenon can be described and measured in a remarkably wide variety of ways. Ultimately though, a discussion of which nations or linguistic groups perpetuate inequality, their reasons for and their means of doing so, the costs in human suffering, as well as the possible solutions, would take us well outside of the realm of language learning. While I would love to debate the matter with you, I will just say that I am not convinced that increasing multilingualism throughout the world, irrespective of any intrinsic value that such a project might hold, would lead to greater social justice.

I share zenmonkey’s point of view, and experience, that possessing an intermediate language (a lingua franca) can serve as a point of entry for the learning of some other language. Of course, some people will make little or no effort to learn a language if they find that their langua franca already serves their needs. What if some people were to resist the call to greater multilingualism, what if some people were to persist in their unrepentant reliance on an intermediate language? Should they be sanctioned? In what manner? By whom? The logical extension of your line of reasoning on the purported damage done by linguae francae would be to eradicate them all; and the (practicable) alternatives would be ...?

I doubt that any member of this forum would bother developing a rebuttal to your belief that multilingualism is a good thing in and of itself, I certainly won’t. Nevertheless, even if untold millions of people were to share your opinion on the matter, they would be doing so out of a more-or-less shared hierarchy of values, nothing more. I believe that the linguistic interactions of the (literally) hundreds of millions of people who have resorted to the use of linguae francae throughout history is sufficient testimony to their utility in fostering communications amongst disparate linguistic groups. The purported damage of their use has not yet been demonstrated in this forum. Making a case for their abandonment in favour of greater multilingualism is, perhaps, a laudable project. In any event, making such a case certainly represents a challenge.

[reineke]

“Mother tongue countries have had their day,” said Crystal, who was in India as a British Council guest to speak on the Future of Englishes."

Professor Crystal speaking in Delhi said: "A language is dying every two weeks somewhere in the world today. Half the world's languages will no longer be spoken in another century. This is an extremely serious concern, and English has to share the blame."

https://mg.co.za/article/2004-10-26-hol ... ka-english

On Saving China's Dying Languages
Kellen Parker, co-founder of the Phonemica project, believes preserving a language means preserving history.

"There are languages that are dying out because there are only 100 speakers, all of whom in their 70's or 80's, and there are languages that are dying out with millions of speakers. The reason is fundamentally the same, though: More and more people are consciously using Mandarin at home."

https://www.theatlantic.com/china/archi ... es/276971/

GLOBAL ENGLISH: A KILLER LANGUAGE?

https://languagedebates.wordpress.com/c ... -language/

Apparently the few remaining French people in Algeria and the neighboring countries have a stronger incentive to learn...English.

English-speaking North Africa?
"...historic opportunity to take advantage of increasing demand for English - and with it to expand British engagement and influence..."
"Above all, English provides two things: employability and social mobility."

https://www.britishcouncil.org/organisa ... rth-africa

Competition between four “world” languages in Algeria
"Amongst the above-mentioned conquering groups, two left a deep impact on Algeria’s linguistic profile – the Arabs and the French. In the seventh century, the Byzantines were defeated by the Arabs who came from the east to spread Islam. North Africans gradually converted to Islam and by the twelfth century the majority had become “orthodox” Sunni Moslems. As for language, there was something peculiar in the introduction of Arabic in North Africa. Right from the beginning of the Arab invasion, the Arabic language came to be strongly associated with Islam in North Africa (Gellner 1973 Gellner, E. 1973.... So, “[t]he Berbers admitted the superiority of Arabic over their own language, probably because of this link between Arabic and religion, and maybe also because of the respect they felt for the written forms which their own language did not possess” (Bentahila, A. 1983. Language Attitudes among Arabic-French Bilinguals in Morocco.)... The Arabic language spread progressively, and more and more Berbers abandoned their mother tongue to become Arabophones."

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10. ... src=recsys

I think the author is fantasizing about Chinese but the paper is worth a few minutes of your time.

