English as an Academic Lingua Franca
As a result of globalization, higher education institutions throughout the world are adopting English for parts of their education. Higher education is becoming increasingly international and thus linguistically diverse, for educational, idealistic and financial reasons. This book presents a much-needed description of English as a lingua franca (ELF) from an international university setting and focuses on form and pragmatic issues, using authentic spoken data. It provides useful insights into how communicative effectiveness can be achieved in spoken lingua franca communication.
Chapter 1 Introduction This book is about the widest use of English in the world today: English as a lingua franca (ELF). ELF is defined as “any use of English among speakers of different first languages for whom English is the communicative medium of choice, and often the only option” (Seidlhofer 2011: 7). English today is a lingua franca which brings millions together in a wide range of communicative situations in numerous settings for a broad spectrum of purposes. As you are reading these lines, a very large number of people with different first languages are communicating through English as a lingua franca in business meetings, in conferences and other academic discussions, or sports activities, to name a few. Businessmen are busy trying to land deals, academics are giving lectures or having research meetings, university students are working out the details in their new institutions, and all of this, they do through English as a lingua franca. English, in this sense, has reached truly global dimensions no other language has come near before. It is used in a very large number of domains, spoken by millions of people for different purposes. This is not to say that there are no other lingua francas. Other languages are used as lingua francas centralized in particular regions in the world, such as Russian and Spanish; however, “it is English and English alone that can reasonably claim to have become a global lingua franca” (Van Parijs 2011: 11). In the present context, ‘lingua franca’ is used in a different sense from the original meaning of the term. The original term ‘lingua franca’ refers to the oldest pidgin for which there is a reasonable amount of data for investigation (Parkvall 2005). It has been suggested that the meaning of the term comes from Arabic and Greek. Before the Crusades and during the Middle Ages, Western Europeans were referred to as ‘Franks’ in Arabic and ‘Phrankoi’ in Greek during the times of the late Eastern Roman Empire. So lingua franca was the language of the Franks, and it was a mixed trade language used by the language communities around the Mediterranean to communicate with others, as these comunities did not share a common language. It consisted mainly of Italian mixed with Turkish, French, Greek, Arabic, Portuguese and Spanish. It had limited vocabulary and grammar, and it lacked verb tenses and case– it did however develop a past and a future tense around the seventeenth century during its golden age (Corré Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 220.127.116.11 Heruntergeladen am | 04.03.13 15:02 2 Introduction 2005). Pidginists have maintained that the earliest text in lingua franca goes back to 1353, and there are traces of its use from the twentieth century. This long period of time suggests that it may well be “the most long-lived pidgin language we know of” (Parkvall 2005). The original lingua franca had the same purpose with today’s lingua franca English: It was used by speakers from different first language backgrounds as a vehicular language. Those involved in trade had to sell and buy goods through a common language, and with the Mediterranean lingua franca, they were able to do so. There are important differences, however, between the original lingua franca and today’s lingua franca English. Today’s lingua franca is obviously not a mix of languages, nor does it have limited vocabulary or syntax the way the original lingua franca did. The original lingua franca was mostly spoken, and not so often written, as it was a contact language. When it was written, it was generally in early opera libretti and ballads, and this was done generally to include exotic elements in these works (Corré 2005). Otherwise, the original lingua franca was merely a practical language and not a literary medium. This is unlike today’s lingua franca English, which is used in several domains, both in spoken and written form (see e.g. the WrELFA corpus project). Perhaps most importantly, the original lingua franca was not expanded or nativized anywhere (Parkvall 2005) unlike English, which is the native language of a number of countries. English is the only language in history to have countries where it is the native language and to have become a truly global lingua franca. This is surely a fascinating linguistic phenomenon. It is, however, not only a linguistic phenomenon. English gained the lingua franca status as a result of a series of political events and other significant historical developments, becoming the language of several domains, such as higher education. In this introductory chapter, I will consider these developments, alongside the reactions and ideological responses raised to one language gaining such a powerful status. We will start by a brief review of some historical developments and then move on to how English has become the language of science and technology. Turning to reactions and ideological responses, we will go through some of the arguments raised by concerned academics who have been arguing for over a decade that ELF is simply about hegemony, Anglification and the spreading of market economics, and that minor languages are losing one domain after another against English. The chapter will end with a brief introduction of English as a lingua franca, which is Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 18.104.22.168 Heruntergeladen am | 04.03.13 15:02 1.1 English today 3 another perspective one could adopt with regard to the widespread use of English in Europe today. 1.1. English today “…although the global spread of English as a lingua franca belongs very much to the present, it needs to be put in perspective by reference to the past”. (Seidlhofer 2011: xi) To be able to understand the phenomenon of English as a lingua franca, we need to refer to the past and see the events that have led to English gaining such a global status. To many, the nineteenth century was the time when English first reached a strong global position. By the end of the nineteenth century, Britain, with its many communities of English speakers settling around the world along with trade, enabled English to become the world’s lingua franca. Consequently, French declined outside its borders, and different varieties of English around the world emerged and were “partially standardized” (Graddol 1997: 7). It was, however, the rise of the US as a superpower in the world that bolstered the dominance of English. The US quickly became the most powerful industrialized country because of its natural and human resources, and the fact that it was not destroyed by war unlike the countries in mainland Europe that had been war zones. As the world’s third largest country with reference to population, it is the country that has the largest group of native speakers of English in the world (Graddol 1997: 8). While the expansion of English to so many domains in the world is generally regarded as a result of the expansion of Great Britain with its colonies and the dominance of the US after World War II, there are other factors to consider. It is true that there are political developments that contributed to the growth of English; however, the need to communicate knowledge was a bigger factor. The growing needs of sharing and disseminating knowledge in the twentieth century required a language for all communication to take place in. This was true for scientific and technical knowledge dissemination as well as for other areas, such as for commerce and consumer culture (Graddol 1997: 14). English in the twenty-first century is used predominantly by three main groups of speakers: Those who speak it as their native language, those who speak it as a second (or additional) language and those who have learned it as a foreign language. A classical view of these groups was expressed by Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 22.214.171.124 Heruntergeladen am | 04.03.13 15:02 4 Introduction Kachru as “inner circle”, “outer circle” and “expanding circles”, well known to linguists (Kachru 1985). In the inner circle are countries where English is the native language, i.e. the USA, the UK, Ireland, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. The outer circle countries are those where English has some historical significance and is spoken as the language of some or all of the country’s institutions, e.g. Singapore, India, Nigeria, South Africa, the Philippines. These two circles, however, do not represent the major groups of speakers of English in the twenty-first century. The largest group is the expanding circle countries, where English is a foreign language, e.g. China, Japan, Poland etc. These countries do not have a history of being colonized by any of the inner-circle countries, and English does not have much intra-national function. Inner circle, 320–380 Outer circle, 150–300 Expanding circle, 100–1000 Figure 1.1. Approximate numbers of speakers in millions in inner, outer and expanding circle countries (Kachru 1985; numbers from Graddol 1997). Kachru uses the term “norm-providing” for inner-circle countries, “normdeveloping” for outer-circle countries and “norm-dependent” for the expanding-circle countries. When the outer and expanding circles are merged, we have before us the largest group of users of the English language in the world. In a way, the numerical balance has shifted tremendously from the inner circle countries to these two groups of countries. Today, English is used predominantly by its non-native speakers as a lingua franca. Much happened demographically in what is now almost three decades as a result of globalization. Kachru’s description of the speakers in each circle no longer reflects the reality of the linguistic situation in the world. The Three Circles Model has undoubtedly been helpful in addressing the different groups of speakers of English who use English for a variety of Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 126.96.36.199 Heruntergeladen am | 04.03.13 15:02 1.1 English today 5 functions. It provided a description of different types of users, thereby making an important contribution to showing the changing balance of speakers in the world by its inclusion of outer and expanding circles. However, the model is now dated, and it falls short of accurately accounting for the true heterogeneity of English today. It is very much a debated issue whether the inner circle speakers should be norm-providing for the speakers in the other two circles. The model, therefore, has been criticized for failing to show