Category: Uncategorized

This is the first post on this blog that is not related to the After Babel course. I completed this course with a 9.0, which is the highest grade I have ever got during my time in Maastricht. This might be an indicator of the joy I had taking this course, so much that I even considered studying multilingualism in Groningen. However, in the end I chose to go to stay in my beloved Maastricht to enroll in the master’s programme of Public Policy and Human Development. In this last week before the courses start, I wanted to start writing on this blog again. Me still being interested in languages and language policies wants to try to continue this blog from a language perspective.

Continue reading Back after the Summer Holidays!

The objective of the European Union is for everyone across the continent to be able to speak two languages additional to their mother-tongue. That is the official ‘European Language Policy’. Multilingualism they claim, is an “important element in Europe’s competitiveness”. I repeat – everyone is to speak TWO additional languages besides their mother tongue!!! First, I want to point out that the EU actually spends some of its time focusing on implementing programmes so that this goal can eventually be reached. Now, I’m not entirely sure where to even go on from. I ‘ll go from here –

I am not in any way against the idea of people learning another language. In my utopia, everyone speaks the same language or is at least able to. It would make everything so much easier.. Clearer.. It would probably be of great help bringing peace to the world as well, haha. But lets be honest, the way things stand in the world most people only speak one language. Their mother-tongue. Learning a new language is often difficult, especially as you get older. In some subjective scenarios it may not even be necessary to speak anything else but your local dialect. In Europe however, we do have a significant amount of bilingual speakers. Many people in Western Europe for example speak English in addition to their native language. You’d think that the EU would then say – alright, lets begin with one additional language. I’d stand by that objective without doubt. To start with two when we haven’t even achieved one yet just seems strange.

The ONLY reason the EU, although it will not express it this way, has after so much pondering decided to require people to speak two languages instead of the logical single extra language is because it does not want to offend the ego’s of either the French, the Germans or the English. In the institutional working arena, all major languages may be used. They all think their language is the most important and therefore should be used the most. None of them are allowed to “win”! Multilingualism is a strength, and can be very useful to the individual. But this is not what the ELP is based on. If we were taking the Union seriously, I do not think major EU objectives should be formed on the basis of emotions and personal pride issues. If the governments involved were truly (pointing fingers at the same three again here) focused on what would serve the European people best, they would not let their pride-complexes affect long-term decisions. Every decision has to be the most rational decision, and the best decision in the long run. Many Member States will have to, and already do, accept things they may not want to for the greater good. If in this instance this means that English is introduced everywhere, then the French and Germans will just have to take it. I just feel this issue is something we should not even be discussing any more in our time. This for two reasons – the first because I thought we would be past that. I think the Germans, French and English should all be past that. The second reason is because… well, technology is coming.

I agree with the idea that there should be discussion and research done into what language would be most viable and easy to implement for everyone. However in all the literature for this task only one author shared my view that the language chosen should be entirely independent of any sort of emotional sentiment. I also support the view that only one language should be chosen. Some authors have proposed using Esperanto, amongst other artificial languages in order for the common European language to be ‘neutral’. Latin was also proposed. Now although I am perhaps delusional enough to believe that if we introduced Esperanto in every school across Europe now, that in 20-30 years we all might share a common level of it.. I believe other major developments will happen before we could even reach that point. The whole discussion about which language should be spoken in the European political arena just seems irrelevant to me as well. It took me a while but I am now finally going to get back on my former point about technology on the rise.

The EU spends so much money finding and employing a huge amount of translators for every get-together. Sometimes it has to find the most unheard of combinations – a Lithuanian to Maltese translator for example. Or in even more difficult situations, just make sure each translator from both sides is able to translate into the same language. The discussion about which language to choose as a common European language will last decades. Instead of wasting our time fighting about whose the biggest, we could also all wait till translation-technology improves. By my estimations, this will take 10-15 years at most. Within that time (will probably go even faster), machines which combine the functionalities of Google Translate and Siri will exist to translate our every word as we speak them out.

Don’t believe me? Check out this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRBb27BzevQ

And that’s just one of many basic prototypes coming up.

This technology  in the political arena, if the speaker was speaking in English and a specific representative did not understand English, instead of hiring a translator, the representative could then select which language he or she wants to have the speech translated into by his device and it would do so for him/her as the speech is given. Eventually you would even be able to hand-select the type of voice you want to hear.

In the social arena, it would have similar applicability. Lets say you’re Dutch, and you met a Romanian. Neither of you spoke English, or any other common language. But you needed to communicate about an immediate, highly important situation you have both gotten into. You could speak Dutch, and the other person could speak Romanian. Your device would just translate what the other is saying in the language you choose in the moment.

I truly believe that as our societies continue to modernize, the need for a European Language Policy will completely be eradicated for the aforementioned reasons. Multilinguilism will remain a personal strength, and all learning a common language would be the best thing for establishing understanding for each other. However, I believe that technology will do this at a faster pace. Maybe we will even start wearing an earplug which directly translates anything any one else is saying around you in a foreign language to your own. I implore everyone to inform themselves about the latest tech news – because I’m telling you, anything is going to be possible.

DISCLAIMER: Though all writing comes with a bias I feel that it is necessary to be forth coming and honest with one’s readers. In this particular case as a English only speaker I welcome the idea of having a monolingual society.  No longer would I be at some disadvantage as the most useful language would be my own, English.  As well barriers to working here in Europe would be drastically lowered if multilingualism was no longer a requirement for many jobs. With that being said I do see the benefits of Europe’s Multilingual Language policy and hopefully I can present an argument that is not too heavily biased.

The European Union is made up of 28 member states and has 24 working languages. Official documents and speeches are presented in all official languages, as well as much of the workings of the EU that occurs in public light.  As the EU is built on many distinct cultures in which language is a large factor, it seems only appropriate that these languages would be a main tenant of its operations. Yet who is benefiting from these policies? Have they become just for show? None of the literature I read had hard data stating that it was really making people’s lives better. Robert Phillipson actually uses this as a main tenant of his argument constantly referring to the need for studies to be conducted and ‘national interests’ ignored.  I am in no way opposed to multilingualism, but it strikes me that such an important factor in a diverse organization would not conduct studies to figure out the best policies.

Continue reading European Language Policy: From Words to Reality