Language etiquette: What happens when we don't bow down to English

Language is a funny thing. It is our primary and quintessential means of communication with each other and with the world. It is the fundamental backbone of civilization. And due to the ways in which our species and civilizations have evolved, language is also inextricably tied to culture. Languages therefore hold a wealth of information, hidden within its grammar and lexis. As Octavio Paz said, "Each language is a view of the world." Languages are seen as the fierce protectors and warriors of cultural assimilation. When a language dies, something inexplicably precious has been forever lost. In today’s globalized multicultural world, language is also a means of advancement within society. To better one’s own language or to learn another can and will open many figurative doors. Not to mention the wide strata and culture of people that become accessible with each newfound ability to communicate. Yet despite all of these extraordinary traits languages possess, some people find this plethora of linguistic diversity offensive.

Let me start from the beginning. Given our intensely globalized and diverse societies, it is only natural that a form of language etiquette, or rules of language choice appropriacy should evolve along with it. Previously, it was very simple. If you were in Thailand, regardless of where you were from, you should and will be forced to speak Thai, as no one there spoke any other language. If you were in England, the primary language would be English. However now, as English has become the de facto international language it is very possible to travel the world with the knowledge of only one language. English is no longer seen as the representative or ‘guardian’ of one single culture but has evolved to take on the role as the primary language in international or intercultural relations.

The consequences of this linguistic evolution are numerous, most notably for the so called ‘language etiquette’. Previously, before English reached its current state of global dominance, the de facto linguistic rule was in favour of the local language. If you were in Spain, this was Spanish. In addition, if you were in a French household in Spain, the language would be French, the circumstantial “local” language. Presently however, as we now have an international currency of languages, the de facto language for any international gathering tends to be English. However, this is not to be mistaken as ‘English, the representative of England or America’, for the language as mentioned, has taken on a new status, and is not solely tied to England, America, or any specific culture. Billions of people all around the world speak fluent English and have never set foot in either country. As with the United Nations, the governance system between governments, English is now the language between other languages and cultures. And this system has worked rather well. One of the only major problems is the confusion garnered by the fact that there are still at least half a dozen countries that have English as one of or the sole language.

Given the fact that language is the guardian of culture, most of these English-speaking countries enjoy somewhat of a special status internationally, as there is no risk of the death of their language. It is very widely spoken all throughout the world. The people from these countries can also travel with an ease unknown to people from any other culture, for they have no need to learn another language to travel, theirs is almost identical to the international currency of languages. The only draw-back of this to these few countries, is given this special status they have acquired, they largely feel no need to learn any other language. Why should they when they can safeguard their culture as well as communicate effortlessly all over the world.

However this perspective is short-sighted, as the advantages of learning another language are immeasurable, and not only in terms of intellectual or personal development or international travel. People from cultures who do not have this special status internationally, and who have been raised speaking two or three languages, often have a far better insight to the position and perspectives of other cultures; A sort of cultural empathy, so to speak. They are also far more adept to learning a third, fourth, or fifth language. As such, their ability to adapt to life in another country is significantly increased. But most importantly in regards to the notion of language etiquette, is that they are intensely more aware of the question and sometimes controversy of language and its tie to culture.

People from these special status English-speaking countries however, are often ignorant of these linguistic controversies or the weight the death of a language can carry, for the simple fact that they often only speak one language, the international language. So they often have no ability to think of language objectively, for they have never existed or thought in the space between languages. They have had no need for this, for chances are, they have always been understood and have always had the ability to understand. So inevitably, when someone who has always been able to effortless communicate or understand is suddenly confronted with a situation in which they can no longer communicate, or can no longer understand, they feel frustrated.

So what happens to language etiquette in these circumstances? It is quite natural that people from English-speaking countries are quite used to English being the de facto language everywhere they go. But what happens when language etiquette presents a situation, where it is acceptable to continue speaking in another language? When you are in a Russian-speaking household for example. Or when you are in an international group in a country where next to no one speaks the local language? English-speakers quite often expect to continue their communications in English, and often, they have no other choice, as they speak no other language. However, as most English-speakers are not used to these situations, and have no awareness of the aforementioned weight language can carry, they are often frustrated that they cannot communicate and offended as they feel left out.

However, being frustrated with or offended by your company for your own inability to understand or communicate is as logical as a heterosexual male GOP Republican being offended that a woman is using contraception, or that a homosexual man is having sex with his partner, or that an Muslim in the Middle-East believes in a different deity than themselves. It is absolutely illogical and is no excuse for you to vent your frustrations or anger out on these people, or anyone else for that matter.

If you are offended by something that is outside your control and is in itself a perfectly legitimate action, then perhaps you should stop and examine the heart of the problem: yourself. Instead of making these people feel bad for something that they have a right to do, be it have a sexual relationship with someone they love, or speak their native language, maybe you should stop think about why it is that you have a problem with this behaviour or action. Use that energy to try to rectify or change something that you actually have control over, namely, yourself and your own behaviour.

If everyone that was offended by someone innocently doing something on their own time, or by someone speaking their language and preserving their culture in their presence, channeled that energy to something productive, such as learning another language for example, there would most definitely be far less misunderstandings in the first place.