the true dynamics of the usage of English today (Jenkins 2009). World Englishes and ELF researchers together point to a need for pluricentralism (Bruthiaux 2003; Seidlhofer 2003). The applicability of the model has even been contested on the grounds that the model â€œperpetuates the very inequalities it otherwise aims to combat, such as the distinction between native and non-native speakersâ€? (Park and Wee 2009: 390). Kachru however, never claimed these circles would stand against time and against changes that take place as speakers move around the world for a number of reasons and use English as a vehicular language. He himself acknowledged this, that the Three Circles Model may be somewhat simplistic and that it shows less awareness of the grey areas (Kachru 1985; Rajadurai 2003: 113). On the scale we are witnessing today, English is being used as the working language of many international domains. The twelve major international domains Graddol listed in 1997 have continued to use English increasingly as their working language (Graddol 1997: 8): 1. Working language of international organizations and conferences 2. Scientific publication 3. International banking, economic affairs and trade 4. Advertising for global brands 5. Audio-visual cultural products, e.g. TV, popular music 6. International tourism 7. Tertiary education 8. International safety 9. International law 10. In interpretation and translation as a relay language 11. Technology transfer 12. Internet communication Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 188.8.131.52 Heruntergeladen am | 04.03.13 15:02 6 Introduction A significance of Graddol’s list above is its inclusion of at least eight domains that are so-called élite domains (1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11). As the number of people using English in the above domains keeps expanding, English is likely to maintain its position as the most dominant foreign language among the world’s languages. The spread of English as the working language to so many of the world’s élite domains has evoked a variety of reactions. These reactions range from fascination to combative rejection. English as the most dominant language has been investigated and debated widely (sections 1.3.1, 1.3.2 and 1.3.3); however, these investigations and debates have had political issues rather than linguistic ones as their foci. The linguistic community has been relatively slow in dealing with the unprecedented growth of English (Mauranen 2003: 513). Although much work has been done in the last decade or so, detailed linguistic investigations are scarce. The extremely dynamic nature of the speakers of English today, i.e. that they travel and use English for a variety of purposes, makes it complicated to carry out investigations. With the situation today, where English has no boundaries, we need to explore the use and usage of English, we need more information on how it is used in the domains where it serves as the working language, but perhaps most importantly, we need to be able to cater for the needs of all those from different language backgrounds who use it as a vehicular language, as a lingua franca (ELF), so that we can help them compete on equal terms. The vast number of its users and the domains in which it is used bring a legitimate need for knowledge of the use of English as a lingua franca. The study used as the basis of the present monograph is an attempt to contribute to the existing knowledge on the use of English today in one of the aforementioned domains: Tertiary education. It investigates English in an academic engineering setting as spoken by lecturers and students, by those who use it as an academic lingua franca. 1.2. English as the language of science and technology The presence of English in Europe today can be observed in many domains. Scientific and technical domains are two such domains where English dominates over other languages (James 2000), and it is English only that is now the dominant lingua franca of science and technology in the world. Science is and has always been a global enterprise, and academic Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 184.108.40.206 Heruntergeladen am | 04.03.13 15:02 1.2 English in science and technology 7 communities are international by nature. A useful preliminary here is a historical perspective. This inherently international nature of science and technology is reflected in the number of languages that have been the lingua francas of science and technology in history. The development has been somewhat different for instruction and publication. When we look at the academy, we see that different languages have been used in instruction and publication. With regard to the language of instruction, up to the sixteenth century, Latin was used. As commonly known, Latin was the first international language of the ‘learned’ and retained its position until the seventeenth century (Lindberg 1984). The attitude to Latin in the eighteenth century is clear from the quote that follows (Johnson 1706). Latin was the language of the learned, and replacing it with another language was seen as extremely unlikely, if at all possible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hat Johnson said wasthought virtuallywas impossible was abandoned What Johnson virtuallyhappened: impossibleLatin happened: Latin was aboutabandoned three hundred years ago. Historically, there have been other about three hundred years ago, leaving its place tolanguages other lanin theguages, position English has today. Not surprisingly, when