Literature review draft

Here is the draft for my part of our groups literature review:

English is a widely spoken language in the world with more than 370 million people speaking it as their native language as of 2005 (Vista Wide World Languages and Cultures, 2008). But trends are showing that this figure is steadily declining (see fig 1.), with languages like Hindu and Spanish making up ground. In the journal “The Future of Language”, Graddol (2004, p. 1329-1331) suggests that ‘any look into the future must entertain the idea that soon the entire world will speak English’, but as a secondary language rather than a native one. Many see the future of language as a multi-lingual one, leaving monolingual English speakers at a disadvantage. Countries right across Europe are showing very high levels of English fluency (see fig 2.), where as figures for native English speaking countries learning a second language are quite low.

Despite this trend towards a multilingual society, wealths of information like the internet are somewhat discriminatory to people who are not fluent in English. As of November 2006, 29.7% of internet users were English (see fig 3.), with Chinese coming in second by a fair margin. It is interesting how a tool that is supposed to create a network, or community, actually does more to segregate people than it does connect them. An extreme example of this segregation is discussed by Flammia & Saunders (2007, p. 1899-1903), where ‘language played a major role in creating a digital divide between Ethiopia and the rest of the connected world.’ Ethiopia’s infrastructure minister labelled his country as “one of the ‘least connected’ countries in the world”, which he sees as being responsible for effectively closing “the door to economic opportunity” (Heavens, 2004).

Its incredible how English speakers take something like the internet for granted; where as other countries are being somewhat discriminated against because their native tongue is not catered for. On a global scale, language barriers are very hard to overcome, but on a local community scale it is definitely easier for solutions to be realised. The diversity of cultures in Australia means there are always going to be language difficulties at times, and certainly avenues to look into for further research. Areas like multilingual signage, cultural alienation, immigrant and indigenous literacy are a few of the gaps that could be explored.

Understanding language and interpreting language are two different things. The ways in which someone learns a language does not differ too much from person to person, but how someone interprets language and words can come down to a number of contributing factors and is usually manipulated by the person speaking them. “Words and phrases have the power to excite our spirits, to free our minds, and to help us envision innovative ideas.” (Millward, 2007) Leaders, and people in power, do at times use their language for the positive points raised in Millward’s journal. But while Millward mainly speaks about positive uses of language, using examples from people like Martin Luther King Jr. and Abraham Lincoln, Steven Poole, author of the book ‘Unspeak’, talks about the misuse of language by those in power to manipulate people.

“What do the phrases ‘pro-life,’ ‘intelligent design,’ and ‘the war on terror’ have in common? Each of them is a name for something that smuggles in a highly charged political opinion.” (Poole, 2006) Poole argues that the use of language of this nature is essentially propaganda, but most of the people hearing it fail to realise and hence buy into it. “’Climate change’ is less threatening than ‘global warming’: we say ‘ethnic cleansing’ when we mean ‘mass murder’” (Poole, 2006) By using fluffy, less provocative language, politicians can say and mean something without ever really saying it at all. While Poole is very biased towards the negative use of this type of language, it isn’t hard to realise just how much it goes on in the media.

Making people aware of this language is Poole’s objective through writing ‘Unspeak’. He also runs a web blog, of the same name, where he has a running commentary and analysis of political and world news. There is definitely the opportunity to push this awareness further. Poole looks at the issue in a very negative light, but there could be ways to raise awareness positively. It would be interesting to see who buys into this type of language. In the case of ‘climate change’, are people actively participating in sustainable practice after hearing it described in ‘unspeak’ terms, or would they rather know the real truth? Will truth lead to understanding, and will understanding lead to action?

Reference:

Language as Power on the Internet
Madelyn Flammia, Carol Saunders, 2007, ‘Language as Power on the Internet’, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, vol. 58, no. 12, p. 1899-1903.

Leaders Understand the Power of Words
Robert E. Millward, 2007, ‘Leaders Understand the Power of Words’, Journal of Leadership Studies, vol. 1, no. 3, p. 81-83.

The Future of Language
David Graddol, 2004, ‘The Future of Language’, Science, vol. 303, no. 5662, 27 February, p. 1329-1331.

Unspeak
Steven Poole, 2006, ‘Unspeak: how words become weapons, how weapons become a message, and how that message becomes reality’, Time Warner Book Group UK, London.

Vista Wide
Vista Wide World Languages and Cultures 2008, Vista Wide, viewed 9th March 2008, http://www.vistawide.com/languages/top_30_languages.htm