A Virtual Empire? English in global multimedia

Introduction

For non-English speakers around the globe, the presence of the English language on the Internet might seem overwhelming. The dominance of English is so prominent that the Internet could just as well be named the ‘Englishnet’ (Fouser et al. 2000). English is the number one language online and is currently used by 478 million of a total of 1.7 billion online users (Internet World Stats, 2009). One can say that the future promises (or threatens with) a monopoly of this language, competent to dominate the world of popular culture, business and technology. Throughout this essay we will look at arguments from several perspectives, moving with the dynamic world of technology fanatics and withstanding the influence with purists of English and minority languages. From one perspective, this essay argues that English potentially weakens foreign languages, as it creeps within tech-talk of new generations. From another perspective the widespread use of English in media supports bilingualism and enriches current tongues.

On account of an increasing popularity and usability, the Internet progressed into a common discursive space (Papacharissi, 2002). Borders between countries seem to blur or even disappear in cyberspace, which consequently is promoted as something that Jones (1997) calls a  ‘new public space’. He argues that internet-based technologies provide a means for discussion between geographically distant people, but that it frequently fragmentizes discourse at the same time. Papacharissi (2002) mentions examples like disjointed conversation style observed in chat rooms and even remarks that the Internet actually decentralizes communication. This is, in my opinion, generalized and relies largely on factors like bandwidth speed, software compatibility between users and usability. Communication through chat rooms can therefore not be compared with a videoconference in High Definition video quality. That English however could cause decentralization is plausible, as it’s range enables discourse to be spread out over the whole of cyberspace.

Although the hegemony of online English seems obvious to global users alike, it remains uncertain if English weakens, replaces or enriches other languages. In the light of research in combined fields of linguistics, globalization and media, this essay discusses whether English is truly capable of influencing minority languages around the world through popular multimedia channels. It places arguments about the capability of English to replace minority languages, and subsequently the unification of technology users. In a case study, we will examine Dutch, the native language of the Netherlands and the influence of English forms of multimedia. This essay attempts to raise awareness, not of a threatening linguistic revolution, but of the extend of discourse about the matter in contemporary language theories.

Language hegemony in cyberspace and beyond

A position as the dominant Internet language has enabled English to permeate through the world of technology. However, some experience this as problematic, a degradation of other languages. Communication by e-mail or cell phone is argued to be ‘indexical’ and blameworthy of deterritorializing speakers by Marc Jaquemet (2005). In my opinion, these particular ways of communication, despite the fact that they are depersonalized and biologically unnatural, in a sense contribute to the education of the user. It provides the possibility to expand territories, perhaps not in a geographical sense, but certainly within the ‘virtual sphere’ (Papacharissi, 2002). Without doubt, increase of converging Internet and mobile telephone technologies had had a major impact on the way we use written English (Katamba, 1994).

In popular culture including music, television and cinema, it has been branded a ‘cool’ language, recited in by film celebrities and sung in by pop artists. “‘Trendy’ youth culture, in particular, recognizes the consumer appeal of English, which is copiously used in brand names, in advertising, in street signs and in popular media the world over” (Svartvik and Leech, 2006). A significant feature of English is its versatility in comparison to Asian languages for it combines phonographic and logographic elements, to be adjusted by users in any desired fashion. ”As the most commonly used language on the Internet and in computer-mediated communication, English is subject to the largest number of idiosyncratic additions and deviations from the largest number of users” (Fouser et al., 2000). Francis Katamba (1994) argues that language used in e-mail and texting has enriched our communicative repertoire. According to him, it has added characteristics used in spoken language, and translated it for modern day use in. For instance, limited length messages on mobile phones or Twitter. These types of messages converge spoken and written English into a modern form that renews constantly within the dynamics of cyberspace.

Dutch, Dunglish, English

The Netherlands is one of many countries where the English language has developed. It made its way into Dutch society through a range of channels: international companies, computer games of the 1980’s, British and American pop music, but largely, technologies in this age of computation. Both the USA and the UK caused this, respectively, Americanization and Anglicisation that provides the Dutch with an increasing knowledge of English. At the end of World War II, when the Netherlands was liberated by American, British and Canadian troops, products and habits from these countries soon set an example in Dutch culture. Linguistic influence from the US manifested through media such as cinema, brand names, and the Internet, whereas Britain was celebrated for literature and popular music. All imported products, plays and films made their way into the Netherlands, preserved their original English names, and the language’s ‘coolness’ was born. It was therefore that around the computational turn the English language words like ‘Internet’, ‘e-mail’ and ‘games’ predominantly remained in English.