English started and then to English, which is now “the universal language” for to the be used for education, it caused considerable controversy. If we look at the dissemination of knowledge. debates Historically, back in the there middle of been the seventeenth century, see three focal have other languages in thewe position English has points: whether to learn Latin or the vernacular, inEnglish this case English, today. For this reason, perhaps notLatin surprisingly, when started to be first, used whether to acknowledge the advantages of using whether for education, it caused and still seems to beEnglish causingand considerable to usecontroversy. Latin to make English a legitimate choice (Mitchell, 2006:475). LecTurning to the debates in the middle of the seventeenth centuturingry,inwethe forbidden in the Middle and seevernacular three focalwas points: WhetherintoEurope learn Latin or the Latin Ages vernacular, through the Renaissance (Nastansky, 2004:49). Some scholars advocated the use of the vernacular English, saying that it would be a very good skill to have in the future (Aickin, 1693:28). The aim in doing so, ironically, was to Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS enable the public to have access to knowledge and obliterate the social diviAngemeldet | 220.127.116.11 sion generated by Latin between the commonHeruntergeladen public and the amélite. | 04.03.13 15:02 8 1 Introduction in this case English, first, whether to acknowledge the advantages of using English and whether to use Latin to make English a legitimate choice (Mitchell 2006: 475). Lecturing in the vernacular was forbidden in Europe in the Middle Ages and through the Renaissance (Nastansky 2004: 49). There were scholars who advocated the use of the vernacular English, for the reason that it would be a useful skill to have in the future (Aickin 1967: 28). The aim in doing so was to enable the public to have access to knowledge and obliterate the social division generated by Latin between the common public and the ĂŠlite. Subsequently, other languages did indeed come into use, gradually making room for even more languages. When it comes to the language of scientific research, up to the seventeenth century Latin dominated, slowly leaving space for other vernaculars. This, however, happened much more slowly than it did for instruction. Thereafter, both Latin and French were used. In the nineteenth century, French, English and German were all used for science and technology in international publication. The situation changed during the mid twentieth century, and the language of international publication became mainly English with the increasing importance of international publication in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. These changes can be observed in the philosophical transactions of the Royal Society between the years 1665 and 1990 (Figure 1.2, produced using the information given in Allen et al.). 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 English French German Latin Other Figure 1.2. The language of cited materials in the Royal Society 1665â€“1990. Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 18.104.22.168 Heruntergeladen am | 04.03.13 15:02 1.2 English in science and technology 9 The Royal Society has been the centre of scientific activity in England since it was officially founded by twelve philosophers in 1660 to promote physico-mathematical experimental learning. Among its many activities are supporting scientists and engineers, influencing science policy, debating scientific issues etc. As I mentioned above, after World War II, most of the world’s scientific potential became localized in the US, mainly because of the fact that the country was intact unlike the countries in Europe, which were all badly damaged by the war (Graddol 1997: 8). World Wars I and II depended heavily on science and technology, which resulted in increased scientific activity during the war years. The US was able to preserve its scientific foundation and structure since none of the battlefields were located in the US, which in turn ensured its leadership in science and technology (Kaplan 2001: 11). In addition, more resources were available in the US, which made it a popular destination for a large number of students and scientists (Kaplan 2001: 10). Consequently, the US became the leading country in scientific and technical publishing. Later on the “design, production and dissemination” of scientific and technical knowledge was globalized; nevertheless, the US has managed to keep its place in the center (Truchot 2002: 10). However, there were additional reasons for the spread of English. It was reasonable to ask people to learn three languages when German was dominant in science, with English being important economically, and French being influential in cultural spheres (Shaw 2005, 2008). Japanese scientists did indeed learn three languages. With actual globalization however, which is what is happening today, there are Chinese, Japanese, Russian, Indian readers and more. With readers from a large number of countries, it became more difficult to insist that everybody should learn three languages. This being so, the extension of the international research community beyond Europe would have required a common language to operate in even if there had not been other external influences. Since World War II, many scientific journals have adopted English as their language instead of writing and publishing in their national language (Graddol 1997: 9). Over 90 per cent of the articles in the major