Assignment 3: English in a Post-Brexit European Union

Bye Britain, bye English?

“United in diversity” is the official motto of the European Union and it is enshrined in its Treaties that the Union “shall respect its rich cultural and linguistic diversity” (Art. 3(3) TEU). Based on such vision, a complex system of language policies has been arranged to cater to the multitude of interests every member states brings to the table. Accordingly, the EU at the moment has 24 official working languages whereas only German, English and French serve as working languages, for instance inside the European Commission. Phillipson (2012), however, makes clear that in “[p]olitical reality, […] English is now at the pinnacle of an EU system”.


Image retrieved from https://www.hamburg.de/brexit/ (09.05.2019)

On June 23, 2016, the majority of the British voters voted for the United Kingdom to leave the EU. If the British government will ever come to terms with the EU on a contract that regulates the exit conditions, that means that from one day to the other, about 66 million English-speakers will leave the EU. As a result, there will barely be any English L1 speakers left in the EU. Some have suggested that this might present an opportunity to change the language construct in Europe. Hereby, the image of Brexit acoincides with an exit of the English language from Europe as well, as seen in the following quote:

We have a rule that every EU member state has the right to define one official language. Only the United Kingdom has indicated English. […] Accordingly, without the British we are left without English.

Polish MEP Danuta Hübner (br, 2016)

But what would we even do “left without English”? The language is serving as a lingua franca that enables speakers of another L1 to communicate with others around the world. In order to establish an intra-European dialogue and understanding among Eurocitizens of different member states, English is an important tool as by its role of lingua franca it enables cross-cultural communication. This is not only needed for day-to-day business in Brussels but also between Eurocitizens in order to create a intra-European platform for dialogue.

On the other side it is clear that the UK and the US have a major interest in strengthening English worldwide, particularly due to economic motivations. Phillipson (2012) has even gone as far as calling efforts to promote the use of English as “manifest linguistic neoimperialism” (p.17). Consequently, Europe is in a dilemma situation here: on the one side it wants to act as an independent actor that can face the US on an equal footing, particularly in external affairs. In this regard, linguistic realiance on English might be a weak spot suggesting that the EU lacks its own linguistic capital to defend its core values and interests. On the other side is the question of the alternative. What is better than English as lingua franca?

Englishes around the globe

As a result of imperialistic behaviour and colonialization strategies of the British in the past, the spread of English has been made possible. Thereby, “International English has expanded by becoming world Englishes, evolving so as to adapt to the meanings of other cultures” (Phillipson, 2012, p.14). For instance, English spoken in India is very different to English spoken in South Africa but is still very dominant. And also in many European languages, English has been creeping into the daily use by many. This is also because in the last few decades English has emerged as the language of technology. Hence, many terms such as ‘internet’ or ’email’ have become words that most languages borrow from English. Personally, as a native German speaker, I would never say to send ‘elektronische Post’, rather I would obviously say that I send an ‘email’.

Still, Europeans are not speaking English in the same way as the Queen. Modiano (2017) argues that with Brexit, “the sociolinguistic space for a European variety (or varieties) of English will become even more unambiguous, given the absence of Britain as an arbiter of correctness and standardization” (p.314) and that in consequence a form of Euro-English will be strengthened that is recognized Europewide and “liberates continental European L2 users of English from the tyranny of standard language ideology” (Modiano, 2017, p.324). I agree with him that English will most probably not loose significance among Europeans, particularly considering the high numbers of English learners in Europe.

Euro-English, really?

From an EU integrationist perspective, Euro-English developments seem to be very desirable to foster trans-national dialogue. Indeed, English had been intoduced in the post-war period exactly for that reason: to make Europeans better equipped to communicate with each other beyond national boundaries (Mondiano, 2017, p.325). Yet many years have passed and still English has not reached such a role to fulfil the abovementioned aim. This shows that in a system of language ecology, processes of language spread and decline are not short but take generations. Hence, any effect that Brexit will have on the spread of English in the EU will probably only be visible, or audible, in 50 years-time. But will there be a Euro-English even in the distant future?

According to Crystal (2017), new forms of English “express local identities, and the forces that promote identity are by their nature in conflict with the forces that promote intelligibility” (p.330). However the main question is whether Europe with all its different countries and cultures constitutes a breeding ground for such an English variant to develop that is conceivably European and not French or Polish. Crystal (2017) is very sceptical in this regard and refers to social groups that very well may develop their own version of English, however this refers to entities with a unified cultural identity which he sees lacking for the EU. I tend to agree here as from personal observations it is clear that English spoken by Italians is vehemently different than by Germans or French. And that is not only in terms of vocabulary and grammar structure but especially in terms of intonation and accent.

Why do we care?

Speaking a language, or not speaking a language, has huge implications on feelings of identity as it impacts on who you get in contact with. Language barriers hinder the exchange of cultural norms and help to draw up images of prejudice. A European Union with more than 24 languages spoken by its citizens has been faced with such a lack of identity-giving capacity since its creation and language is certainly one aspect that is relevant in that regard. If every Eurocitizen was able to speak English, identification with the EU and its democratic legitimacy would undoubtedly higher. However, as Phillipson (2012) states, “linguistic capital accumulation in and through English may entail linguistic capital dispossession for other languages” (p.15) which would then contravene the mission to protect languages the EU adheres to. Hence this dilemma will continue and the Brexit will not change much. At most, the controversy and possible negative consequences for the UK will have an impact on the remaining member states in a way so that they realize the importance of the EU. Only if the EU manages to bring citizens from different member states together so that the consequences are directly felt in society there will be change towards a uniform language intelligible to everyone in the EU.

References

br. (2016). Englisch keine EU-Sprache mehr? Retrieved from
https://www.br.de/nachricht/brexit-englisch-sprache-100.html (09.05.2019).

Crystal, D. (2017). The future of new Euro‐Englishes. World Englishes36(3), 330-335.

Modiano, M. (2017). English in a post‐Brexit European Union. World Englishes36(3), 313-327.

Phillipson, R., (2012). Imperialism and colonialism. The Cambridge Handbook of Language Policy (forthcoming), ed. Spolsky, B. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *