The Hegemony of English and Strategies for Linguistic Pluralism Le hegemonia de anglese e strategias pro pluralismo linguistic

The Hegemony of English and Strategies for Linguistic Pluralism: Proposing the Ecology of Language Paradigm Yukio Tsuda - Professor, Graduate School of International Development Nagoya University, Aichi, 464-01, JAPAN

Le hegemonia de anglese e strategias pro pluralismo linguistic: Proponer le ecologia de paradigma linguistic Yukio Tsuda - Professor, Schola graduate de developpamento international, Universitate de Nagoya, Aichi, 464-01, JAPON

	Introduction		Introduction
	1.1. Linguistic and Communicative Inequality		1.1. Inequalitate linguistic e communicative
	1.2. Linguistic Discrimination and Social Inequality		1.2. Discrimination linguistic e inequalitate social
	1.3. Colonization of the Consciousness		1.3. Colonisation del conscientia
	2. Dominance of English as Globalism		2. Domination de anglese como globalismo
	2.1. Globalization as Anglo-Americanization 2.2. Globalization as Transnationalization		2.1. Globalisation como anglo-americanisation 2.2. Globalisation como transnationalisation
	2.3. Globalization as Commercialization		2.3. Globalisation como commercialisation
	3. The Ecology of Language as a Counter-Strategy to the Hegemony of English		3. Le ecologia linguistic como un contra-strategia al hegemonia de anglese
	3.1. The Right to Language		3.1. Le derecto a lingua
	3.2. Equality in Communication		3.2. Equalitate in communication
	3.3. Multilingualism and Multiculturalism		3.3. Multilingualismo e multiculturalismo
	Conclusion		Conclusion
	References		Referentias

Introduction One of the most important tasks that we scholars ought to achieve is to discover a question out of the taken-for-granted knowledge in the existing reality. The question I want to raise in this paper is concerned with the use of English, which is very much taken for granted in international communication today. Speaking from the non-English-speaking perspective, I believe the use of English should not be taken for granted, but it should be examined as a problem of linguistic hegemony. It is evident that English is the de facto international language of international communication today, but it is also evident that the dominance of English today causes not only linguistic and communicative inequality but also the feelings of anxiety and insecurity especially on the part of the non-English-speaking people in a rapidly globalizing world in which English dominates extensively. Thus, there is a need to propose a paradigm for counterattacking the Hegemony of English so that linguistic and cultural pluralism will be secured.   In this paper I want to achieve two goals. One is to raise the problem of the Hegemony of English by discussing the two aspects of it, namely, neocolonialism and globalism. The other goal is to discuss what I call "The Ecology of Language Paradigm" as a counter-strategy to the Hegemony of English in order to find some implications for the building of a more equal international communication and linguistic pluralism. Addressing the problem of linguistic hegemony is crucial to the development of human and cultural security. 1. Dominance of English as Neo-colonialism - It is often said that English is the most widely used language for international and intercultural communication. A number of linguists, in fact, report on the global spread of English, indicating the dominant status of English as the most prevalent language of today. Ammon, for example, points out the dominance of English by providing same statistics about the dominance of English. According to him, (1) English has the greatest number of speakers reaching as many as 1.5 billion people; (2) English is designated as official languages of as many as 62 nations; (3) English is the most dominant language in scientific communication with 70-80 percent of academic publications being published in it; (4) English is the de facto official and working language in most international organizations; (5) English is the most taught foreign language across the world (Ammon, 1992:78-81). English is indeed the most dominant language and operates as a common medium for international communication. However, because it is the most dominant, English is also the "hegemonic" and "neocolonialist" language, creating not only the structure of linguistic and communicative inequality and discrimination between speakers of English and speakers of other languages, but also indirect rule over many aspects of their lives. The use of English has been taken for granted in most international interactions, and it has almost never been called into question. In the English-dominated Western academic community, the use of English has never been perceived as the problematic, as far as I know. Strangely enough, international and intercultural communication studies are quite indifferent to the dominance of English, while socio-linguistics centers on the objective description of the spread of English and thus legitimates the function of English as an international language.   Takahashi, a Japanese anthropologist, having observed the proceedings of an international conference where English is the only one official language, argues that English-dominated international conferences are bound to serve as an arena for linguistic and communicative discrimination (Takahashi, 1991). According to him, native speakers of English take full advantage of the linguistic and communicative inequality to their own benefits. Takahashi reports on his observation as follows: I have been attempting to critically examine the dominance of English as the problematic in international communication (Tsuda, 1986, 1990, 1992, 1993a, 1993b, 1994, 1996). I have found that the dominance of English causes serious consequences which include: (1) linguistic and communicative inequality to a great disadvantage of the speakers of languages other than English; (2) discrimination against the non-English-speaking people and those who are not proficient in English; and (3) colonization of the consciousness of the non-English-speakers, causing them to develop linguistic, cultural, and psychological dependency upon, and identification with, the English, its culture and people. 1.1. Linguistic and Communicative Inequality - In a situation where English dominates communication, the non-English-speaking people are inevitably disadvantaged. They become mute and deaf, and therefore prevented from fully participating in communication. The structure of linguistic and communicative inequality exists in a highly English-dominated international communication. Let us look at an example from international conferences. There is a great gap in the working knowledge of English between native speakers and non-native speakers, especially those speakers whose mother tongues are linguistically distant from English. Thus, native speakers of English intentionally try to push non-native speakers out of discussions by making a full use of tactics that stem from phonetic, idiomatic, syntactic, and pragmatic characteristics unique only in English... For example, they step up the speed of speech, use a large number of jargons and idioms, or make utterances that are grammatically complex.... These communicative tactics are used to take advantage of lower proficiency of non-native speakers in English (Takahashi, 1991, pp. 188-189). As Takahashi observed, it seems that native speakers of English in the English-dominated conferences use their linguistic advantage to magnify their power so that they can establish the unequal and asymmetrical relationship with the non-English-speakers and thus push them out of the mainstream of communication. There are a great many other examples of linguistic and communicative inequality arising from the dominance of English, but it is sufficient to report one more example. W. J. Coughlin, an American journalist, reports on the "Mokusatsu" mistake that caused the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (Coughlin, 1953). He reports that the Japanese prime minister's response of "Mokusatsu" to the demand of complete surrender by the United Allies, was misinterpreted to mean "reject" the demand, driving the then American President, Harry Truman, to decide on the atomic bombing. "Mokusatsu" actually means both "ignore" and "no comment."   The point in this historic misunderstanding of a word is that in the English-dominated Japan-U.S. communication, that the Americans always have the control of semantics under which the subtle nuances of the Japanese semantics are "ignored" or "overlooked." In other words, in the English- dominated communication, English speakers are in a position to control communication to their own advantage. 1.2. Linguistic Discrimination and Social Inequality - The dominance of English also creates the prejudices and stereotypes which, in turn, create discrimination against those who do not or can not speak English. For example, those who can not speak English fluently are labeled as incompetent, and thus insulted and perceived to be inferior. Let me present two examples of discrimination as a result of the dominance of English. The first example comes from as Time magazine article, which reports on a Chinese immigrant to the United States. He was confined in a mental institution for thirty-one years because of "the incomprehensible English" he spoke. The article reports that when the Chinese visited a doctor, he was diagnosed as "abnormal" because of the English he spoke. ("Free at last," 1984) The second example illustrates discrimination among the non- native speakers of English. Kazuo Kojima, a Japanese journalist, writes an essay about the role of English in Southeast Asia as a basis of discrimination (Kojima, 1996). Being able to speak English is such a source of pride for the people in these countries that some proficient speakers of English are inclined to insult and discriminate against those who can not speak English. Kojima himself has a personal experience of having heard an Indian say, "Iraqis are beasts, because they can't speak English." I believe this is rather an extreme case, and most Indians do not hold such an discriminatory attitude. However, these two examples suggest that the dominance of English is such that the stereotypes and prejudices are easily created to hold a discriminatory perception and attitude toward those who do not and cannot speak English. In other words, English, because of its dominant prestigious status, functions as a basis of discrimination, and therefore legitimates and reproduces the perceptions of linguistic prejudice and discrimination. Discriminatory perceptions and attitudes toward non-English-speakers justify the social hierarchy which places native speakers of English at the top of the order with non-native speakers of English placed in the middle, and the people who do not speak English placed at the bottom. The dominance of English is such that English serves as a criterion by which to classify people according to the proficiency in English. Thus, native speakers of English reign as a prestigious ruling class of international communication: they can easily express their ideas any time, while non-native speakers and people who do not speak English constitute the "muted" working class of international communication: they are slaved to learn English and have difficulty in expressing their ideas. This is what I call "The Class Structure of International Communication" on the basis of proficiency in English.   1.3. Colonization of the Consciousness - The third and ultimate consequence of the dominance of English is what is usually called "Colonization of the Consciousness" which refers to the mental control of the colonized by the colonizer. Colonization of the mind occurs as a result of the domination of the colonizer's language over the language of the colonized. Ngugi wa Thiong'o, an African writer famous for his book titled "Decolonizing the Mind", describes how colonialism takes control of the mind of the colonized as follows: Colonialism's most important area of domination was the mental universe of the colonized, the control, through culture, of how people perceived themselves and their relationship to the world... For colonialism this involved two aspects of the same process: the destruction or the deliberate undervaluing of a people's culture, their art, dances, religions, history, geography, education, orature and literature, and the conscious elevation of the language of the colonizer. The domination of a people's language by the languages of the colonizing nations was crucial to the domination of the mental universe of the colonized. (Ngugi, 1981:160, underline by Tsuda) As Ngugi clearly points out, linguistic domination leads to mental control. This implies that the global dominance of English today is to lead to the control of the mind of the global population by the speakers of English, and their nations, and governments. Ngugi also points out that the mental control is made possible by a combination of "the destruction or the deliberate undervaluing of a people's culture" and "the conscious elevation of the language of the colonizer." In the face of this mental controlling, the colonized/dominated usually are coerced into complying with the force of mental controlling, which facilitates the execution of the colonization of the mind. In short, the dominated are led to identify with the dominator, and glorify the dominator's language while devaluing their own language and to an English-centered one; namely, the colonization of a person's mind and the conscious devaluing of her own language. 2. Dominance of English as Globalism - While the dominance of English as neocolonialism occurs at the level of international interpersonal communication, the dominance of English as globalism operates at the level of international mass communication which involves the issues such as cultural and media imperialism, Americanization of global culture, McDonaldization and Dallasization of the society, the unequal flow of international news and information, the dominance of English in the Internet, and so on. In short, the dominance of English operates as a means of promoting globalization. The dominance of English doubtlessly serves to facilitate globalization. Globalization, in turn, assumes and encourages the use and dominance of English. In other words, the dominance of English is a reflection of the structure of global relations. Australian applied linguist A. Pennycook, for example, points out the interrelationship between the dominance of English and the structure of global relations as follows:   Its widespread use threatens other languages; it has become the language of power and prestige in many countries, thus acting as a crucial gatekeeper to social and economic progress; its use in particular domains, especially professional, may exacerbate different power relationships and may render these domains more inaccessible to many people; its position in the world gives it a role also as an international gatekeeper, regulating the international flow of people; it is closely linked to national and increasingly non-national forms of culture and knowledge that are dominant in the world; and it is also bound up with aspects of global relations, such as spread of capitalism, development aid and the dominance particularly of North American media. (Pennycook, 1994, p.13) Thus addressing the dominance of English is crucial to understanding the structure of global relations. According to sociologist Roland Robertson, one of the most prominent scholars on "globalization," "globalization" as a concept refers to "the crystallization of the entire world as a single place" (Quoted in Arnason, 1990:220) or "the compression of the world and the intensification of consciousness of the world as a whole" (Robertson, 1992:8). "Globalization" in a more concrete sense is taking place primarily in economic domains in which transnational corporations (TNCs) act as the agent to conduct business and trade beyond the national borders. As a result, we live in a "global culture" in which our life is filled with products and information imported from overseas.   "Globalism," therefore, is the belief or a form of knowledge that "globalization" should happen. Globalism accepts "globalization" as natural. However, as I mentioned, globalization, in fact, causes the Americanization of the world culture and McDonaldization of the society: it is not a process carefully planned, but it is a mere affirmation of the structure of the unequal global relations in which a few Center nations dominate over the Periphery nations. Thus, "globalism" justifies "globalization" as it is happening today. "Globalism" prevents us from recognizing the three consequences of globalization including: (1) Anglo-Americanization, (2) Transnationalization and (3) Commercialization of our contemporary life. 2.1. Globalization as Anglo-Americanization - The most serious problem caused by globalization is Anglo-Americanization of the world culture, based on the Anglo-American monopoly of the global market of information and entertainment. Take movies, for example. Of 87 countries surveyed in 1992, as many as 63 countries import the largest number of movies from the United States, and 20 out of 25 European countries have a share of 60-70 percent of American movies. Also in Japan, more than half of its movies are imported from the United States (Tsuda, 1996). It seems that the dominance of American products is evident in the entire global market of international mass communication: American videos, music, news, magazines, TV programs, and so on, are exported throughout the world. This inevitably results in the "ideological control" of the world population, especially by the United States. American ways of feeling and thinking become very visible and therefore influential as American cultural and information products are received and welcomed by the whole population of the world.   Thus, Anglo-Americanization and globalization go hand in hand, enabling the United States to be in a position to be able to control, influence, and dominate over other countries in terms of values, beliefs, and thoughts. The dominance of American media products provides the United States with a power to promote and facilitate globalization as well as to spread their values across the world. It also facilitates the global spread of English. The rest of the world is simply bombarded with the images, ideas, and values that are not their own. Americanization and globalization thus cause ideological invasion into countries throughout the world and interfere with cultural and political self-determination of most of the countries. 2.2. Globalization as Transnationalization - The most striking characteristic of globalization is its transnationalizing force. Due to rapid developments of telecommunication technologies and networks such as communication satellites, personal computers, and Internet, most messages and information are disseminated on a global scale, easily going beyond the national borders. The power of transnational messages is so powerful that the image from the West is believed to have influenced the people of East Germany and caused the collapse of the wall of Berlin. This leads us to believe that whoever controls the channels and media of transnational telecommunication can control global relations. Rather, I would say that the present system of transnational telecommunication which is heavily dominated by the Western advanced capitalist countries such as the United States is merely a reflection of the unequal power structure between the Center countries and the Periphery countries. Although there was an urgent demand for more equal flow of international information as demonstrated in the UNESCO attempt to establish "The New World Information and Communication Order" started in the 1970's, such a call from the non-Western nations has been mostly ignored by the United States and the United Kingdom as they withdrew from UNESCO in the middle of the 1980's. The introduction of the "Information Superhighway" by the United States and global spread of the Internet in the 1990's result in the loss of interest in the issue of imbalance and inequality in the flow of international information. Above all, the dominance of English on the Internet and international information is not merely creating inequality in communication and homogenization of culture, but it is also affirming and reinforcing the structure of inequality between English and other languages. Thus, the transnationalizing aspect of globalization does not contribute to the establishment of a more equal international communication. Rather, globalization operates to consolidate the power structure of global relations in which the advanced capitalist countries such as the United States dominate over all the rest. 2.3. Globalization as Commercialization - Today for the English-speaking countries English is the best commodity that can be exported throughout the world. English is the best-selling product every year. It means that the English- speaking countries have a larger linguistic capital than countries of other languages. Because English is the most widely used and taught language, it is accepted easily in almost any place in the world. Because of this greatest communicability and acceptability, the English-language related products ranging from movies, videos, CDs to jeans, T-shirts, discos, and so on, are exported and consumed all over the world. One of problems with this globalization of English products is that it creates "cultural domination" by the United States as well as the transnational corporations over the non-Western countries and the Third World. Herbert Schiller, an American critical scholar, characterizes the global spread of cultural domination as "transnational corporate cultural domination" (Schiller, 1991) which causes the commercialization of our life: Excluding the public's voice, denying the right to political expression, extolling shopping as the primary activity of human existence owned privately. The mall is the foremost expression of contemporary capitalism, providing the daily social experience of millions of people. If the transnational corporate order has a vision - possibly an absurd notion - surely it must be that of a global shopping mall. (Schiller, 1989:43)   Schiller thus points out that American and transnational corporation's cultural domination spreads in all the spheres of our daily life, commercializing all the physical and mental spaces of our life. This brings about another problem with the globalization of English products, namely, commercialization of our life and existence. American cultural products such as Disneyland, rock & roll, McDonalds, etc., appeal to, and satisfy, the libido of the people, thus transforming our existence into mere consumers of these products who willingly continue to purchase them without really knowing that they are trapped in a cycle of consumption. Once trapped in a cycle of consumption, people accept it as the inevitable, and thus become happily slaved to consume English products. Globalization of English products thus gives rise to not only "cultural domination" of the United States and transnational corporations, but it also causes "commercialization" of all the spheres of our life in which we become consumers willing to purchase English products, unknowingly helping to reproduce the structure of cultural domination and commercialization of life.   3. The Ecology of Language as a Counter-Strategy to the Hegemony of English - We have seen in the above discussions that the Hegemony of English creates and reproduces inequality, discrimination, colonization of the mind as well as Americanization, transnationalization, and commercialization of our contemporary life. In order to solve these problems and realize equal and emancipatory communication, the Ecology of Language Paradigm is very much needed as a theory of resisting the Hegemony of English. The Ecology of Language Paradigm serves as a theory or perspective for promoting a more equal language and communication policy of the world. I have first talked about "The Ecology of Language Paradigm" in 1993 in Honolulu at the East-West Center's "Internationalization Forum." The two paradigms are as follows: "The Diffusion of English Paradigm," which is a dominant position not only in the Anglo-American world but also in the former British colonies in Asia and Africa, is characterized by theoretical orientations such as capitalism, science and technology, modernization, monolingualism, ideological globalization and internationalization, transnationalization, Americanization, and homogenization of the world culture, and linguistic, cultural, and media imperialism. In contrast, an alternative theoretical orientation critical of the Diffusion of English Paradigm is what I call the "Ecology of Language Paradigm." This paradigm is based on the theoretical positions such as Human Rights Perspective, equality in communication, multilingualism, maintenance of languages and cultures, protection of national sovereignties, promotion of foreign language education (Tsuda, 1994: 58 -59). Thus, the Diffusion of English or what I call "The Hegemony of English Paradigm," is evidently a paradigm serving Western capitalism and civilization, while the "Ecology of Language Paradigm" is a paradigm critical of the underlying philosophy of Western civilization which advances modernization. For example, the philosophy of language in the "Hegemony of English Paradigm" is basically functionalism in that it sees language as a mere tool or instrument for communication and fails to understand that it is an essential component of culture and identity. Thus, the "Hegemony of English Paradigm" disconnects language from culture and the people using it. On the other hand, the "Ecology of Language Paradigm" assumes that language is culture and is a source of personal identity. Moreover, the Ecology of Language believes that language is a precious environment, which creates our culture and us. Language is not a mere instrument, but it is an environment that influences and shapes us. Also, the "Ecology of Language Paradigm" believes that language is people, and people are language. Therefore, inequality among languages means inequality among people. The death of one language is the death of its speakers. Based on these views of language, the "Ecology of Language Paradigm" advocate the following: (1) The Right to Language (2) Equality in Communication (3) Multilingualism and Multiculturalism By advocating these goals, the "Ecology of Language Paradigm" attempt to promote linguistic and cultural security for the non- English-speaking people. Let us look at each of them. 3.1. The Right to Language - "The Ecology of Language Paradigm" regards "the right to language" as an essential right for every person. "The right to language" primarily refers to an individual's right and freedom to use a language of his/her choice in any circumstances. It therefore assumes an individual's right and freedom not to use a language that is not his/her choice but imposed upon him/her. The central concept of "the right to language" resides in the use and recognition of an individual's "mother tongues." Tove Skutnabb- Kangas and Robert Phillipson, authors of Linguistic Human Rights, define "linguistic human rights" and "mother tongues" as follows: We will provisionally regard linguistic human rights in relation to the mother tongue(s) as consisting of the right to identify with it/them, and to education and public services through the medium of it/them. Mother tongues are here defined as "the language(s) one has learned first and identifies with." In relation to other languages we will regard linguistic human rights as consisting of the right to learn an official language in the country of residence, in its standard form (Skutnabb-Kangas & Phillipson, 1995:71). Skutnabb-Kangas and Phillipson emphasize two factors in their definition. One is "identification with an individual's mother tongues." They believe that emotional attachment to one's mother tongues should be recognized as a part of "the right to language." Another factor emphasized by Skutnabb-Kangas and Phillipson is social participation and integration. They recognize language as a channel that enables people to participate and integrate into the society. They recognize access to an official language as a part of linguistic human rights. Therefore, we can provisionally say that "the right to language" involves an individual's right to use, learn, and identify with a language of his/her choice including his/her mother tongues and official languages of the country where they live. 3.2. Equality in Communication - The prerequisite for equality in international communication is equality among languages. If a speaker of language A and a speaker of language B communicate by speaking either one of the two languages, inequality in communication occurs. One of the most influential factors that justify the use of English in international communication is the taken-for-granted assumption that English should be used. The English-speaking people unconsciously believe English to be used by all people; namely, they unconsciously hold linguistic imperialist consciousness, while the non-English-speaking people assume the use of English as the inevitable, indicating the colonization of the mind on their part. Consciousness revolution is thus needed to alleviate imperialist consciousness as well as colonization of the mind. One practical approach to establishing equality in international communication is "linguistic localism," or the use of local languages by all the participants in communication. For example, when an international conference meets in France, every participant will speak French, while if a conference is held in Japan, Japanese should be used. By practicing "linguistic localism," we will be able to develop an intercultural awareness of sharing the burden of using and learning foreign languages.   