SCI database are taken from journals that are published in English. European databases also have this as common practice instead of leaving room for articles written in European languages other than English (Truchot 2002: 10). Most journals have switched to English for purposes of broad readership. Already in 1997, Swales reported on the change of language from Swedish to Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 22.214.171.124 Heruntergeladen am | 04.03.13 15:02 10 1 Introduction English-only in the last medical serial in Sweden, Läkartidningen (Swales 1997: 379). In short, as these examples show, for scientists today, publishing findings automatically suggests writing the articles in English since most journals, even in non-English speaking countries, require articles in English (Murray and Dingwall 2001: 86). French-authored articles in English are cited much more frequently than the articles in French: “The 1978 English-language papers received about 57,600 citations from 1978–1982, yielding a five-year impact rating—based on an SCI1 calculation — of 6.5 for the average paper. The French-language articles received 15,650, or a five-year impact of 1.9” (Garfield 1989: 1). One of the consequences of such practices is that publications in English are valued more than those in other languages. This is true for Dutch and Scandinavian languages; readers seem to value research articles that are in English more than those written in Dutch or Scandinavian languages (Ammon 2001). This reported trend certainly continues. In a recent study of bibliometric indicators for research evaluation in Italy, Gazzola discusses using bibliometrics as a performance indicator and states that doing so encourages Italian researchers to publish in English (Gazzola 2012). According to the three-year research evaluation VTR (Valutazione Triennale della Ricerca) carried out between 2001 and 2003, English dominates in hard sciences with 90 per cent and economics with 80 per cent. 2The numbers also show that the output for the VTR was in English in three fourths of all cases (Gazzola 2012: 141). Gazzola argues that using bibliometrics in this way functions as an implicit language policy tool (see section 6.3 in this monograph for a discussion of language policies). However, we should note that the situation described above is for publications aiming at an international readership. For national readerships, there still may not be much reason to write in English. This distinction is made clear in an investigation of a biliterate environment in a Danish business school. The study found that applied disciplines need to communicate nationally as well as internationally, which brings “a more complex mix of genres and languages” (Petersen and Shaw 2002: 372). In other words, if there is a strong reason to communicate scientific activity nationally, naturally the choice is the local language. 1. Science Citation Index of the Institute for Scientific Information in Philadelphia (SCI) is an example of the most influential databases on science and technology. 2. The figures show that English is used much less in political science (30 per cent), humanities (25 per cent) and law (10 per cent) (Gazzola 2012: 141). Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 126.96.36.199 Heruntergeladen am | 04.03.13 15:02 1.2 English in science and technology 11 Subsequent to the establishment of English as the language of publication, practices in scientific activity followed the same trend: English became the main language to access scientific information, to take part in discussion, symposia and congresses and to collaborate with other scholars in the field. The use of English is promoted in academia and publications, networks, programs and institutions. The scientific programs in the EU, for example, operate entirely in English (Truchot 2002: 11). Certainly, there have been reactions to the use of English as the only international language. These reactions come from a wide range of countries. Ammon groups them as countries where the local languages have been lingua francas of science and technology (e.g. French and German) with the aim to achieve wide use of their L1s as international languages of science and technology (e.g. Japanese) where the L1s have had only local use and do not/cannot aim for international usage (e.g. Swedish) where the L1s have not yet been modernized or have been modernized to a very limited extent (e.g. Haus(s)a) (Ammon 2001: 348) Among these four groups, the first three are of relevance to the present monograph. The strongest reactions naturally come from the first group, including the countries that have used their L1s as the international languages of science and technology. A group of full-time researchers in France admitted to using English in a variety of situations, e.g. giving presentations in English at international conferences, but they expressed their concern regarding the use of English in laboratories and research centers (Truchot 2001: 321). Unlike other countries where international researchers speak English with each other in a lab situation, this group was in favor of preserving French as the language of operation. Another area where they aimed to keep French alive was doctoral work. They preferred postgraduate studies to take place entirely in French and theses to be written in French. This study, which took place in 1984, was followed by a plan to achieve language pluralism in France with the aim of performing high quality science and yet keep it available to the citizens. This did