Monday, May 09, 2005

English it must be

This is an attempt at stating the obvious and making the courageous conclusion that International English must be the common language of Europe.

The problem with Europe today is that it remains an intergovernmental organization of member states stuck in their monolingual narrowness: most states face the same economic and social problems, yet there is no collaboration on solutions due to language barriers. Insightful editorials by locally renowned intellectuals are of no value to the outside world because they are published in the local language only. Denmark has no clue what Germans are up to, whom really know nothing about how Danes deal with their own immigration or traffic issues.

There is a lot of potential for creating synergy between European countries. To enable this from grassroots level, Europeans need to embrace and encourage the teaching of a common language, spoken and understood by all. If this common language was chosen to be Esperanto, all governmental services and publications at all levels must be offered in Esperanto as well as local languages, all products must be labelled accordingly, all public spaces must be minimally bilingual, and most importantly all newspapers must publish in Esperanto as well as in their usual language of publication.

Outside Europe, since hardly anybody speaks Danish or German or Esperanto, the only view on Europe is through the British prism.. in English. However the UK is "frequently not in the mainstream of European thinking but rather the odd one out": the world was surprised that the EURO was successfully launched given the tone of the euro sceptic British media (See 'World has a distorted view of Europe').

This leaves only one option to improve both intra-Europe cross-communication and international communication: International English.

The problem with languages is that they represent both cultural identity and a mean to communicate. Europeans must embrace English as a mean to communicate, and their own mother tongue as a mean to express their unique identity. Which to use primarily depends on the audience, usually the public versus the private sphere.

Measures to 'protect' or encourage linguistic diversity are also necessary as long as they are linked to linguistic groups, not territorial space or historical antecedents, and that the measures are rooted in respect and understanding, not ethnocentricity (see the Universal Declaration of Linguistic Rights).

Under this, public spaces, product and services, and civil services would always be available in English, as well as in any other local languages; a local language being the language spoken by linguistic communities in a given area, independently of the Nation State tradition.

2 comments:

  1. okay, sounds reasonable, I second your motion...

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi guys,
    looking forward to see you soon and also dicuss these issues.

    Anyway I have my doubts reg. English as official language of Europe. The increased globalisation will anyway push English as a preffered language in international context. The national public space should be reserved to local languages..

    Why should we dinimish the use of local languages....I thought that you shared the vision of diversity :)

    And btw. esperanto sux!

    Take care,
    Mirza

    ReplyDelete