Effective use of translators and interpreters is also encouraged to promote equal use of languages. In addition, the use of a third language, or what I call "Neutralingual Communication" is another approach. When an American and a Chinese communicate in a third language such as French, Russian, or Malay, they will engage in linguistically equal communication in comparison with communication in English which favors the American one-sidedly. Another strategy for promoting equality in communication is by equalizing linguistic handicap of the participants in communication. For example, if each one of us speaks a foreign language or a planned constructed language such as Esperanto, we will be able to establish equality in linguistic handicap, which will lend to equality in communication. The primary reason for emphasizing equality in communication is that it will establish "symmetry" among people, enabling them to exchange ideas without much constraint as German social theorist J. Harems points out when he talks about "The Ideal Speech Situation": Pure intersubjectivity exists only when there is complete symmetry in the distribution of assertion and dispute, revelation and concealment, prescription and conformity, among the partners of communication. (Habermas, 1970:371) Of all the symmetries, linguistic symmetry is the most important for realizing equality in communication and the "Ideal Speech Situation." 3.3. Multilingualism and Multiculturalism - Multilingualism and multiculturalism can be also called "Linguistic and Cultural Pluralism," suggesting a critical theoretical position against monolingualism and monoculturalism which aims at one language and one cult. When we look back upon the history of modernization, we find that it was the process of building monolingual and monocultural societies, as the standard languages were developed for efficient communication at the expense of innumerable local languages and dialects. As a result, linguistic hierarchization emerged, and it caused social stratification and inequality as well as discrimination. Globalization as it is happening today is bringing about a new "Global Class Society" in which English and Anglo-American culture dominate as a "Global Ruling Class."   Linguistic and cultural pluralism is a counterstrategy against the force of monolingualism and monoculturalism. It opposes monolithic singularism because diversity is the most important index of a truly democratic society. Pluralism is a philosophy of tolerance and conviviality, which pursues a harmonious coexistence of different cultures, languages, and peoples. Pluralism also pays most attention to the minorities, the dominated, and the disadvantaged, as it believes that these people should be given equal opportunities. Thus, linguistic and cultural pluralism is not only criticizing monolingualism and monoculturalism, but it serves as an important indicator determining whether a certain society is truly democratic or not. The philosophy of pluralism is very necessary if we really wish to realize the democratization of international communication which is dominated by one language, namely, English. Implications From the Ecology of Language Paradigm The ideas and goals advocated by the Ecology of Language should be incorporated into the theories and practices of international communication, especially for the purpose of democratizing it. Let me summarize in the following some of the implications from the Ecology of Language for the betterment of international communication today. (1) The Ecology of Language provides a critical perspective for the present English-dominated international communication, and raises consciousness about the issues such as the right to language and equality in communication. (2) It serves the non-English-speaking people by providing a theoretical base for building strategies to fight the Hegemony of English and promote their cultural security and empowerment. In other words, it serves as a strategy for creating a balance of cultural and linguistic power between English and other languages. (3) It provides a theoretical foundation for the development of global language policy, especially from the position of promoting multilingualism and multiculturalism. (4) It serves the English-speaking people by providing them with a critical awareness and knowledge with regard to the dominance of English, raising consciousness about equality in communication, the right to language, and linguistic and cultural pluralism. The Ecology of Language Paradigm is not without faults and weakness. Perhaps, linguistic and cultural isolationism is one of the pitfalls that are likely to happen. If multilingualism, for example, is pursued to the extreme at the expense of everything else, the speakers of minority languages might be confined in their languages and thus cannot communicate with the world outside of their linguistic and cultural boundary. In order to prevent linguistic and cultural isolationism, we should recognize the "ecology-conscious" ideas such as "communitarian globalism" and "liberal localism" developed by M. Tehranian (Tehranian, 1993) and integrate them into the Ecology of Language Paradigm. Conclusion - Whenever I criticize the Hegemony of English, I am asked the same question: "I understand what you are talking about. But look, English is the lingua franca today. How can we communicate without it?" I am not denying the use and learning of English. Rather, what I am actually challenging is the very knowledge or consciousness that makes it possible for people to ask such a question: the knowledge that takes for granted the existing reality, accepts it as natural, inevitable, and even beneficial; the knowledge that refuses to envision the alternative. We need to examine the existing reality, and then try to fill the gap between the status quo and the ideal by exploring the problems and providing solutions to them. In conclusion, I would like to make three suggestions. The first one is directed to scholars of international and intercultural communication. That is, I suggest that the Hegemony of English should become the subject of academic inquiry in the area of international and intercultural communication, especially in the English-speaking countries. The second suggestion is directed to the English language- teaching professionals. I suggest that the English language education should incorporate the Ecology of Language Paradigm into the contents and methods of teaching as well as teacher education.   The last suggestion goes to all the speakers of English. I suggest that both native speakers and non-native speakers of English should learn the philosophy of the Ecology of Language so that they will become more sensitive to the ethical aspects of international communication. REFERENCES Ammon, U. (1992). Gengo-to Sono Chii. Trans. by Y. Hieda and H.Yamashita.Tokyo:Sangensha. Arnason,J.P.(1990). "Nationalism, globalization and Modernity" In M.Featherstone(Ed.), Global Culture. London:Sage.pp.207-236. Coughlin,W.J.(1953). "The great Mokusatsu mistake: Was this the deadliest error of our time?" Harper's Magazine, 206(1234) 31-40. "Free at last." (1984). Time, Jan.9, p.24. Habermas,J.(1970). Towards a theory of communicative competence. Inquiry, 13,360-375 Kojima,K.(1996). "Eigoken-no Kuni-ga Harau Daishou." Mainichi Simbun. Jan.9. Ngugi wa Thiongo(1981). Decolinizing the Mind: The politics of language in African Literature. London: James Carey. Pennycook,A.(1994). Cultural Politics of English as an International Language. London: Longman. Phillipson,R.(1992). Linguistic Imperialism. London: Oxford University Press. Robertson,R.(1992). Globalization: Social Theory and Global Culture. London: Sage. Schiller,H.(1989). Disney, Dallas and Electronic Data Flows: The Transnationalization of culture. In C.W.Thomsen (Ed.) (1989). Cultural Transfer or Electronic Imperialism?, 33-43 Carl Winter Universitatverlag.   Schiller,H.(1991). "Not yet the Post-imperialist era?" Critical studies in Mass Communication. 8,13-28. Skutnabb-Kangas,T.& R.Phillipson.(Eds.)(1995). Linguistic Human Rights:Overcoming Linguistic Discrimination. Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter. Takahashi,J.(1991). Kokusai Kaigi-ni Miru Nihonjin-no Ibunka Koushou. In J.Takahashi,et.al.(Eds.), Ibunka-eno Sutoratejii.(pp.181-201). Tokyo:Kawashima Shoten Tehranian,M.(1993). "Ethnic discourse and the new world disorder: A communitarian perspective." In C.Roach (Ed.) Communication and Culture in War and Peace. Newburypark:Sage Publications. 192-215. Tsuda,T.(1986). Language Inequality and Distortion. . The Netherlands:John Benjamines. Tsuda,Y.(1990). Eigo Shihai-no Kouzou (The Structure of the Dominance of English) Tokyo:Daisan Shokan. Tsuda,Y.(1992). Dominance of English and linguistic discrimination Media Development. (39) 1,32-34. Tsuda,Y.(Ed.)(1993a). Eigo Shihai-eno Iron (Objections to the Dominance of English) Tokyo:Daisan Shokan. Tsuda,Y.(1993b). Communication in English: Is it anti-cultural? The Journal of Development Communication. (4)1,68-78. Tsuda,Y.(1994). The diffusion of English: Its impact on culture and communication. Keio Communication Review. (16),48-61. Tsuda,Y.(1996). Shinryaku-suru Eigo, Hangeki-suru Nihongo. (The Invading English, the Counterattacking Japanese). Tokyo:PHP. TSUDA, Yukio. 1994. "The diffusion of English: its impact on culture and communication." Keio Communication Review 16 (1994): 49-61. (Yukio Tsuda, professor no Department of International Communication, na Nagoya University. Autor de Language Inequality and Distortion (1986); The Structure of the Dominance of English, 1990; The Invading English: The Counter-attacking Japanese, 1996.)

