Amglish In, Like, Ten Easy Lessons_ A Celebration of the New World Lingo - Arthur E. Rowse [49]
Ostler is not just another Brit who is angry at what the Americans have done to his royal tongue. He is a well-respected historical linguist who knows what has happened to languages of broad convenience such as Greek, Latin, and French, to mention only three of these rare linguistic birds.
One of his two main arguments is that English is being used primarily by elites, such as tourists and business travelers with special reasons for using the language at a time when increasing democratization and rising social equality tend to bring down such languages. But the impetus for English in the world comes from all levels of society, especially middle and lower ones.
HOW OSTLER ERRS
His other main argument is that instant translation technology has reached a point where a common language will not be needed for international contacts. The only problem is that machine translation has not—and never will—reach the point where it can completely replace human translation, which can be prohibitively expensive.
In addition, Ostler commits one huge error of omission that indicates that he may have been living on the moon for the past few decades: he essentially ignores the impact of the computer, a subject that is barely mentioned in more than three hundred pages of text, with only one reference to it in the index.
He also errs in saying that the only means of communication that really matters is written or printed. The huge increase in oral discourse through computerized devices doesn’t count for much in his eyes. In fact, languages change more in an oral sense than a written one.
GRADDOL’S COMPLAINT
In 2004, David Graddol, another respected British linguist, wrote an article for Science magazine in which he said that English no longer seemed to be the dominant language of the world. It’s still important, he said, but the share of the world’s population that speaks English as a native language was falling, at least in his view. He added that Chinese will continue to have the most native speakers, while English remains in second place.45
But his thesis does not take into account all the people who speak English as a second language. That number—an estimated 1.5 billion—is still growing and puts English far ahead of any other language. Two years later, Graddol wrote a paper for the British Council entitled Why Global English May Mean the End of English as a Foreign Language. In it, he acknowledged that English had become the world’s primary language for international communication. “But,” he said, “even as the number of English speakers expands further there are signs that the global predominance of the language may fade within the foreseeable future.”
Nine years earlier, the same Graddol had issued a monumental report for the same group. It was called The Future of English: A Guide to Forecasting the Popularity of the English Language in the 21st Century. On the first page, he asked, “Isn’t it obvious . . . that the English language will continue to grow in popularity and influence, without the need for special study or strategic management?” His answer was a begrudging “probably yes.”
Like many other Brits, he refuses to acknowledge the dominance of U.S. English or its influence on the informality of global English. At least David Crystal, author of the authoritative book The Stories of English, does, but only in the final, twentieth chapter.46
LANGUAGE OWNERS’ REMORSE?
These and many other worries about the future of English appear to be essentially laments from the previous owners of the language that they had nurtured for well over 1,500 years. After such a long love affair, it is only natural to dislike what the unpredictable and irresponsible Americans have been doing to trash such an old family member.
You don’t find Americans setting up big national councils to assess the future of American English. By the time such a study could be published, it would be grossly