By Tore Janson

 

For these reasons English remains strong in most of these countries. In many of them, including gigantic India, English actually has a stronger foothold now than it had at independence. The general level of education is higher now and national and international contacts across linguistic boundaries have become more frequent. For that reason more people learn English and use it.

 

At the same time, English is associated with the old colonial power in these countries, and that of course is a negative connotation. But as English remains so strong in the schools, in fact often much stronger than any native language of the country, a large part of school education really is an initiation into English culture. This is most true for those who get the highest education.

 

The ties between those countries and Britain are of varying kinds; on the whole the relations are neither very close nor uniformly cordial. However, there are special channels for education, in particular for education in English. The British Council provides teachers who are native speakers of English, and it distributes textbooks and other material for teaching. The universities in Cambridge and Oxford administer examinations that are used for awarding certificates at the advanced school level in many countries. In this way Britain still wields considerable influence on education in many of the former colonies.

 

In Britain there has been some ideologically motivated discussion about this fact. Some believe the activities of the British Council and similar organizations amount to “linguistic imperialism.” It is probably true that some highly placed people in Britain feel that language education is a good way to keep and strengthen the ties with the former colonies. But in so far as this is an attempt at imperialism it is not very impressive. Britain can no longer assert itself globally by economic, political, or military means. Rather, it is a country that wants the income it may get through the textbooks and the native English teachers.

 

Naturally, what Britain does is also not very important for the standing of English in the former colonies. As has been shown, quite different forces work for the language. A tangible proof of this is that English is gaining ground even in states that once were colonies of other European powers. Namibia was a German colony for a few decades and after that was administered for about seventy years by South Africa; the colonial languages were first German and then Afrikaans, which was promoted very forcibly by the South African authorities. After independence in 1990, the new government has settled for English as official language and school language. Mozambique used to be completely dominated by Portuguese, but a growing number of people in leading positions now master English. Many young persons know English even in the Central African Republic, a former French colony still more or less supervised by France. In all those cases, Britain is completely irrelevant.

 

The United States is a different matter. The country has a cultural influence almost everywhere, through film,TV, music, and in other ways, and it is a major player in economy and politics. American companies prefer English in all countries. Of course the power of the United States is important for the spread of English. In fact, one may describe the spread as one aspect of the economic and cultural imperialism of that country, if one chooses to use such a terminology.

 

However, governmental authorities of the United States are not spending much time or money on the promotion of English in other countries. There are libraries, cultural centres, and the like in some places, but not much more than that. The political activities of the country have not necessarily furthered the English language very much. True, there are or have been American military bases in many places, and that certainly has contributed to some extent to the spread of English in such countries as Iceland and Germany, but it has hardly been of

major importance.

 

Further, the countries closest to the United States are not the ones that have adopted English without reservations. In Latin America in general English is not exceptionally strong, and seems to be losing ground. In Mexico, for example, there certainly is some English in the school curriculum, but less than in many European countries, and very much less than in such countries as Kenya or Nigeria. Political pressure from the United States seems not to have led to increased interest in English, but rather the reverse.

 

The conclusion is that English is not furthered very much by the activities of Britain and the United States. Britain cannot do much, and the United States does not do much.

 

Generally speaking, if English is seen as closely linked to Britain and the United States, that does not further its use as an international language. In those countries where those links are manifest the language meets with considerable resistance. The image of English that contributes most to its growth is that of a supranational language for international communication. At present that image prevails with many people, and English is gaining ground.

 

For how long will this be going on? No one knows, of course.