Introduction Un de cargas le plus importante que nos eruditos deberea complir es a discoperir un question ex le presupponite realitate existente. Le question que io vole levar in iste discurso se concerne con le uso de anglese, que es hodie multo presupponite in le communitate international.   Parlante del perspectivo non anglophone, io crede que le uso de anglese non deberea esser presupponite, sed illo deberea esser como un problema de hegemonia linguistic. Il es evidente que hodie anglese es de facto le lingua international del communication international, sed il es etiam evidente que le dominantia hodierne de anglese causa non solmente inequalitate linguistic e communicative sed etiam le sentimentos de anxietate e insecuritate specialmente del parte del populo non-anglophone in un mundo rapidemente globalisante in le qual anglese domina extensivemente. Assi, il ha besonio a proponer un paradigma pro contra-attaccar le hegemonia de anglese in maniera que pluralismo linguistic e cultural va esser assecurate. In iste discurso io vole complir duo scopos. Un es a levar le problema del hegemonia de anglese per discuter duo aspectos de illo, a saper neocolonialismo e globalismo. Le altere scopo es a discuter que io nomina "le ecologia del paradigma linguistic" como contra-strategia al hegemonia de anglese a fin de trovar alicun implicationes pro edificar communication international plus equal e pluralismo linguistic. Adressar le problema de hegemonia linguistic es crucial pro le developpamento de securitate human e cultural. 1. Domination de anglese como neo-colonialismo - il es sovente dicte que anglese es le lingua le plus largemente usate pro communication international e intercultural. Un numero de linguistas, in facto, reporta del diffusion global de anglese, indicante le stato dominante de anglese como le plus prevalente lingua de hodie. Ammon, pro exemplo, monstra le dominantia de anglese per provider alicun statistica del dominantia de anglese. Secundo ille, (1) anglese ha le plus grande numero de parlatores, si multe como 1.5 milliardos gente; (2) anglese es designate como lingua official de tanto multe como 62 nationes; (3) anglese es le lingua le plus dominante in communication (4) anglese es de facto le lingua official e de labor in plus organisationes international; (5) anglese es le lingua le plus inseniate in le mundo (Ammon, 1992:78-81)   Anglese es vere le lingua le plus dominante e functiona como media commun pro communication international. Totevia, proque illo es le plus dominante, anglese es etiam un lingua "hegemonic" e "neocolonista", que non solmente crea le structura de inequalitate e discrimination inter le parlatores de anglese e parlatores de altere linguas, sed etiam un regula super multe aspectos de lor vita. Le uso de anglese ha essite presupponite in le plus interactiones international e illo ha quasi nunquam essite ponite sub question. In le communitate academic del west, dominate per anglese, le uso de anglese ha nunquam essite percepte como problematic, in tanto que io sape. Estraniemente, recercas de communication international e intercultural son bastante indifferente al dominantia de anglese, quando socio-linguistica centra al description objective del diffusion de anglese e assi legitima le function de anglese como un lingua international. Takahashi, un anthropologista japonese, post que habente observate le actiones de un conferentia international, in le qual anglese es le sol lingua official, argue que conferentias international que son dominate per anglese son destinate a servir como un arena pro discrimination linguistic e communicative (Takahashi, 1991). Secundo ille, native anglophonos prende plen avantagia del inequalitate linguistic e communicative pro lor beneficios. Takahashi reporta de su observation como seque: Io ha essayate criticamente examinar le dominantia de anglese como problematic in communication international (Tsuda, 1986, 1990, 1992, 1993a, 1993b, 1994, 1996). Io ha trovate que le dominantia de anglese causa consequentias seriose le quales include: (1) inequalitate linguistic e communicative como grande disavantage del parlatores de altere linguas quam anglese (2) discrimination contra le gente nonanglophone e illes qui non son proficiente in anglese; (3) colonisation del conscientia del nonanglophonos, causante que illes developpa dependentia linguistic, cultural e psychologic de e identification con le anglese, su cultura e populo.   1.1. Inequalitate linguistic e communicative - In un situation in le qual anglese domina le communication, le populo nonanglophone es inevitabilemente in disadvantage. Illes deveni mute e surde, e pro isto prevenite de plen participation in communication. Le structura de inequalitate communicative existe in un communication international altemente dominate per anglese. Vamos tractar un exemplo de conferentias international. Il ha un grande gap in le cognoscentia functionante de anglese inter parlatores native e non-native, specialmente con de ille parlatores cuje linguas materne son linguisticamente distante de anglese. Assi, parlatores native intentionamente essaya a pulsar parlatores non-native foras de discussiones per un plen uso de tactica que resulta de characteristicas phonetic, idiomatic, syntactic e pragmatic que son unic solmente in anglese ... Pro exemplo, illes augmenta le rapiditate de parlar, usa un grande numero de jargons e idiomas, o pronuncia dictos que son grammaticamente complexe ... Iste tacticas communicative son usate pro prender avantagia de plus basse competentia de non-native parlatores de anglese (Takahashi, 1991, pp. 188-189). Como Takahashi observava, il pare que native parlatores de anglese in le conferentias que son dominate per anglese usa lor avantagia linguistic pro magnificar lor poter tanto que illes pote establir le relation inequal e asymmetric con le non-native parlatores de anglese e sic pulsar illes foras del currente principal de communication. Il ha multe altere exemplos de inequalitate linguistic e communicative levante del dominantia de anglese, sed il suffice a reportar un exemplo plus. W. J. Coughlin, un jornalista statounitese, reporta del falta de "Mokusatsu" que causava le bombardamento atomic de Hiroshima e Nagasaki (Coughlin, 1953). Ille reporta que le responsa de "Mokusatsu" del prime ministro japonese al demanda del alliatos unite de capitulation complete, era misinterpretate a significar "rejectar" le demanda, que compelleva le presidente statounitese de ille tempore, Harry Truman, a decider pro bombardamento atomic. "Mokusatsu" actualmente significa e "ignorar" e "nulle commento". Le puncta de iste mal interpretation de un parola es que in le communication Japon - SUA, dominate per anglese, le statouniteses semper ha le controlo de semantica sub le qual le nuances subtil del semantica japonese son "ignorate" o "passate super." In altere parolas, in le communication que es dominate per anglese, parlatores deanglese son in position a controlar le communication a lor proprie avantage. 1.2. Discrimination linguistic e inequalitate social - Le dominantia de anglese etiam crea le prejudicios e stereotypos que, in torno, crea discrimination contra illes qui non parla e non pote parlar anglese. Pro exemplo, illes qui non pote parlar anglese fluentemente son etiquettate como incompetente, e talmente insultate e percepte a esser inferior. Permitte me presentar duo exemplos de discrimination como un resultato del dominantia de anglese. Le prime exemplo veni como un articulo ex Time Magazine, que reporta de un immigrante chinese al Statos Unite. Ille era confinate in un institution mental pro trentaun annos proque del "anglese incomprehensibile" le qual ille parlava. Le articulo reporta que quando ille visitava un doctor, ille era diagnosticate como "abnormal" proque del anglese que ille parlava. ("Finalmente libere," 1984) Le secunde exemplo illustra discrimination inter non-native parlatores de anglese. Kazuo Kojima, un jornalista japonese, scribe un essayo del rolo de anglese in Asia del sudest como un base de discrimination (Kojima, 1996). Habente potentia a parlar anglese es tal fonte de orgolio pro le populo in iste paises que alicun competente parlatores de anglese son inclinate a insultar e discriminar contra illes qui non pote parlar anglese. Kojima ipse ha un experientia personal de haber audite un indiano dicer: "Iraqis son bestias proque illes non pote parlar anglese." Io crede que illo es un caso extreme, e le plus indianos non tene un attitude tal discriminatori. Totevia, iste duo exemplos suggere que le dominantia de anglese es tal que le stereotypos e prejudicios son facilemente create a tener un perception discriminatori e attitude contra illes qui non parla o non pote parlar anglese. In altere parolas, anglese, proque de su dominante stato prestigiose, functiona como un base de discrimination, e pro isto legitima e reproduce le perceptiones de prejudicio linguistic e discrimination. Perceptiones discriminatori e attitudes contra non-anglophonos justifica le hierarchia social que placia native parlatores de anglese al summitate del ordine con non-native parlatores de anglese placiate in le medie, e le gente qui non parla anglese placiate al basso. Le dominantia de anglese es tal que anglese servi como un criterion per le qual a classificar populo conforme al competentia in anglese. Assi, native parlatores de anglese regna como un prestigiose classe regnante de communication international: illes pote semper facilemente exprimer lor ideas, quando le nonnative parlatores e populo qui non parla anglese constitue le "mute" classe de proletariato del communication international: illes son reducte al sclavitude de apprender anglese e ha difficultates in exprimer lor ideas. Isto es le qual io nomina "le structura de classes de communication international" al base de competentia in anglese. 