not reach great success however, perhaps not so strangely because 75 per cent of Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 188.8.131.52 Heruntergeladen am | 04.03.13 15:02 12 1 Introduction doctoral students in France came from other countries at the time (Truchot 2001: 322). Another, and a stronger approach was the adoption of the law on the use of the French language in 1994 by the Parliament against the dominance of other languages, specifically against English. Although there were public protests, the law was maintained in the education domain. Researchers were given the right to give conference presentations in French, were obligated to provide a copy of the presentation document in French, and all other documents had to have a French abstract. This was, nevertheless, quite marginal in comparison with the conference work in English. It was also decided that French was to be the sole language of education, exams and theses. However, despite these concerted efforts, the debate seemed less alive in France already about a decade ago than it was in the 80s and 90s (Truchot 2001: 327). These efforts were criticized in a more recent work (Wright 2006). Wright lists the three misconceptions in the arguments used in the campaign to promote and protect French as: “(1) The intrinsic qualities of a language are factors in the promotion of a language as a lingua franca; (2) language policy making at national level can affect language practices in international contexts; and (3) language diversity is served by the promotion of another prestige lingua franca”. (Wright 2006: 35). (See Wright’s discussion for an elaboration of these misconceptions). German is another language that once was a lingua franca of science and technology. The situation of German today differs greatly from the times it had the lingua franca position. According to Ammon, after World War I, German was “banned from all international conferences”, and it never gained its previous position back (Ammon 2001: 345). German scholars have also had problems with publications in general when they wanted to publish in German internationally (Ammon 2001: 345). (See Darquennes and Nerde 2006 for the state of German as a lingua franca, from the past to present). There is work from countries outside the first group, as classified by Ammon above. In the second group, where the countries might aim for international use, Wu et al. reported from China, and Inoue from Japan (Inoue 2001; Wu et al. 2001), where the situation is rather different. These countries have never been colonized like some of the other countries in Asia, which might be the main reason for wider use of L1 in China and Japan. In China, English seems predominantly to be a language of writing and not used widely for spoken communication. In Japan, there is a long tradition of translating foreign technical terms into Japanese, which has allowed Japanese researchers to do science in their native language without Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 184.108.40.206 Heruntergeladen am | 04.03.13 15:02 1.2 English in science and technology 13 relying on another language, strengthened by the availability of textbooks and other reference materials in their language. This situation is expected to change as higher education is becoming increasingly international; there is an increasing intake of foreign students into Japanese universities (Inoue 2001: 468). (See Kawai 2007 for a detailed description of the position English has in Japan today and implications of this for teaching). The third group in Ammon’s classification includes the countries where the L1s have always stayed at a national level, and among them is Sweden. Swedish is one of the languages that have never reached outside its borders for wide use within science and technology. Although it was used as the language of higher education from some time in the middle of the eighteenth century (Gunnarsson 2001: 293) until education became globalized about a decade ago, it was never a language that research could be published in internationally. Naturally, Sweden being a relatively small country and Swedish a small language, Swedish started to be challenged (see Chapter 3 for information on Swedish higher education). This is construed by some as leading to diglossia and Swedish being on its way to dying a natural death as an academic language, and measures are suggested if Swedish is to be resuscitated as an academic language (Gunnarsson 2001: 312–313). These views and worries, however, are not shared by others (Berg et al. 2001; Josephson 2004; Murray and Dingwall 2001: 106;). Already a decade ago, more researchers reported from Switzerland (Dürmüller 2001), Finland (Haarman and Holman 2001), Hungary (Medgyes and László 2001), Sweden and Switzerland compared (Murray and Dingwall, 2001), Russia (Kryuchkova 2001) and Belgium (Willemyns 2001) among others, with only slightly varying results. A decade or so later, English is increasingly being used in international publication, international conferences, general academic activity and higher education within science and technology. 1.3. Globalization and English in higher education If we go back to the list of the twelve major domains of English (section 1.1), place seven is taken by tertiary education (Graddol 1997: 8). The reason more and more countries are choosing English-medium higher education seems obvious: The scene described above and the globalization of studies. Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 220.127.116.11 Heruntergeladen am | 04.03.13 15:02 14 1 Introduction A considerable number of changes have already taken place, specifically but not only, in Europe within tertiary education, and English is being used increasingly often. Student exchange programs within the EU result in changes especially at the Master’s level: A growing number of programs are offered in English to allow students to receive education in countries other than that of their origin. The development of additional programs in English is reported to be under way in several countries in continental Europe, allowing students from all over the world to participate. This expansion of use of the English language undoubtedly has advantages; student and staff exchanges are much easier, collaboration between universities is livelier than ever, and job opportunities are plenty. English is the language of science, academia and the professions. There is a growing trend of using English in general in European tertiary education (Cenoz 2006). Tertiary education in science and technology is, naturally, following this general trend. There is an additional reason for science and technology to adopt English as the medium of instruction in a large number of programs. As discussed in the previous sections, English is also the language of scientific publications and activity. Consequently, technical universities and institutes are responding to demands from students and industry by introducing English in tertiary education as the medium of instruction. Among the aims of the Bologna Process is “to make European Higher Education more compatible and comparable, more competitive and more attractive for Europeans and for students and scholars from other continents” (European commission), and the main aim of the Bologna process is stated as “to establish a common European area for higher education by 2010” (Swedish Agency for networks and Cooperation in Higher Education). Today, in 2012, we can see that this aim seems to have been reached to a great extent with student exchange programs. Creating a ‘common area’ requires a common language, and since English is the most widely studied language, it is the best-known second language. Consequently, the ‘common’ European area for higher education has evolved in such a way that English has become the ‘common language’. Although it is not stated anywhere that this common language has to be ‘English’, it is the natural choice. There are obvious advantages in making English the medium of instruction: Mobility, employability and competitiveness/attractiveness, which are all among the objectives of the Bologna Declaration (European Commission 2009). Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 18.104.22.168 Heruntergeladen am | 04.03.13 15:02 1.3 Globalization and English in higher education 15 Universities today are more than ever advertising their multilingual programs and courses. They have several main reasons for doing so. First, they want to recruit more students. Secondly, it improves their public image and chances of competition in the education market. There are idealistic reasons as well, such as promoting multilingualism, creating world-citizens and strengthening internationalization locally (van Leeuwen and Wilkinson 2003: 11). Finally, there may be educational reasons like offering new degrees. Among these, it is likely that institutional survival, as Wilkinson calls it, plays a pivotal role. If the local market is too small, if the income that can be generated from international students will constitute a substantial income for institutions, learning and teaching through an additional language becomes an attractive option. Many universities worldwide are introducing programs where English is the medium of instruction. The number of students going abroad to study for one year or extended periods is increasing so dramatically that some countries have been reportedly considering making changes to their laws to stimulate this movement even further (Kruseman 2003: 7). Changing the medium of instruction from the local language to another language makes a number of changes necessary to the curriculum, the assessment and the general organization of education. One such change is the arrival of Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL). CLIL entails the teaching of content and language in connection with each other instead of as separate components (van Leeuwen 2003). Language learning, therefore, is not an add-on, rather a part of the teaching of content. In this approach, students acquire language and content together. Naturally, CLIL requires very close collaboration of content and language teachers. A wide range of benefits are likely to be gained by CLIL programs, namely, building intercultural knowledge and understanding, developing intercultural communication skills, improving language competence and oral communication skills, developing multilingual interests and attitudes, providing opportunities to study content through different perspectives, allowing learners more contact with the target language, not requiring extra teaching hours, complementing other subjects rather than compete with them, diversifying methods and forms of classroom practice and increasing learnersâ€™ motivation and confidence in both the language and the subject being taughtâ€? (European Commission 2012) The impact of globalization on higher education institutions throughout the world has been much discussed (sections 1.3.1 and 1.3.2). Some see the globalization of higher education as creating a level playing field where Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 22.214.171.124 Heruntergeladen am | 04.03.13 15:02 16 1 Introduction scholars and students from different countries are functioning together, sharing and disseminating knowledge, allowing higher education institutes to reach the aims mentioned above. On the other hand, there are those who see it as a basis of inequality (sections 1.3.2 and 1.3.3, e.g. Ljosland 2007; Phillipson 1998). Major higher institutions have a history of being highly dominant with regard to production and dissemination of knowledge, unlike smaller institutions with smaller budgets and fewer resources, which try to co-exist with them. Important academic institutions are, consequently, in richer countries and not in developing countries. Funding, libraries, access to major networks and qualified scholars are typically available in these larger institutions (Altbach 2004: 7). In this sense, globalization might be seen as automatically posing a disadvantage for developing countries (Altbach 2004: 7; Rodrik 1997 and 1999; Stiglitz 2002). At the same time, it should be noted that globalization does not necessarily create inequality. Countries like China, India or Brazil have benefited considerably from globalization financially, e.g. outsourcing, call centers etc. Having said that, apart from economic matters, there are also linguistic ones. Major higher education institutions and leading international journals operate in English-speaking countries, such as the US, the UK, Australia and Canada. The role of the language surely affects higher education policy and the work atmosphere of scholars and students. This kind of globalization is certainly not unprecedented in academia. Although it has been suggested that the emergence of a world language is a â€œwholly new phenomenonâ€? (Coleman 2006: 1), this is not entirely true. Universities have always been international. Students have always travelled to prestigious institutions to get the best education. Similarly, scholars have always been able to work in foreign countries where there was expertise in their fields or have provided expertise where they have moved. As I have touched upon in the previous section (section 1.2), historically, we know that there have been other languages in the position English has today. The situation English is in now is unprecedented since this time it is on a global scale; however, communication and information technology are also on a global scale. In an age of such global communication and collaboration, higher education institutions worldwide cannot distance themselves from scientific collaboration. For collaboration and mobility to be possible, a common language is required. English is used internationally in academia for the same purpose: To bring scholars and students together so they can create, share and disseminate knowledge. Those who are critical of the Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 126.96.36.199 Heruntergeladen am | 04.03.13 15:02 1.3 Globalization and English in higher education 17 growth of English claim that although English is supposed to bring people together, it does the opposite by creating gaps and inequality in today’s academia. Graddol said more than a decade ago that the higher education sector would become “increasingly complex” and refered to credit transfer, accreditation and hybrid courses such as “engineering through English”, which would result in new practices between institutions in the world (Graddol 1997: 45). This has certainly been happening in continental Europe and elsewhere. These practices and developments are likely to continue, and they will continue to enable even a greater number of students to study in other countries. As long as English remains as the leading language in technology and science, the situation is likely to put pressure on tertiary education to adjust itself. A distinction needs to be drawn at this point between the language of publication and the language of instruction. There have always been languages of publication, but only when a language becomes the vernacular and is used in instruction, do matters get complicated. English has been the lingua franca of science and education in publication for some time now (section 1.2). Concerns started to be raised only when it started being used in instruction. There are surely advantages of using English in instruction in higher education. However, English, being both the language of publication and now, increasingly, the language of instruction, has gained a much more powerful position. On this, there are two main concerns: If English is used in instruction instead of the local language, the local language might be threatened and if students cannot study in their native language but in English, they might not be able to learn as effectively as they would in their L1. These concerns have been expressed in numerous studies (section 1.3.2); a number of scholars from Europe have focused exclusively on whether this unprecedented growth of English is threatening the languages of Europe or not. I will cover these concerns in the following sections. 1.3.1. Ideological responses to globalization One of the words that is used very frequently in discussions of globalization is ‘dominance’. There are two ways of interpreting the term ‘dominance’. As Ammon points out, dominance could simply mean the widespread use and acceptance of a language with contrast to other languages Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS Angemeldet | 188.8.131.52 Heruntergeladen am | 04.03.13 15:02