English and Linguistic Imperialism

Linguistic imperialism or language imperialism is occasionally defined as "the

transfer of a dominant language to other people". This language "transfer" (or rather
unilateral imposition) comes about because of imperialism. The transfer is considered to
be a sign of power; traditionally military power but also, in the modern world, economic
power. Aspects of the dominant culture are usually transferred along with the language.
In spatial terms, indigenous languages are employed in the function of official (state)
languages in Eurasia, while only non-indigenous imperial (European) languages in the
"Rest of the World" In the modern world, linguistic imperialism may also be considered
in the context of international development, affecting the standard by which
organizations like the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank evaluate
the trustworthiness and value of structural adjustment loans
Dr. Phillipson argues that the defining characteristics of linguistic imperialism are:

1. As a form of linguicism, which manifests in favoring the dominant language over

another along similar lines as racism and sexism.
2. As a structurally manifested idea, where more resources and infrastructure are
given to the dominant language
3. As being ideological, in that it encourages beliefs that the dominant language
form is more prestigious than others. These ideas are hegemonic and
internalized and naturalized as being "normal".
4. As intertwined with the same structure as imperialism in culture, education,
media, and politics.
5. As having an exploitative essence, which causes injustice and inequality
between those who use the dominant language and those who do not.
6. As having a subtractive influence on other languages, in that learning the
dominant language is at the expense of others.
7. As being contested and resisted, because of these factors

Linguistic imperialism is the imposition of one language on speakers of other

languages. It is also known as linguistic nationalism, linguistic dominance, and
language imperialism. In our time, the global expansion of English has often been
cited as the primary example of linguistic imperialism.
The term "linguistic imperialism" originated in the 1930s as part of a critique
of Basic English and was reintroduced by linguist Robert Phillipson in his
monograph "Linguistic Imperialism" (Oxford University Press, 1992). In that
study, Phillipson offered this working definition of English linguistic imperialism:
"the dominance asserted and maintained by the establishment and continuous
reconstitution of structural and cultural inequalities between English and other
languages." Phillipson viewed linguistic imperialism as a subtype of linguicism.
Phillipson defines English linguistic imperialism as "the dominance of English... asserted and
maintained by the establishment and continuous reconstitution of structural and cultural inequalities
between English and other languages." English is often called a worldwide "lingua franca", but
Phillipson argues that when its dominance leads to a linguicide, it can be more aptly titled a
"lingua frankensteinia” by his view.
Phillipson's theory supports the historic spread of English as an international language and that
language's continued dominance, particularly in postcolonial settings such as Wales, Scotland,
Ireland, India, Pakistan, Uganda, Zimbabwe, etc., but also increasingly in "neo-colonial" settings
such as continental Europe. His theory draws mainly on Johan Galtung's imperialism theory, Antonio
Gramsci's conspiracy theory, and in particular on his notion of cultural hegemony.
A central theme of Phillipson's theory is the complex hegemonic processes which, he asserts,
continue to sustain the pre-eminence of English in the world today. His book analyzes the British
Council's use of rhetoric to promote English, and discusses key tenets of English applied
linguistics and English-language-teaching methodology. These tenets hold that:

 English is best taught monolingually ("the monolingual fallacy");

 the ideal teacher is a native speaker ("the native-speaker fallacy");
 the earlier English is taught, the better the results ("the early-start fallacy");
 the more English is taught, the better the results ("the maximum-exposure fallacy")
 if other languages are used much, standards of English will drop ("the subtractive fallacy").
According to Phillipson, those who promote English—organizations such as the British Council,
the IMF and the World Bank, and individuals such as operators of English-language schools—use
three types of argument:

 Intrinsic arguments describe the English language as "providential", "rich", "noble" and

"interesting". Such arguments tend to assert what English is and what other languages are not.
 Extrinsic arguments point out that English is well-established: that it has many speakers, and
that there are trained teachers and a wealth of teaching material.
 Functional arguments emphasize the usefulness of English as a gateway to the world.
Other arguments for English are:

 its economic utility: it enables people to get access to some technologies

 its ideological function: it is said as standing for modernity;
 its status might be seen as symbol for material advance and efficiency.
Another theme in Phillipson's work is "linguicism"—the kind of prejudice which can lead
to endangered languages becoming extinct or losing their local eminence due to the rise and
competing prominence of English

Examples and Observations of Linguistic Imperialism

"The study of linguistic imperialism can help to clarify whether the winning of
political independence led to a linguistic liberation of Third World countries, and
if not, why not. Are the former colonial languages a useful bond with the
international community and necessary for state formation and national unity
internally? Or are they a bridgehead for Western interests, permitting the
continuation of a global system of marginalization and exploitation? What is the
relationship between linguistic dependence (continued use of a European
language in a former non-European colony) and economic dependence (the
export of raw materials and import of technology and know-how)?"
(Phillipson, Robert. "Linguistic Imperialism." Concise Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics,
ed. by Margie Berns, Elsevier, 2010.)
"The rejection of the linguistic legitimacy of a language—any language used
by any linguistic community—in short, amounts to little more than an example of
the tyranny of the majority. Such a rejection reinforces the long tradition and
history of linguistic imperialism in our society. The harm, though, is done not
only to those whose languages we reject, but in fact to all of us, as we are made
poorer by an unnecessary narrowing of our cultural and linguistic universe."
(Reagan, Timothy. Language Matters: Reflections on Educational Linguistics. Information
Age, 2009.)
"The fact that…no uniform British empire-wide language policy developed tends
to disconfirm the hypothesis of linguistic imperialism as responsible for the
spread of English…"
"The teaching of English by itself…, even where it did take place, is not sufficient
grounds to identify the policy of the British empire with linguistic imperialism."
(Brutt-Griffler, Janina. World English: A Study of Its Development. Multilingual Matters,
2002.)
Linguistic Imperialism in Sociolinguistics
"There is by now a well-entrenched and very respectable branch
of sociolinguistics, which is concerned with describing the world of globalization
from the perspective of linguistic imperialism and 'linguicide' (Phillipson 1992;
Skutnabb-Kangas 2000), often based on particular ecological metaphors. These
approaches…oddly assume that wherever a 'big' and 'powerful' language such as
English 'appears' in a foreign territory, small indigenous languages will 'die.'
There is, in this image of sociolinguistic space, place for just one language at a
time. In general, there seems to be a serious problem with the ways in which
space is imagined in such work. In addition, the actual sociolinguistic details of
such processes are rarely spelled out—languages can be used in vernacular or
in lingua franca varieties and so create different sociolinguistic conditions for
mutual influencing."
(Blommaert, Jan. The Sociolinguistics of Globalization. Cambridge University Press,
2010.)
Colonialism and Linguistic Imperialism
"Anachronistic views of linguistic imperialism, which see as important only the
power asymmetry between the former colonial nations and the nations of the
'third world,' are hopelessly inadequate as an explanation of linguistic realities.
They especially ignore the fact that 'first world' countries with strong languages
seem to be under just as much pressure to adopt English, and that some of the
harshest attacks on English have come from countries [that] have no such
colonial legacy. When dominant languages feel they are being dominated,
something much bigger than a simplistic conception of power relations must be
involved."
(Crystal, David. English as a Global Language, 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press,
2003.)