[Dr. Jamshid Ibrahim]

A word of comfort to those of you who are unhappy about an important and so far unique and unprecedented linguistic development underway in the world and the present shift in English identity to a world property or world identity.

The rise of a global English doesn't mean the loss of a geographical identity. People in Britian remain British, those in the US stay American. A model is Switzerland. You can be German, French or Italian but you are ultimately Swiss. Even now the term Spanish is misleading because it doesn't consider the Catalans and others.

Although I still believe the loss of a linguistic identity has far more advantages than drawbacks, other languages in the world won't be spared. A much more disasterous fate is awaiting them. It will also free us from the shackles of nationalism and arrogance. We will save time and energy which we still put into translation. A global English might overrun and replace lots of languages (alas Francais what has become of la grande nation). So everybody in the world will acquire a new linguistic identity. I wonder, what's wrong with that? After all languages come and go. This is a rule of nature. Just think of what happened to Latin. It gave birth before it died to a number of daughters Like: Italian, Spanish, Portuguese....

On the other hand a lot of people are worried that the English invasion will bring with it American and English culture. They believe it's a kind of cultural colonialism. The whole world will be Anglo-Saconized or Americanized. Even in China people have already started eating MacDonald's hamburegers. So there is no reason to worry that Chinese (Mandarin) one day will be a more powerful language than English. Chinese sounds are more difficult to the people's of the world. In addition it's writing system is cumbersom and not suitable for international communication. Human beings have always lamented the demise of the present. Shelly's "West Wind" makes way for a new life.

I always say language is the basis for all human interactions. No thinking is possible without language. I wonder why linguistics and language have not got the attention and focus they deserve till now. After all, human knowledge and science is only possible through the medium of language . What we are doing now is only possible because we have a language.

Acquiring a new language opens new perspectives on life and broadens our
minds. our identity is still based on language. However, in case of English and because of its international role the idea of identity might get lost or is in deed on its way to be lost (it is becoming a world or a human identity). Yet, English culture and literature can only be seen in English. That's why although translation is a brilliant discipline it cannot overcome its deficiencies. Just imagine translating Shakespeare or Coleridge into Dutch.

In short, language is superior to all other disciplines and is always first in sequence. It is knowledge, pleasure, emotions (mind and body or body and soul in one). After all we are not only heads but bodies too.

Density and Speed
One question which doesn't leave my mind is: Can the human language we
know cope with the information density and the speed we are experiencing. As you know, information is growing and coding or packing information into language is necessary. Informal language uses more
verbs. So it is more verbal or verbose (i.e. information density is low). Academic language tries to avoid verbs as much as possible apart from some basic ones like: be, have and a couple of other high frequency verbs. So nominalization is a feature of Academic English because of the problem of information density. You can do more operations on nouns than on verbs. For example you can count nouns, use adjectives with them (describe them) etc..But nominalization means using nouns and as you know most of them, at least the academic ones, are of Romance origin i.e. very long words (multisyllabic). What will be if this information density grows to such an extent that the present human language is no more capable ! of packing information. On the other hand human language is slow for communicating messages. You need more time to pronounce long Romance words. Will there be a new communication medium to cope with the problems of density and speed. The more you think of it the more fascinating it becomes.

Ambiguity, Density, Identity and Speed
Now I would like to extend the ideas of density and speed which I touched upon to two additional important phenomena which are part and parcel of human language.

Ambiguity
Some people complain about the imprecise use of language.If human language won't suffice to code information in the future due to information density and speed and of course due to misunderstandings (ambiguity) then the analogue language we have now might make way for a digital language . Nowadays, everything is becoming digital. Why not human language? Of course, I don't mean changing human language by prescription but by convention (This has been at least the custom so far). Once human language is digitzed or replaced by a digital (computer) language (whether prescribed or agreed on), not only ambiguity ends but also beauty and mysticism and culture of human heritage. This means there will definitely be advantages of density, speed and clarity but I am afraid a lot of disadvantages as I already
mentioned will ensue foremost among those is reduction. Digital data is
compressed or zipped. Compression means losing part of the information
which is beyond human perception. Thus! , Digitalization means reducing
human language to two modes, there is current or no current, a duality of yes and no like vending machines or computers. It is always a win/lose situation (there is no win/win case). This is an economic principle. If I spend two hours on reading at home I might lose two hours of conversation with my friends. We have to make a decision and
set priorities.

Identity Another problem of human language is identity. Identity doesn't only help us to belong to a nation and provide a profile but also create big human conflicts. Just take nationalism which is not only based on skin colour and facial features but also on language.

There are different peoples (nations) in the world: In the Middle East there are Arabs, Turks, Kurds or Persians.In East Asia there are: Chinese, Koreans, Vitnamese. In Germanic Europe there are: the English, the Germans, the Dutch etc. In Romance Europe: the French, the Italians, the Spanish. All these People look alike in their own parts of the world and it is difficult to
tell them a part like one cell twins but they have lots of conflicts mostly based on nationalism (language identity). Using a digital language might solve some national conflicts. Human relations will probably then be based on economy and not languages.

Evolution Perhaps one day we will cease to be bodies or at least some parts of our bodiees will be left as remnants based on a different anatomy (giving way to big heads) in the process of human evolution.

The problem is not one of technology as much as that of growth .The pace
of information growth is scaring. This is in deed a gloomy picture (at
least to us now). Our biggest problem and enemy is ultimately growth not
only that of information. Every thing is growing: world population is
growing, pollution is growing, economy is growing. People usually think
it is positive but any growth means more consumption and more damage.

This means we have to set priorities. I personally find it difficult to
cope with the information overload. Sometimes I develop interest in a
variety of issues and I find myself lost. It is really difficult to make
a choice or a decision.


Maths or translating language into a digital or formal language can only
substitute natural language by means of reduction. Reduction means parts
of our analogue language (like intonation and other features) are lost
because digital or mathematical language stops the language flow, creates boundries and compresses data as I already mentioned. So because of information density, speed and the possible need for a language which doesn't allow ambiguity. The language we know now might change or be replaced. I mean human beings have already thought of a language like Esperanto void of identity based on linguistc differences which has caused a lot of human suffering. I am not saying this is what I personally prefer. I know the price we have to pay but our present language has to cope with the big challenges it is going to face in the future.

Of course language forms thought, in other words thought is only possible through language. But language can be anything. It can be signs (it is ultimately signs: semiotics) or digital signals. So whatever noises we make it is language.
Regards
Jamshid