Mary Dejevsky: Native English, alas, is degenerating into a global dialect

Notebook

Mary Dejevsky
Tuesday 29 May 2012 14:48 EDT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

It is easy to believe that, as native English speakers, we have a stupendous advantage over those who have to learn the lingua franca of our age. But there's a price to be paid for speaking the world's most widely spoken language from birth, and it is that you are vastly outnumbered by those who speak it as a second (third, fourth or fifth) language. And while they bawl out their Eurovision songs, present their learned papers, or chatter away in their multi-national groups, you – the native speaker – are the odd one out. You can – mostly – understand them, but unless you adopt a measure of English bilingualism, they can find it nigh impossible to understand you.

Now I should start by apologising to all those who find that my efforts to communicate in a foreign tongue grate on their ear – at least I try. But I'm starting to find the ubiquity of a lowest-common denominator English a bit tiresome. A few years ago, one strain of it was branded Globish (English in 1,500 words), and – of course – it's the possibility of reducing English to such basics that has made it so adept a means of communication. Increasingly, though, I find myself hankering for the sort of English which, say, makes the sequence of events clear by recognising a pluperfect tense, expresses diffidence or conditionality with the subjunctive, and inserts the correct tense after "since".

Many professional linguists would doubtless say that there is no such thing as correct usage, only custom and practice, and they would add – with a gentle rap on my knuckles – that language changes, as all living things are wont to do. But it would just be so, well, relaxing to be able to include the occasional subordinate clause and use idiom and irony in public discourse from time to time without the risk of being misunderstood.

At a conference last week, one contributor, whose English was beyond superlative, began by expressing his linguistic envy of the native speaker who was sharing the platform. He had no need to, but I understood what he felt. It is looking more and more as though the future will hold one English, a minority English, which is recognisably descended from the King James Bible and Shakespeare, and another, mass, English that is no more than a tool of basic international communication.

And the problem with mere functionality is that it is highly infectious and "good enough" leaves no incentive for improvement. How long might it be, I wonder, before complicated "native" English becomes exotic, and we join the rest of the world in talking to each other in Globish.

How Russia's '28 Up' flatters Britain

Bouquets have, rightly, rained down on Michael Apted for 56 Up, the latest in his ITV series that was built on the Jesuit saying: "Give me a child until he is seven, and I will give you the man." And in many respects his subjects have borne out the thesis, while reinforcing today's anxieties about Britain's poor record of social mobility. Against that, as one of the producers also remarked, the 56-year-olds mostly display admirable fortitude, regardless of their estate, with the less successful tending to blame themselves for not seizing the opportunities that came along.

On Monday, 56 Up was followed by the no less telling Born in the USSR – 28 Up. The subjects, all aged seven when the Soviet Union fell apart, have weathered changes of a ferocity unlike anything ever faced by Apted's Britons. A Kyrgyz had taken his young family to Siberia in search of work; two of the women had left children with their grandparents and rarely saw them. Several had seen violence, death, even murder and suicide, pass close by. One young man, unhappily adopted by a Florida couple after the first programme, was still not at home in his new continent, but had no one to return to. Only Anton, from a privileged family in Soviet times, seemed to have skated effortlessly to a pleasant job on a magazine.

Unintentionally, I'm sure, but 28 Up served to cast Britain's class-bound stasis in a rather more positive light, as evidence of reassuring, and historically remarkable, social stability.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in