Language privilege: What it is and why it matters

"Throughout my tenure, it more than surprised me that although my fellow Arabic teachers were required to learn English to retain their positions, I did not have to have even the most rudimentary understanding of Arabic. The public school system with which I was employed was determined to teach every subject, save Arabic and Islamic Studies, in English. It was no wonder that some of the English teachers began to demand that every correspondence, every staff meeting, every professional development class be conducted in English. I found this quite disconcerting considering we were in an Arabic speaking country. "

https://linguisticpulse.com/2013/06/26/ ... t-matters/

How Switching From French to English Changed Education in Rwanda
https://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/tre ... -in-rwanda

Espoo Greenlights Official Language Status for English
"New status for English as third official language in Espoo will boost business and competitiveness, say politicians."

http://newsnowfinland.fi/editors-pick/e ... or-english

Espoo is Finland’s second largest city.

"Euroamericans have devoted little time or energy to learning the history of the region, treating that history much the same as they do learning other languages. The simple equation prevails that if it's not in English, it's not worth learning; ..."
Anything But Mexican: Chicanos in Contemporary Los Angeles

This kind of attitude was not invented in the good ole USA. However, the phenomenon of Global English is both new and unprecedented in speed, size and scope. The long term consequences are difficult to predict.

[iguanamon]

Playing devil's advocate, are there any monolingual adult speakers of Basque, Catalan, Asturian and Galician in Spain today? When I was there recently, I didn't meet any. Not that I am against learning Iberian languages, I have three, but what would be the practical benefit of someone living and working in Castillian-speaking regions of Spain learning those four languages when those speaking the other languages can all speak Spanish just as well?

That's also one of the reasons why more British people don't learn Welsh and Scots Gaelic. They'd never meet a monolingual speaker in Wales or Scotland. Of course, there are nice (though impractical for most people) benefits for learning the language anyway, as I have done with Djudeo-espanyol/Ladino. There are no monolingual Ladino-speakers left and few native-speakers remain either, but Ladino gives me a unique entry to the culture that I wouldn't otherwise have.

Catalan probably has the highest number of second language learners of minority Iberian languages but even in Catalonia I had no problem speaking Spanish anywhere. There are several Native American languages in Guatemala. I couldn't have learned them all, but with Spanish I was able to communicate with people.

If I were a second language speaker of Russian, I would love that Russian would give me access to the former Soviet Central Asian Republics where English probably wouldn't get me anywhere near as far. In fact, that would be an incentive for me to learn Russian. The same goes for Mandarin in China and French in West Africa. I'd be glad to find French-speakers in Senegal, Mali and Burkina Faso.

Yes, languages that serve as lingua francae in the world do tend to diminish linguistic diversity but they also make it possible to be able to communicate with a wide range of people without having to learn a hundred languages. Of course, I see your point and, as a language-learner and one who loves linguistic diversity, it is difficult for me to argue against it. That's the ideal. I just don't believe the ideal is practical given the forces in place that tend to ensure that lingua francae exist for a reason.

I see that my argument can be construed to say, "why learn any language when my native (or second language) English will serve me just as well?". This is a fallacy. Using English, in my experience, won't gain a monolingual speaker little more than a superficial acquaintance with the local culture. That's why I learn languages, in order to go beyond the surface. Not everyone speaks English or, if they do, speak it sufficiently well despite its pervasiveness to give the entree into a culture and its people that I want.

[DaveBee]

Of course, there are nice (though impractical for most people) benefits for learning the language anyway, as I have done with Djudeo-espanyol/Ladino. There are no monolingual Ladino-speakers left and few native-speakers remain either, but Ladino gives me a unique entry to the culture that I wouldn't otherwise have.

I watched a Professor Arguelles video recently where he spoke about an interest in learning older versions of a language, to know it more intimately.

As I understand it Ladino is essentially medieval spanish, so it must give you that historical depth of understanding of Spanish.