|
| Milena
Benini Getz |
| Ze
Drem Vil Finali Kum Tru!
Euro English: Lingua Franca or The Trumpet of Doom?
Ze drem vil finali kum tru. In all probability, all, or at least
the majority of you present here have seen the joke in question.
(For those who haven't, a reproduction is provided in the appendix.)
But, as the old saying goes, every successful joke is based to some
extent on truth. And the truth of the matter here is twofold: on
one side, there is, of course, the reaction to Euro-regulation of
everything. Although getting a bit stale, this argument is still
valid. If sausages and road signs can get unified, why not language?
On the other hand, the problem of the so-called ?Euro-English?,
the kind of English spoken by the majority of inhabitants of Europe,
is equally, if not more important for the joke, and for our purposes
here today.
One of the reasons for this is the fact that, despite efforts made
by various countries to preserve their languages among the select
few that will, hopefully, see the moment when the world?s collection
of languages dwindles down to some 300, Europe is rapidly moving
towards an, on average, bilingual population. If anyone feels that
proof is needed for this statement, it is enough to look around
this table. All native English speakers please raise a hand.
Thank you very much.
There are many reasons for this. For one, English is one of the
most linguistically developed languages of the world, i.e. its basics
are very easy to learn. The basics, however, act here as an opposite
from learning properly; many native speakers feel, one must admit
rather justly, that English is getting an undeserved treatment,
mauled and mutilated as it is by innumerable 'quick learners' who
pass a one-year course and feel that they have done enough. They
can communicate in English, indeed. But bare ability to make one
understood is not enough, especially not for literature. The mastery
of language, the nuance of expression, the refinement of the sentence
structure, all of these things get lost in the kind of reduction
which English is undergoing nowadays. And very little can be done
to prevent that.
English is, as some researchers put it, too accessible for its own
good. You don?t know the verb for something? Just use the noun.
It is almost enough to watch a few sub-titled films in English to
catch on to the basics. And it is quite impossible, short of living
on a desert island in the middle of nowhere, to avoid seeing films
in English. With methods of communication growing as quickly as
they do, not even desert islands are safe any more: the satellites
will find you wherever you hide, bringing you TV, radio and the
Internet and bombarding you with English-language products. This,
if you will excuse a strong word, cultural imperialism, coming from
the US, is present in many other segments of the society as well,
but those other segments are not our main concern today. What is,
however, is the impact this ?anglicisation? of Europe has on literature.
Because not even literature is spared. The enormous amount of production
in English, both from English-speaking countries and elsewhere,
further strengthens the position of English as a sort of lingua
franca of today. In small countries especially, the cheaper imported
books are already making significant inroads in the production and
sales of translations. The print-runs and facilities accessible
for English-language books alone make it impossible for local-language
editions to compete with imported ones even with big names and sure-fire
hits. Local authors and names slightly away from the mainstream
can?t even enter the race. The same situation applies to all cultural
areas where import is remotely possible: cinema and TV, but also
music, software, comics. So not only is European literature today
cornered in an English-language world; it is also cornered in an
English-referrenced, English-referencing world, which makes it even
less likely that the situation would change significantly in the
future.
One wonders, inevitably, what can be done to rectify this situation.
And, if one is willing to look on the controversial side of things,
should anything be done to rectify it at all? Let us start from
that.
The concept of a lingua franca, a common language uniting all educated
people, is not a new one in Europe. Works in Latin abounded in European
literature for centuries. Did the fact that those works were written
in a non-local language make, for example, Dante's work any less
valuable? Is the probably most famous example of macaroni Latin,
the Carmina Burana collection, less strong because it was put together
by half-finished students with less-than-perfect knowledge of their
chosen language? The answer to this is obvious: of course not. But?and
there always is one, isn?t there?it is also true that Dante?s Italian
writings are more revered today. An analysis far surpassing anything
we?ve got room for here would be needed to assess what this difference
of attitude is really based on. However, the sheer number of works
written in Latin indicates that Europe has long felt the need for
a common language. After all, in a region where many countries already
share a common language, while others operate with two or more languages
at the same time, the matter of communication, and finding appropriate
means for it, is extremely important.
So if we could have done it once, why not do it again? Why bother
with expensive language-preservation projects when we could just
create EuroEnglish and chatter merrily away? Many people, in fact,
do perceive the situation as such: the phrase 'English is the most
important language in the world' or something along those lines
can be heard in any language-related discussion. From personal experience,
I can vouch that at least 50% of potential English language students
decide on English as their chosen field not because they like English
or linguistics (or, God forbid, culture) but simply because they
feel English is the most useful. Whether they are right or wrong,
only time will tell. However, one cannot help but wonder what are
going to be the final effects of this unification.
Because, whether we like it or not, language is much more than just
a simple means of communication: it creates ideas as much as it
helps translate them. And unlike Latin, which had no source-nation
when it was used as lingua franca, English has a very active source-nation.
A number of them. However, it can be said with relative certainty
that even with the new interconnectivity, the influence of Canada,
Australia and even UK remains all but negligible on a wider scale.
And that fact brings us back to the first question.
How can European literature, and European culture, defend itself
from the all-pervasive influence of American culture at the beginning
of the new millennium? The answer is, it can't. As we have established
earlier, the elements of American culture are far too ingrained
in our everyday environment to be avoided. However, considering
Europe's long history of influences and counter-influences, it shouldn?t
really be considered a problem. True, some languages are getting
less exposure than others. True, some cultural concepts are changing.
But it is only natural that they should change. It is, after all,
the beginning of a new milennium. So that, just as Europe is adapting
its adopted universal language to the individual needs and habits
of particular cultures and nations, it can be expected that the
same process will happen with the imported values.
Or, in other words, ze drem vil alvais kum tru.
Appendix: EuroEnglish
The European Language Commission has just announced an agreement
whereby English will be the official language of the EU rather than
German, which was the other possibility. As part of the negotiations,
Her Majesty's govt conceded that English spelling had some room
for improvement and has accepted a 5 year phase in plan that would
be known as "EuroEnglish":
In the first year, "s" will replace the soft "c"
..sertainly, this will make the sivil servants jump with joy. The
hard "c" will be dropped in favor of the "k". This should klear
up konfusion and keyboards kan have 1 less letter.
There will be growing publik enthusiasm in the sekond year, when
the troublesome "ph" will be replaced with the "f". This will make
words like "fotograf" 20% shorter.
In the 3rd year, publik akseptanse of the new spelling kan be expekted
to reach the stage where more komplikated changes are possible.
Governments will enkourage the removal of double letters, which
have always ben a deterent to akurate speling. Also, al wil agre
that the horible mes of the silent "e"'s in the language is disgracful,
and they should go away.
By the 4th yar, peopl wil be reseptiv to steps such as replasing
"th" with "z" and "w" with "v". During ze fifz year, ze unesesary
"o" kan be dropd from vords kontaiining "ou" and similar changes
vud of kors be aplid to ozer kombinations of leters.
After zis fifz yer, ve vil hav a reli sensibl riten styl. Zer vil
be no mor trubls or difikultis and evrivun vil find it ezi tu understand
ech ozer.
ZE DREM VIL FINALI KUM TRU!!
|