Wednesday, June 3rd, 2015...3:26 pm

The European Language Policy

Jump to Comments

The European Union (EU) is stuck in a dilemma. Its own “raison d’être” is diversity, inclusiveness and acceptance of all cultures within the EU. Language is an integrant part of each culture. Moreover, the EU aims to be a model of democracy. These two features mean that the EU must treat each language equally within the institutions and it must promote them equivalently.

The EU’s motto “Unity in Diversity” has been shown in different ways. The most funded and promoted is the Erasmus program that helps students financially to study a part of their study abroad in another Member State. All countries and languages are in theory treated equally; however, by taking a closer look at these programs, we can easily notice that in practical terms, the languages are not treated equally what so ever.

Erasmus Logo

Erasmus Logo

Most students taking part in the Erasmus program arrive in the host country with barely any knowledge of the host country’s language. Having already discussed the difficulties that students face in learning new content in a foreign language, most students chose to follow the courses in English. Moreover, English is often the Lingua Franca of the international Erasmus student community and Erasmus is often seen as a way to improve their English skills. As a result, participants of the Erasmus program generally do not achieve any skills in the home language, but rather improve their English. This reality is not in line with the European ideals. This flaw must be analyzed in order to provide a valid solution.

Why is English the Lingua Franca in Europe for Erasmus students? Economically speaking, English is by far the most valuable language. As de Swaan explained, language choice is based primarily on a utilitarian perspective. Languages are collective: the biggest its amount of speakers, the more attractive it is to learn it. English has reached this stage of being “hypercollective”. This reality is showed in the different European national school systems where about 90% of them provide English courses as a L2.

The power of English - the opportunity it offers

The power of English – the opportunity it offers

Both the problem and the solution reside in this reality. The problem is that before acquiring a proficiency in English, student will always choose to learn English and will always favor universities providing English course. Only after achieving English, student can choose another language as a L3 to learn. This choice is then more based on personal or cultural preferences. Erasmus in this context would show much better result in learning the language of the host country. In order to achieve this, I would recommend taking two independent measures at the EU level. First achieving English fluency by:

  • learning English as L2 from Primary School to the end of High School; and
  • encouraging one-year immersion programs in an English-speaking country at the end of high school in order to reach full proficiency (see the example of Germany).

Second, specific to the Erasmus program, I would put some conditions for the funding to help only the “motivated to learn a language” students by:

  • obliging students to take a language course while having the Erasmus; and
  • by only validating the Erasmus fund if the student passed a test demonstrating a level of A1 or higher in the country’s language at the end of the program.

However, the English fluency policy is hard to be clearly formulated for a reason: principles of equality, language equality and language rights (Article 3 TEU states, “It shall respect its rich cultural and linguistic diversity, and shall ensure that Europe’s cultural heritage is safeguarded and enhanced”). Such right can become problematic when approached in a rigorist way. The Linguist Skutnabb Kangass (SK) does so and gives her opinion in an Immigrant Minority Language paper where she advocates “strong models” for language education. Strong model consists of imposing minority languages on the majority. For a Belgian example, French-speaking children would have to learn kituba, one of the national languages in Congo, because it is the first language of one of their classmate. Although English enables students to communicate with the rest of the world and dutch enables students to communicate with their country mates. This, for the sake of equality and fairness. Brilliant.

Screen Shot 2015-06-03 at 17.24.38

While such approach remains marginal, they still influence some politicians, particularly those sensitive to the “social progress” of society. These types of thinking must be opposed for three reasons:

  • economically speaking, as mentioned earlier, English is the most rewarding language;
  • economic rewards are always coupled with cultural and linguistic shininess (South Korean video Gam Nam Style on YouTube is the most watched video of all the times and it is in Korean); and
  • cross-country exchange would be easier in any domain.

The EU is a group made up of different types of people and mindsets. Therefore, a realistic and pragmatic approach must be taken. The SK multilingual approach is “de rigueur” in the EU and as de Swaan correctly stated, “The more languages, the more English”. The use of other EU official languages are decreasing faster than ever before.

To summarize this post, I advocate a strict hierarchy within language learning.

  • L1: Official state language(s) for the sake of a working and a cohesive nation State.
  • L2: English as the Lingua Franca of the globalized world.
  • L3 free of choice: Minority Language, Immigrant minority Language, or a European language with whom speaker has particular affinity.

I know this post is controversial, but please keep in mind that first, controversy evolves debates and debates remains the most typical feature of democratic societies. Secondly, I purposely chose a provocative tone and “politically incorrect” ideas in order to create that debate.

Screen Shot 2015-06-03 at 16.13.10

A



Leave a Reply