1.3. Colonisation del conscientia - Le tertie e ultime consequentia del dominantia de anglese es le qual es usualmente nominate "Colonisation del conscientia" que refere al controlo mental del colonisate per le colonisator. Colonisation del mente occurre como un resultato del domination del lingua del colonisator super le lingua del colonisate. Ngugi wa Thiong'o, un autor african, famose de su libro de titulo "Decolonisar le mente", describe como colonialismo prende controlo del mente del colonisate como seque: Le plus importante area de domination de colonialismo era le universo mental del colonisate, le controlo, per cultura, de como gente percipe illes ipse e lor relation al mundo ...   Pro colonialismo isto involveva duo aspectos del mesme processo: le destruction o subvalutation deliberate de cultura de un populo, lor arte, dansas, religiones, historia, geographia, education, oratoria e litteratura, e le elevation consciente del lingua del colonisator. Le domination de lingua de un populo per le linguas del nation colonisator era crucial al domination del universo del colonisate. (Ngugi, 1981:160, sublineate per Tsuda)   Como Ngugi clarmente monstra, domination linguistic conduce a controlo mental. Isto implica que le dominantia global de anglese hodierne es a conducer al controlo del mente del population global per le parlatores de anglese, e lor nationes, e lor governamentos. Ngugi etiam releva que le controlo mental es facte possibile per un combination del "destruction o del subvalutar deliberate de cultura de un populo" e "le elevation consciente del lingua del colonisator". Con iste controlo mental, le colonisate/dominate usualmente es coercite a obsequer con le fortia de controlo mental, que facilita le execution del colonisation del mente. In breve, le dominates son abducte a identificar se con le dominator, e glorificar le lingua de dominatores quando devalutante lor proprie lingua, verso a un illo centrate de anglese; a saper, le colonisation de mente de un persona e le consciente devalutar de su proprie lingua. 2. Domination de anglese como globalismo - Quando le domination de anglese como neocolonialismo occurre al nivello de international communication interpersonal, le dominantia de anglese como globalismo opera al nivello de international communication de massas que involve le cosas como imperialismo cultural e illo de media, "americanisation" de cultura global, McDonaldisation e dallasisation del societate, le flucto inequal de novas e information international, le dominantia de anglese in le interrete, et cetera. In breve, le domination de anglese opera como medio pro promover globalisation. Le dominantia de anglese sin dubita servi pro facilitar globalisation. Globalisation, in torno, assume e incoragia le uso e dominantia de anglese. In altere parolas, le dominantia de anglese es un reflection del structura de relationes global. A. Pennycock, un specialista australian de linguistica applicate, pro exemplo, releva le interrelation inter le dominantia de anglese e le structura de relationes global como seque: Le uso extensive de illo menacia altere linguas; illo ha devenite le lingua de poter e prestigio in multe paises, talmente agente como un portero crucial a progresso social e economic; le uso de illo particularmente in dominios, specialmente professional, pote exacerbar relationes differente de poter e pote render iste dominios plus inaccessibile a multe gente; su position in le mundo da a illo un rolo etiam como un portero international, regulante le fluxo international de gente; illo es strictemente concatenate a formas de cultura e cognoscentia national que son dominante in le mundo; e illo es etiam ligate con aspectos de relationes global, como diffusion de capitalismo, adjuta de developpamento e le dominantia particularmente de media nord-american (Pennycock, 1994, p 13). Assi adressar le dominantia de anglese es crucial pro comprehender le structura de relationes global. Secundo le sociologista Roland Robertson, uno del eruditores de "globalisation" le plus prominente, "globalisation" como un concepto, refere al "crystallisation del tote le mundo como un placio singule" (citate in Arnason, 1990:220) o "le compression del mundo e le intensification de conscientia del mundo como un integritate" (Robertson, 1992:8). "Globalisation" in un senso plus concrete es in processo de prender spatio primarimente in dominios economic in le qual corporationes transnational (CTRs) age como le agente a conducer affaires e commercio foris de frontieras national. Como resultato, nos vive in un "cultura global", in le qual nostre vita es reimplete con productos e information importate de paises ultramar. Pro isto "globalisation" es le credentia o un forma de conscientia que "globalisation" va evenir. Globalismo accepta "globalisation" como natural. Totevia, como io mentionava, globalisation de facto causa le "americanisation" del cultura mundial e mcdonaldisation del societate: illo non es un processo attentivemente planificate, sed illo es un mer affirmation del structura del inequal relationes global in le qual qualque nationes del Centro domina super le nationes de Peripheria. Assi, "globalismo" justifica "globalisation" como illo eveni hodie. "Globalismo" preveni nos de recognoscer le tres consequentias de globalisation que include: (1) Anglo-americanisation, (2) Transnationalisation, e (3) Commercialisation de nostre vita contemporari. 2.1. Globalisation como anglo-americanisation - Le problema le plus seriose causate per globalisation es le anglo-americanisation del cultura mundial, basate al monopolio del mercato global de information e intertenimento. A prender cinema, pro exemplo. De 87 paises surveliate in 1992, tanto multe como 63 paises importa le plus grande numero de peliculas del Statos Unite, e 20 de 25 paises europee ha un percentage de 60-70 pro centos de peliculas statounitese. Etiam in Japon, plus quam meditate de su peliculas son importate del Statos Unite (Tsuda, 1996). Il pare que le dominantia de productos statounitese es evidente in tote le mercato global decommunication de massa: Videos statounitese, musica, novas, magazines, programmas de TV, et cetera, son exportate trans tote le mundo. Isto inevitabilemente resulta in le "controlo ideologic" del population mundial, specialmente per le Statos Unite. Maniera de statounitese de sentimento e pensamento deveni multo visibile e pro isto influential quando productos cultural e illos de information statounitese son recepte e benvenite per tote le population del mundo. Assi, anglo-americanisation e globalisation va mano in mano, permittente le Statos Unite a esser in un position a controlar, influentiar e dominar altere paises in terminos de valores, credentias e pensamentos. Le dominantia de productos de media statounitese provide al Statos Unite le poter a promover e facilitar globalisation equalmente ben como a diffunder lor valores trans le mundo. Illo etiam facilita le diffusion global de anglese. Le resto del mundo es simplemente bombardate con le images, ideas e valores que non son lor proprie. In iste maniera americanisation e globalisation causa invasion ideologic in paises trans le mundo e interfere le auto-determination cultural e politic le major parte de paises. 2.2. Globalisation como transnationalisation - Le characteristica le plus fracassante de globalisation es su fortia de transnationalisation. A causa de developpamento rapide de technologias de telecommunication e retes como satellitos de communication, computatores personal e interrete, le plus messages e information son disseminate in un scala global, facilemente transpassing le frontieras national. Le poter de messages transnational es tanto forte que on crede que le image ex le west ha influentiate le populo del Germania del est e causate le collapso del muro de Berlin. Isto duce nos a creder que quicunque controla le canales e media de telecommunication transnational pote controlar le relationes global. Io volerea dicer que le systema presente de telecommunication transnational, que es pesantemente dominate per le avanciate paises capitalista del west, como le Statos Unite, es solmente un reflection del structura inequal inter le paises del Centro e le paises del Peripheria. Benque il habeva un demanda urgente pro un fluxo plus equal de information international domo demonstrate in le essayo del UNESCO a establir "Le Nove Ordine del Information e Communication Mundial", que startava in le 1970s, tal appello del nationes non-westerne ha del major parte essite ignorate per le Statos Unite e le Regno Unite quando illos quitava UNESCO in le medietate del 1980s.   Le introduction del "autostrata de information" per le Statos Unite e diffusion global del interrete in le 1990s resultava in le perdita de interesse in le cosa de disequilibrio e inequalitate in le fluxo de information international. Super toto, le dominantia de anglese in le interrete e information international non solmente crea inequalitate in communication e homogenisation de cultura, sed illo etiam affirma e reinfortia le structura de inequalitate inter anglese e altere linguas.   Assi, le aspecto de transnationalisation de globalisation non contribue al establimento de un communication plus equal. Potius, globalisation opera a consolidar le structura de poter de relationes global in le qual le paises avantiate capitalista como le Statos Unite domina super le resto.   