WP1 Final Draft English: The Great Unifier
Strolling down the streets of Lusaka, Zambia, one is keen to observe the abundance of advertisements and notices displayed in the English language. Why is there a preponderance of English texts in this landlocked country in Southern Africa? The answer lies in the power of a lingua franca. While some may argue in favor of placing emphasis on learning one’s native tongue, encouraging proficiency in the English language around the world would promote increased unity by allowing for communication between various ethnic groups because having a shared mode of communication facilitates the breakdown of tribal and ethnic divisions in order to collectively advance the interests of a country.
As a result of the legacies of British colonialism, English was a natural candidate for becoming the unifying language in many parts of the world. At its peak, the British Empire spanned around a fifth of the world’s population from modern day Zambia to Qatar to India. Naturally, English played a significant role in its colonies and was the common language among various groups. For example, there are 72 ethnic groups and over 70 local languages in Zambia, formerly known as Northern Rhodesia. After gaining independence from Great Britain, the newly formed Zambian government selected English as the official language. Prominent Zambian economist Dambisa Moyo mentions in the introduction of her book Dead Aid that her parents, who hailed from different tribes, conversed largely in English (Moyo, 2010). In Zambia today, a common saying is “The world is English,” emphasizing the belief in the inherent advantages of speaking English (Deutsche Welle, 2013).
While the effects of colonialism played a significant role in advancing the status of English, the perception of the language as a relatively neutral lingua franca has further elevated the importance of English in easing ethnic tensions. While English may be viewed at times as the language of the former “oppressor,” in countries overflowing with dozens of ethnic groups and sometimes thousands of native languages, English provides a neutral medium by which members from different tribes or speakers of different languages can communicate without implying the superiority of one ethnic group over another.
In essence, the adoption of English as a mode of communication can lead to the disintegration of ethnic and linguistic divisions. As we have seen in the past several decades, upon gaining independence, many former colonies have found themselves mired in conflict due to ethnic tensions that they could not overcome due to the strong tribalism that permeated the cultures. Often, leaders in power that came from a specific tribe or ethnic group advanced the interests of their own group and saw themselves as the leader of their own tribe or ethnic group rather than of every resident of the nation. To add on to that, the plurality of languages that are a natural concurrence of ethnic diversity only furthers the division between tribes and make it difficult to unify the country. When the language of one tribe is designated as a national language, the native speakers of that language are granted an implicit sense of superiority, a sense that they have more claim to the country than the non-native speakers. Native speakers of the official language have a steep advantage in rising to positions of power and privilege. Whereas when English is promoted to become the official language, or at least becomes an important language to facilitate communication, it is typically the second or third language for everyone. Consequently, no specific tribe or ethnic group will benefit, but mainly those who strive to master English. Specifically, equal opportunity would largely be expanded to speakers of all languages, and this would especially benefit the minority groups of a country.
Notably, following Indian independence in 1947, there was much debate over what was to be the language of the government of the country. Even though many argued in favor of Hindi as it was the most widely spoken language, Bhimrao Ramji Abedkar, an architect of the Indian constitution, opposed the motion. Abedkar asserted that since Hindi speakers were far greater in numbers in the North, establishing Hindi as the language of government would potentially alienate the millions of people who lived in the South (Mohan 2021). If India was to maintain its hard-earned independence as a unified nation, Abedkar believed that advancing the employment of English was to play a crucial role in ensuring the development of India. Thus, while Hindi remains the official language, English is used by the government for official purposes. Here, we see that English was given an important role in post-independence India in order to level the playing field for Hindi and non-Hindi speakers as well as to promote the idea that no Indian, due to their native language, was inferior or superior to another.
Along the same lines, the status of English rose considerably in post-apartheid South Africa, a nation with eleven official languages. Given the years of oppression led by the Afrikaaner government, Afrikaans was and still is perceived as the language of oppression by the Black population. However, delegating a tribal tongue to national status would only embitter competing tribes and sow the seeds of conflict in an already precarious state. Therefore, the African National Congress, the ruling party of Nelson Mandela, designated English as the language of communication as English “has typically been seen as the language of liberation and Black unity” (Gough, 1996). The continued designation of Afrikaans as the national language would have implied the superiority of the Afrikaner “tribe” over all other tribes. Even today the same conflict continues to play out in various settings. In 2016, the prestigious Stellenbosch University, which has a long and illustrious history within the Afrikaaner community of producing distinguished intellectuals, revised its language policy to diminish the role of Afrikaans in favor of English in order to accomodate the rising number of non-Afrikaans speaking students (Stellenbosch University, 2016). The change followed massive protests from students that decried that not only did the usage of Afrikaans ostracize those who didn’t speak Afrikaans, but it was a lasting reminder of the oppression inflicted by the Afrikaaner government which sought to impose Afrikaans supremacy during apartheid. Once again, English was viewed by the university as a neutral language that would allow for all South Africans to prosper, not simply a select group on the basis of their ethnic or tribal heritage.
Although some may argue that prioritizing English inevitably leads to an estrangement of the native tongues, the blame lies not in the usage of English, but often in the education system. An argument made against the teaching of English in Zambia is that increasingly, Zambian children are neither fluent in English nor their native tongues. Nevertheless, the solution lies not in discarding English completely; rather, a reform of the education system. Currently, English is employed as the primary medium of instruction beginning in Grade 1. Taking into account that less than 2% of Zambians are native English speakers, the current policy is far from wise, as forcing children to learn course material in another language– English– a few years after they have just begun to even speak would clearly only breed confusion. Naturally, the parents are frustrated when children come home speaking broken English and are unable to converse fluently in Nyanja or their native tongues. The faults of the education system should not distract from English’s role as a unifying vernacular. It is the education system that should be reformed in order to ensure that children are proficient in both their native tongues and English. In fact, if English were to be tossed, that would only leave an ominous recipe for disaster. A debate over which language should be the prevailing medium of instruction would inevitably prevail, potentially leading to serious conflict between the various tribes.
As of the moment, globalization remains on an upward trajectory, serving as a catalyst for growing diversity in many parts of the world. With diversity comes a beautiful fusion of multiculturalism but also the severe potential for misunderstandings and the exploitation of ethnic divisions to benefit select groups. Since countries that are ethnically and linguistically diverse often fall into conflict, English has and will continue to play a pivotal role in uniting and improving societies around the world by acting as a bridge between different ethnic bodies to all members of a diverse nation to communicate and collaborate with the shared goal of doing what is best for everyone.
Works Cited
Deutsche Welle. “Zambia Grapples with Language Challenge: DW: 14.02.2013.” DW.COM, https://www.dw.com/en/zambia-grapples-with-language-challenge/a-16598662.
Hillman, Sarah, and Emilio Ocampo Eibenschutz. “English, Super-Diversity, and Identity in the State of Qatar.” World Englishes, Apr. 2018.
Mohan, Peggy, et al. “English Language Gained Power in India Only after the British Left.” ThePrint, 6 June 2021, https://theprint.in/pageturner/excerpt/english-language-gained-in-power-in-india-only-after-the-british-left/672734/.
Moyo, Dambisa. “Preface.” Dead Aid Why Aid Makes Things Worse and How There Is Another Way for Africa, Penguin Books, London U.a., 2010.
Penny Silva. “South African English: Oppressor or Liberator?” The Major Varieties of English, Nov. 1997.
“Revision of the Language Policy (2016) of Stellenbosch University.” Stellenbosch University, 2016.
Silva, Penny. A Dictionary of South African English on Historical Principles. Oxford University Press, in Association with the Dictionary Unit for South African English, 1996.