This language ‘invasion’ is not the first one to sweep the Netherlands. In the 16^th century, languages like Latin and French had the same influence as English has in contemporary times. Subsequently, Dutch started embedding words from both languages, which nowadays are widely used in the Netherlands (Genootschap Onze Taal, 2009). The question remains if English has an equal effect, a thought alerting Dutch language purists, who dub it an “English Invasion”. On television, program titles such as Life & Cooking, So You Wannabe a Popstar and Holland’s Got Talent does make one wonder if the country is on the verge of a linguistic revolution. In recent Dutch politics, politicians are currently pleading for introducing English lessons to the education system for children at the age of four to prepare them for international business and communication. Those who did not grew up speaking English, verbalize in ‘Dunglish’ in attempting so, which is a portmanteau of Dutch and English and signifies improper direct translations from Dutch. English users, and especially ones of older generations, share this inexperienced use of ‘techno’ English. Svartvik and Leech (2006) argue that in this so-called ‘e-revolution’ the vocabulary of English has been extended in many ways, even transfiguring exiting words as ‘wizard, ‘cookies’ and ‘virus’. Older generations and language purists in both English speaking countries and the Netherlands fear that these practises will somehow undermine the standard language, diminishing a long literary heritage. Modernists accredit the e-revolution for infusing the language with vigour and creativity.

Employing a relatively small language like Dutch, is forcing the Netherlands to open up for these linguistic influences, especially for the good of international business and education. In gaining competence in English, many countries in Northern Europe have a head start; brands, undubbed (and subtitled) films and a strong link as another Germanic language contribute to an advanced tradition of learning the lingo. Svartvik and Leech (2006) even note: “In the near future, it has been predicted that all Dutch speakers will be bilingual in Dutch and English.” Here, bilingualism is presented as a new option for the future course of what was previously called an ‘English Invasion’: cooperation between languages, working parallel, but in separate fields. After all, even though English has made its way into areas such as business and technology in the Netherlands, Dutch is predominantly used for all other fields. Nonetheless, the former areas have enabled English to settle deep within Dutch social culture, which has potential to apply irreversible alteration to the ancient linguistic heritage of the Netherlands. As for smaller minority languages, for example the Dutch local Frisian tongue, the Internet offers opportunities to spread written communication in dialects and languages that previously were used principally for oral communication. Endangered languages can benefit from the Web, which works as a medium in the search of fellow dialect speakers (Svartvik and Leech, 2006, Warschauer et al., 2007).

Globalisation

As mentioned above, the English language has been able to expand through the technological/electronic revolution. Svartvik and Leech (2006) draw upon two other overlapping eras in world history that have proved to be beneficial for the language, which are imperial expansion and globalization. “…These three processes have piggy-backed on one another so that, for example, the electronic revolution has given birth to the Internet, and thereby generated e-mail, e-commerce, e-business and numerous other ‘e-activities’ which further caused globalization (Svartvik and Leech, 2006). In the early years of the Internet, when users foresaw its immense popularity, a feared result was that it would encourage global use of English to such a degree that other languages would be crowded out (Warschauer et al., 2007). Certain language upholders have made serious arrangements in order to prevent infiltration of English. Warschauer (et al., 2007) notes how “ Local opposition to English online has sprung up most notably in France, where a 1994 law mandates that all advertising must be in French and where the Finance Minister reportedly banned the use in his ministry of English-derived terms such as “email” or “start-up,” in favor of French terms such as courier électronique or jeune pousse.” The province of Quebec in Canada has even introduced the Office québécois de la langue française (OQLF), better known as the Language Police, in order to align on international French and fight Anglicisms. In this and many other places, feelings of patriotism eventually prevent second languages from penetrating the heritage of a native tongue.