2.3. Globalisation como commercialisation - Hodie anglese es le optime mercantia pro le paises anglophone que pote esser exportate trans tote le mundo. Anglese es le producto best-seller omne anno. Il significa que le paises anglophone ha plus grande capital linguistic quam le paises de altere linguas. Proque anglese es un lingua le plus generalmente usate e inseniate, illo es facilemente acceptate in quasi ulle placia in le mundo. Proque de iste optime communicabilitate e acceptibilitate, le productos relatate rangiante de peliculas, videos, DCs a jeans, camisas "T", discos, et cetera, son exportate e consumpte in tote le mundo. Un de problemas con iste globalisation de productos anglese es que illo crea "domination cultural" per le Statos Unite como etiam per corporationes transnational super le paises non-westerne e le mundo tertie. Herbert Schiller, un erudito critic statounitese, characterisa le diffusion global de domination cultural como "domination cultural per corporationes transnational" (Schiller, 1991) que causa le commercialisation de nostre vita: Excludente le voce public, denegante le derecto a expression politic, exaltante shopping como le activitate primari de existentia human possedite privatemente. Le centro de shopping es le supreme expression de capitalismo contemporari, que provide le experience social quotidian pro milliones de gente. Si le ordine de corporationes transnational ha un vision - possibilemente un notion absurde - certo illo debe esser illo de un global centro de shopping. (Schiller, 1989:43). Schiller assi releva que domination cultural american e illo de corporationes transnational diffunde in omne spheras de nostre vita quotidian, commercialisante tote le spatios physic e mental de nostre vita. Isto provoca altere problema con le globalisation de productos anglese, a saper commercialisation de nostre vita e existentia. Productos cultural statounitese como Disnelyland, rock & roll, McDonalds etc. appella a, e satisface, le libido del populo, talmente transformante nostre existentia a mer consumentes de iste productos qui de bon voluntate continua a emer illos sin realmente saper que illes son trappate in un cyclo de consumption. Un vice trappate in le cyclo de consumption, populo accepta lo como inevitabile e talmente deveni felicemente reducte in sclavitude de consumer productos anglese. Assi globalisation de productos anglese non solmente da loco a "domination cultural" del Statos Unite a corporationes transnational, sed etiam causa "commercialisation" de tote le spheras de nostre vita in le qual nos deveni consumentes qui de bon voluntate eme productos anglese, incognoscentemente adjutante in reproduction del structura de domination cultural e commercialisation de vita. 3. Le ecologia linguistic como un contra-strategia al hegemonia de anglese - Nos ha vidite in le discussiones in supra que le hegemonia de anglese crea e reproduce inequalitate, discrimination, colonisation del mente como etiam americanisation, transnationalisation e commercialisation de nostre vita contemporari. In ordine a solver iste problemas e realisar communication equal e emancipatori, le ecologia de paradigma linguistic es multo besoniate como un theoria de resister le hegemonia de anglese. Le ecologia de paradigma linguistic servi como un theoria o perspectiva pro promover un plus equal politica de lingua e communication in le mundo. Io ha le prime vice dicte del "ecologia de paradigma linguistic" in 1993 in Honolulu al "Foro de internationalisation" del Centro de est-west. Le duo paradigmas son sequente: "Le paradigma de diffusion de anglese", que es un position dominante non solmente in le mundo anglo-american sed etiam in le previe colonias britannic in Asia e Africa, es characterisate per orientationes theoretic como capitalismo, scientia e technologia, modernisation, monolingualismo, globalisation ideologic e internationalisation, transnationalisation, americanisation, e homogeneisation del cultura mundial, e imperialismo linguistic, cultural e del media. In contrasto, un alternative critic orientation theoretic del Paradigma de diffusion de anglese es que io nomina le "Paradigma de ecologia linguistic". Iste paradigma es basate al positiones theoretic como perspective de derectos human, equalitate in communication, multilingualismo, mantenentia de linguas e culturas, protection de soveranitates national, promotion de education de linguas estranier (Tsuda, 1994: 58-59). Assi, le diffusion de anglese e le qual que io nomina "le paradigma de hegemonia de anglese", es evidentemente un paradigma qui servi capitalismo e civilisation westerne, quando le "paradigma de ecologia linguistic" es un paradigma que es critic del philosophia subjacente de civilisation westerne que avantia modernisation. Pro exemplo, le philosophia de lingua in le "paradigma de hegemonia de anglese" es basicamente functionalismo in illo que illo vide lingua como un mer utensile o instrumento pro communication e falle a comprender que illo es un componento essential de cultura e identitate. Assi, le "paradigma de hegemonia de anglese" disconnecte lingua de cultura e le gente qui lo usa. Del altere parte, le "paradigma de ecologia linguistic" assume que lingua es cultura e un fundo de identitate personal. Alsi, le ecologia linguistic crede que lingua es un ambiente preciose, que crea nostre cultura e nos. Lingua non es solmente un mer instrumento, sed illo es un ambiente que influentia e forma nos.   Assi, le "paradigma de ecologia linguistic" crede que lingua es populo e populo es lingua. Pro isto, inequalitate inter linguas significa inequalitate inter gente. Le morte de un lingua es le morte de su parlatores.   Basate sur iste vistas de lingua, le "paradigma de ecologia linguistic" advoca le sequente: (1) Le derecto de lingua (2) Equalitate in communication (3) Multilingualismo e multiculturalismo Advocante iste scopos, le "paradigma de ecologia linguistic" essaya a promover securitate linguistic e cultural pro le populo non-anglophone. Vamos tractar omnes de illos. 3.1. Le derecto a lingua - Le "paradigma de ecologia linguistic" reguarda "le derecto a lingua" como un derecto essential pro cata persona. "Le derecto a lingua" primarimente refere a un derecto e libertate de un individuo a usar un lingua que illa/ille ipse selige in omne circumstantias. Illo dunque assume le derecto e libertate de un individuo non usar un lingua qui non es selection de illa/ille sed imposte a illa/ille. Le concepto central del "derecto de linguas" reside in le uso e recognition de "linguas materne" de un individuo. Tove Skutnabb-Kangas e Robert Phillipson, autores de Linguistic derectos human, define "linguistic derectos human" e "linguas matyerne" como seque: Nos va provisionalmente reguardar linguistic derectos human in relation al lingua(s) materne como consistente del derecto a identificar se con illo/illos, e a education e servicios public per le medio de illo/illos. Linguas materne son hic definite como "le lingua(s) que un ha apprendite initialmente e con le quales un se identifica." In relation a altere linguas nos va reguardar linguistic derectos human como consistente del derecto a apprender un lingua official in le pais de residentia, in le forma standardisate de illo (Skutnabb-Kangas & Phillipson, 1995:71). Skutnabb-Kangas e Phillipson accentua duo factores in lor definition. Un es "identification con linguas materne de un individuo". Illes crede que attachamento emotional a linguas materne de uno deberea esser recognisate como un parte del "derecto a lingua". Altere factor accentuate per Skutnabb-Kangas e Phillipson es participation e integration social. Illes recognosce lingua como un canal que permitte gente a participar e integrar se al societate. Illes recognosce accesso a un lingua official como un parte de linguistic derectos human. Pro isto, nos pote provisionalmente dicer que "le derecto a lingua" involve le derecto de un individuo a usar, apprender e identificar con un lingua de selection de illa/ille includente su linguas materne e linguas official del pais ubi illes vive. 3.2. Equalitate in communication - Le condition pro equalitate in communication international es equalitate inter linguas. Si un parlator de lingua A e un parlator de lingua B communica parlante le un de iste duo linguas, inequalitate in communication occurre. Un del factores le plus influential que justifica le uso de anglese in communication international es assumer como cosa evidente que anglese deberea esser usate. Le populo anglophone inconsciemente crede que anglese es usate per tote le populo; a saper, illes inconsciemente tene conscientia linguistic imperialista, quando le populo non-anglophone assume le uso de anglese como inevitabile, indicante le colonisation del mente de lor parte. Assi, un revolution de conscientia es besoniate a alleviar conscientia imperialista como etiam colonisation del mente. Un approche practic a establir equalitate in communication international es "localismo linguistic", o le uso de linguas local per omne participantes in communication. Pro exemplo, quando un conferentia international es arrangiate in Francia, omne participantes va parlar francese, quando si un conferentia es arrangiate in Japon, japonese deberea esser usate. Per practicar "localismo linguistic" nos pote developpar un conscientia intercultural de divider le carga de uso e apprender linguas estranier. Uso efficiente de traductores e interpretes es etiam incoragiate a promover uso equal de linguas. In addition, le uso de un tertie lingua, o le qual io nomina "communication neutralinguistic" es un altere approche. Quando un statounitese e un chinese communica in un tertie lingua, como francese, russo o malay, illes va ingagiar in communication linguisticamente equal in comparition con communication in anglese que unilateralmente favora le statounitese. Un altere strategia pro promover equality in communication es a equalar handicap linguistic del participantes in communication. Pro exemplo, si cata uno de nos parla un lingua estranier o un planate lingua constructe como esperanto, nos pote establir equalitate in handicap linguistic, que va ducer a equalitate in communication. Le ration primari pro accentuar equalitate in communication es le qual que illo va establir "symmetria" inter gente, permittente illes a intercambiar ideas sin multe pression como theorista social german J. Harems monstra quando ille parla de "le situation ideal de parlar". Intersubjectivitate pur existe solmente quando il ha un symmetria complete in le distribution de assertion e disputa, revelation e celamento, prescription e conformitate, inter le partneros de communication (Habermas, 1970:371). De omne symmetrias, symmetria linguistic es le plus importante pro realisar equalitate on communication e in le "ideal situation de parlar". 3.3. Multilingualismo e multiculturalismo - Multilingualismo e multiculturalismo pote etiam esser nominate "pluralismo linguistic e cultural", suggerente un position critic theoretic contra monolingualismo e monoculturalismo que mira a un lingua e un culto. Quando nos reguarda retro al historia de modernisation, nos trova que illo era un processo de edificar societates monolingua e monocultural, quando linguas standardisate era developpate pro communication efficiente al expensa de innumerabile linguas e dialectos local. Como resultato, hierarchisation linguistic emergeva, e illo causava stratification e inequalitate social como etiam discrimination. Globalisation como illo eveni hodie es in processo de crear un nove "global societate de classes" in le qual cultura anglese e anglo-american domina como un "classe regnante global". Linguistica e pluralismo cultural es un contrastrategia contra le fortia de monolingualismo e monoculturalismo. Illo oppose singularismo monolithic proque diversitate es le indice le plus importante de un societate vermente democratic. Pluralismo es un philosophia de tolerantia e conviventia, que proseque un coexistentia harmonic de culturas, linguas e populos differente. Pluralismo etiam presta le plus attention al minoritates, le dominate e le disavantiate, proque illo crede que on debe offere a iste gente opportunitates equal. Assi, linguistica e pluralismo cultural non solmente critica monolingualismo e monoculturalismo, sed illo servi como un indicator importante pro determinar si un certe societate es vermente democratic o non. Le philosophia de pluralismo es multo necessari si nos realmente vole a realisar le democratisation de communication international que es dominate per un lingua, a saper anglese. Implicationes del paradigma de ecologia linguistic Le ideas e scopos advocate per le ecologia de lingua deberea esser incorporate in le theorias e practicas de communication international, specialmente pro le objecto de democratisar lo. Permitte me summarisar in le sequente alicunos del implicationes del ecologia de lingua pro le melioration de communication international hodierne.   (1) Le ecologia de lingua provide perspective critic pro le communication international, que es al presente dominate per anglese, e leva conscientia del cosas como le derecto a lingua e equalitate in communication.   (2) Illo servi le populo non-anglophone per provider un base theoretic pro edificar strategias pro lucta contra le hegemonia de anglese e promover lor securitate e autorisation cultural. In altere parolas, illo servi como un strategia pro creation un equilibrio de poter cultural e linguistic inter anglese e altere linguas. (3) Illo provide un fundo theoretic pro le developpamento de global politica linguistic, specialmente del position de promover multilingualismo e multiculturalismo. (4) Illo servi le populo anglophone per provider a illes un conscientia e sapientia critic a proposito del dominantia de anglese, levante conscientia de equalitate in communication, le derecto a lingua, e pluralismo linguistic e cultural. Le paradigma de ecologia linguistic non es sin mendas e debilitates. Forsan, isolationismo linguistic e cultural es uno del trappas que probabilemente va occurrer. Si multilingualismo, pro exemplo, es prosequite al extreme al costo de tote altere, le parlatores de linguas de minoritate pote esser confinate in lor linguas e talmente non pote communicar con le mundo foras de lor confinios linguistic e cultural. In ordine a prevenir isolationismo linguistic e cultural nos deberea recognisar ideas "ecologic-consciente" como "globalismo communitarian" e "localismo liberal" developpate per M. Tehranian (Tehranian, 1993) e integrar los in le paradigma de ecologia linguistic. Conclusion - Quando io critica le hegemonia de anglese, io es respondate con le mesme question: "Io comprende que vos parla. Sed reguarda, anglese es le lingua franca hodierne. Como pote nos communicar sin illo?" Io non nega le uso o apprender de anglese. Potius, le qual que io actualmente defia es le ver sapientia o conscientia que face il possibile pro gente a facer un tal question: le cognoscentia que prende como auto-evidente le realitate existente, accepta lo como natural, inevitabile, mesmo beneficial; le cognoscentia que refusa a vider le alternative. Nos besonia a examinar le realitate existente e deinde essayar a plenar le vacuo inter le status quo e le ideal per explorar le problemas e provider solutiones a illos. In conclusion, io volerea presentar tres suggestiones. Le prime es directe a eruditos de communication international e intercultural. Illo es, io suggere que le hegemonia de anglese deberea devenir le subjecto de inquesta academic in le area de communication international e intercultural, specialmente in paises anglophone. Le secunde suggestion es directe a professionales inseniatores del lingua anglese. Io suggere que le education de lingua anglese deberea incorporar le paradigma de ecologia linguistic in le contentos e methodos de inseniamento como etiam in le education de inseniatores. Le ultime suggestion va a omne parlatores de anglese. Io suggere que parlatores de anglese native e non-native vaderea apprender le philosophia del ecologia de lingua pro deveniente plus sensitive al aspectos ethic de communication international.   REFERENTIAS Ammon, U. (1992). Gengo-to Sono Chii. Trad. per Y. Hieda e H.Yamashita. Tokyo:Sangensha. Arnason,J.P.(1990). "Nationalismo, globalisation e modernitate" In M.Featherstone(Ed.), Cultura global. London:Sage.pp.207-236. Coughlin,W.J.(1953). "Le grande error de Mokusatsu: An illo era le plus fatal error in nostre era?" Harper's Magazine, 206(1234) 31-40. "Libere al fin." (1984). Time, Jan.9, p.24. Habermas,J.(1970). Verso a un theoria de competentia communicative. Inquiry, 13,360-375 Kojima,K.(1996). "Eigoken-no Kuni-ga Harau Daishou." Mainichi Simbun. Jan.9. Ngugi wa Thiongo(1981). Decolonisation de mente: Le politica linguistic in litteratura african. London: James Carey. Pennycook,A.(1994). Politica cultural de anglese como un lingua international. London: Longman. Phillipson,R.(1992). Imperialismo linguistic. London: Oxford University Press. Robertson,R.(1992). Globalisation: Theoria social e cultura global. London: Sage. Schiller,H.(1989). Disney, Dallas e fluxos de data electronic: Le transnationalisation de cultura. In C.W.Thomsen (Ed.) (1989). Transferimento cultural o imperialismo electronic? 33-43 Carl Winter Universitatverlag. Schiller,H.(1991). "Ancora non un era post-imperialista?" Studios critic in communication de massa. 8,13-28. Skutnabb-Kangas,T.& R.Phillipson.(Eds.)(1995). Derectos human linguistic: Superar discrimination linguistic. Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter. Takahashi,J.(1991). Kokusai Kaigi-ni Miru Nihonjin-no Ibunka Koushou. In J.Takahashi,et.al.(Eds.), Ibunka-eno Sutoratejii.(pp.181-201). Tokyo:Kawashima Shoten Tehranian,M.(1993). "Discurso ethnic e le nove ordine mundial: Un perspectivo communitarian." In C.Roach (Ed.) Communication e cultura in guerra e pace. Newburypark:Sage Publications. 192-215. Tsuda,T.(1986). Inequalitate e distortion linguistic. Le Pais Basse: John Benjamines. Tsuda,Y.(1990). Eigo Shihai-no Kouzou (Le structura del dominantia de anglese). Tokyo:Daisan Sokan. Tsuda,Y.(1992). Dominantia de anglese e discrimination linguistic. Media Development. (39) 1,32-34. Tsuda,Y.(Ed.)(1993a). Eigo Shihai-eno Iron (Objectiones al dominantia de anglese). Tokyo:Daisan Shokan. Tsuda,Y.(1993b). Communication in anglese: Es illo anti-cultural? The Journal of Development Communication. (4)1,68-78. Tsuda,Y.(1994). Le diffusion de anglese: Su impacto a cultura e communication. Keio Communication Review. (16),48-61. Tsuda,Y.(1996). Shinryaku-suru Eigo, Hangeki-suru Nihongo. (Le anglese invadente, le japonese contra-attaccante). Tokyo:PHP. TSUDA, Yukio. 1994. "Le diffusion de anglese: su impacto a cultura e communication." Keio Communication Review 16 (1994): 49-61. (Yukio Tsuda, professor de Departimento de Communication International, Universitate de Nagoya. Autor de Inequalitate e distortion linguistic (1986); Le structura del dominantia de anglese, 1990; Le anglese invadente: Le japonese contra-attaccante, 1996.)

Actualisate le 2011-10-28 Administrator de iste sito: -------------------------- Allan Kiviaho SILY - Suomen Interlinguayhdistys ry. FILF - Föreningen för Interlingua i Finland AFIL - Association Finlandese pro Interlingua