Information accessibility for foreign users

As the Internet was initially designed by and for Americans, it utilised merely the Roman character sets, which was why English became the default language on the Net (Svartvik and Leech, 2006). In 2000, Robert J. Fouser (et al.) notes that this forced users in both Japan and Korea to exchange computer-mediated messages through public and commercial online systems. Unfortunately, little of this activity ended up on the actual Internet since few computers in the western world are programmed to write these languages. Nowadays, operating systems are including these character assets that has opened a world of opportunities for communication from Asia. With sophisticated online tools such as Google Translation, the accessibility of English web sites has significantly improved. Furthermore, by engaging with this language, users are able to utilise the logographic elements in English that provide a greater visual variety and makes it easier for readers to follow lines of text (Fouser et al., 2000). Think for example about expressing emotion through so-called ‘Smileys’, which was made possible by adding western characters on Asian computers; a process named ‘ASCII-ization’. This refers to the American Standard Code for Information Interchange, the character set on western computers (Warschauer et al., 2007). Vice versa, the demand of language compatibility for diasporas around the globe causes North American software companies to supply their products in a range of languages, even for the local market. Hence, this electronic revolution happening to English is also happening to other major languages (Svartvik and Leech, 2006). Popular websites like eBay, BBC News and Youtube have chosen to rather focus on accessibility instead of promoting English and are available online in many smaller languages like Irish and Czech.

The world’s biggest websites are currently built to cover an impressive amount of tongues and tools like Google Translation provide means through which the majority of bilinguals and monolinguals find their information online. In Languages in a Globalising World, Mark Fettes (2003) draws on the fact that “Before the advent of high-speed desktop computers and internet connections, machine translation and multilingual software existed primarily as specialised and expensive series for large corporations and governments.” As the Web gets cheaper and usability becomes more compatible, many users find way to read a foreign language effortlessly. Unfortunately this does not apply for countries with very small online representation, which constructs a certain dependency on these online translation tools. “If current trends are representative, the center of gravity of the Internet will remain in North America and Europe for the foreseeable future. Africa, and most of its linguistic diversity, is likely to remain out of reach of the Internet” (Paolillo, 2007). Zizi Papacharissi (2002) argues that the Internet in fact decentralizes communication. In a sense, this statement is plausible as the Internet could geographically spread a single conversation out over the entire globe. Although, due to the increase of multilingualism on the Net, dispersed speakers of certain languages (ex. French in Quebec, Louisiana, France and the Democratic Republic of the Congo) are able to converge in virtuality.

It is only a matter of time before every single webpage will be readable by everyone. Online translation software is progressing towards compatibility with every written language in the world by translating entire websites with a single mouse click. Online, monolingualism is no sin as long as one is speaking the right language. Largely, translation tools diminish all efforts of learning other languages. Translators on cell phones and MP3 players ensure smooth communication on the street and on holiday locations.

Learning a major language; time and tools

Do we need to learn another major language anymore? Mark Fettes (2003) argues we do not: “…the investment of time and energy to acquire limited proficiency in several standard languages will increasingly be seen as costing more and delivering less than high-quality professional services.” He predicts that consequently, seekers of active bilingual competence automatically converge on the most widespread second language, which in many cases is English. Plausibly, this focus strengthens world English. Yet, he argues; “translation into and out of English also constitutes the most tempting market for language technology, meaning that the marginal benefits of learning English are likely to fall faster than those for learning other languages” (Fettes, 2003). In short, Internet users who wish to start learning a major world language will probably make use of the online tools instead of spending costly time on intensive education.

Although the electronic revolution caused an increase in language diversity on the web, the urge for global communication does not ensure that people from different cultural backgrounds will also be more understanding of each other (Papacharissi, 2002). Cultural differences are not viable to be filtered out by translation software and online immersion into someone else’s culture has not yet reached the point of sophistication to manage this. For now, Internet culture offers a rich alternative for real-life contact with others when there is no physical opportunity available. To successfully master a second language, however, one must behave appropriately to that specific culture, use it in daily life and think in the language (Todd and Walker, 2000). Once a future Internet is able to persuades learning users to do so, we will be looking at a stronger hegemony of world English.

Conclusion

As an important new communication medium, the Internet is bound to have an important long-term effect on language use. As most of the information online is written, this means that either a common language or improved translation tools will be necessary. Throughout this essay, varying arguments and theories were engaged with of both native and non-native English speakers. It is clear that learning a language online can improve global communication, even though it does not greatly contribute to actually learning about the attached culture. Svartvik and Leech (2006) note how the appetite for learning English had little to do with love of the language; more with the opportunities for self-betterment and prestige this certain language can carry. Furthermore, they present us with the argument that English does not overtake a country’s social culture but rather makes it bilingual. In the 16^th century, the Netherlands succumbed to Latin and French language under pressure of neighbouring countries, hence the fears of this happening again in this era of computation.

Jones (1997) argued that internet-based technologies frequently fragmentizes discourse, so the question is whether dispersed online conversation can be acknowledged a proper use of language. Others have noted that the boundary between any spoken and written language gets blurred in email, which overlaps with texting to some extent (Katamba, 1994). The English language itself seems to evolve because of this e-revolution, so one can argue if it is really the ‘English’ language that dominates, or merely a techno-dialect. Some researchers like Francis Katamba (1994) find that this language (or dialect) enriches the vocabulary of many Internet users. This would mean that a shared online language could contribute to improved communication around the world. That this will actually occur remains uncertain at this point. “Most contemporary linguistic studies are still under the influence of the Babel myth: of the ideological desire to maintain a linguistic boundaries, allocate people to their respective territories, connect languages with the emergence of the sense of national identity,” argues Marco Jaquemet (2005). It is indeed this ideology that triggers the arousal of fanatics of the e-revolution, of who many support a single common language (which most of them already master). It is by intricate research to determine whether an online language monopoly is either good or bad. Substantiated arguments argue that English is well on the way to becoming the first ‘global language’ (Svartvik and Leech, 2006). As mentioned earlier, this does not necessarily mean that it attempts to overtake minority languages. The actual ‘death’ of a language in general is rare in this day and age, as the Internet is able to shelter it, as it did with Old Norse and Egyptian hieroglyphs. If a linguistic revolution seems imminent, supporters of minority languages are likely to raise awareness and commence political discourse. The online dominance of English is clear, but the Internet welcomes more than a single culture and the online language is therefore not yet on its way of becoming a true Virtual Empire.

References

Fettes, Mark (2003) ‘The geostrategies of interlingualism’ in Languages in a Globalising World by Jaques Maurais and Michael A. Morris, Cambridge University Press.

Fouser, Robert J., Inoue, Narahiko and Lee, Chungmin (2000) ‘The pragmatics of orality in English, Japanese and Korean computer-mediated communication’ in Words on the Web by Lyn Pemberton and Simon Shurville, Exeter: Intellect Books.

Genootschap Onze Taal (Our Language Association, 2009) ‘Verengelsing’ (Englization), online, http://www.onzetaal.nl/dossier/verengelsing/, [Accessed on 12 March 2010].

Internet World Stats (2009) ‘Internet World Users by Language; Top 10 Languages’, online, http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats7.html [accessed on April 6, 2010].

Jaquemet, Marco (2005) ‘Transidiomatic practices: Language and power in the age of globalization’, Language and Communication, 25

Jones, S.G. (1997) ‘The Internet and its Social Landscape’, in S.G. Jones (ed.) Virtual Culture: Identity and Communication in Cybersociety, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Katamba, Francis (1994) ‘English Words, Structure, History, Usage’, Oxon: Routledge.

Paolillo, John C. (2007) ‘How Much Multiligualism? Language Diversity on the Internet’ in The Multilingual Internet, language culture, and communication online by Danet, Brenda and Herring, Susan C, Oxford University Press

Papacharissi, Zizi (2002) ‘The Virtual Sphere: The Internet as a public sphere’, New Media Society, 4; 9, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Svartvik, Jan and Leech, Geoffrey (2006) ‘English; one tongue, many voices’, Basingstoke: Palgrave McMillan.

Todd, Zazie and Walker, Stephanie (2000) ‘Multilingualism on the Net: language attitudes and use of talkers’ in Words on the Web by Lyn Pemberton and Simon Shurville, Exeter: Intellect Books.

Warschauer, Mark, El Said, Ghada R. and Zohry, Ayman (2007) ‘Language Choice Online, Globalization and Identity in Egypt’ in The Multilingual Internet, language culture, and communication online by Danet, Brenda and Herring, Susan C, Oxford University Press