Language of Access

I feel some strong “academic” analysis about to come pouring out of me. About to deconstruct and challenge some language ideologies, and about to use some first hand experience to do so.

I just had a wonderful time with a new friend here named Moon, or Tsuki, or now Luna (“Moon” in 3 languages) Alright, let’s begin to challenge the dominance of English, in English.

There’s this lie that many societies and non-English dominant governments and resources have been believing for years now, a lie that may sound good in theory, but does not work in practice. That is the idea that if people learn English, they will have suddenly have the whole world open to them, that their economy will do better, and that they will grow better societies. This is a fallacy that many hold to be true, native or non-native English speakers alike.

But wait, aren’t I in Japan to teach English, to help expose my students (and teachers and communities) to this great language that will magically give them access to the rest of the world? Well in the sense of access, it’s not about what language you speak, it’s about how willing and able you are to learn, and the cognitive resources you have access to.

An example, I just had a very quick Korean lesson, and quick English pronunciation lesson with my new friend Moon. Since we both speak Japanese, Moon is learning English (and doing great!), and I’m learning Korean, most of the actual talking and explaining was done in Japanese, from both sides.

The reason this inspired me to challenge the dominance of English was because I thought after we were done “wow, I learned (and am learning) Korean via Japanese.” In this instance, English was not my language of “access,” but rather Japanese was. What this means is that it didn’t matter that I am a fluent English speaker and Moon is a fluent Korean speaker, it means that communication, i.e. the language of access for us to understand each other was Japanese!

Okay, so what does this mean? This means that we need to reframe our policies to consider the cultural aspects of languages, and all the ideologies that encompass that. Too many times policies are created in haste, to “make life simpler” and to have something “stable” to rely on. But we all now, life is complex, it is not a “solved by one policy” kind of experience, and rarely are there any solutions to our many problems. Life is a process. And so is language.

So what did I bring with my desire to teach in Japan? Yes, I brought English, because that is a language I know well and can function well in. But I also brought Spanish, another language that I do well in, can switch to on the drop of a dime (usually without noticing), and I brought my Japanese, my language of access in Japan for my everyday life outside of school.

One of the main goals for learning English it is said is so that people from other cultures and languages will be better able to understand each other. But I challenge this notion. If you’ve ever studied another language (or know some), or ever lived in another culture outside the one you grew up with for an extended amount of time, you begin to realize and ask yourself “why do they do that?” You begin to realize that language itself is all about nuances, is all about cultural expression, is about defining what’s important to certain people, and is about structuring entire societies around the use of certain languages and dialects.

It has been said by academic after academic before, but deserves reiterating now. Language diversity is dying, and it needs to be restored. So to go back to my conversation, had I only known English and the culture that comes with my American English, it would be more difficult for me to study Korean. Not impossible, but definitely more difficult. It would be hard to understand the hierarchy inherent in the language (much like in Japanese), why there are markers to mark subjects, direct objects, and verbs in sentences, and why the pronunciation is the way it is. But, if I use my current language of access of Japanese, suddenly Korean is much easier to learn, as in concept it is similar to Japanese. I understand the why there might be a hierarchical relationship, why things are pronounced a certain way, and I get all of that understanding in an instant, because I know Japanese (and don’t have to try and translate culture from English)

So what we should be focusing on is the idea of valuing differences while at the same time viewing the similarities that we all share the world over. Instead of saying “English is the language of internationalism,” we should actually promote internationalism and try and make our future generations multilingual and multicultural instead of trying to make them fit the (American) English mold.

So how do I deal with this ethically and morally with my current English teaching position? The way I see it is that I’m here to help instill an appreciation for people in those that I meet. English is not my main concern so much as building a gap between multiple cultures to enhance understanding and appreciation for those who speak and are seemingly different than us. English for me is not a language of “access” in the sense that I’m here to make sure my students are more able to work for an American company when they finish school, but English is just English. With all its variations, its many dialects, the multiple cultures it represents, and for me English is just another language, no more valuable and no more less valuable than other languages.

But of course, public policy and societal pressures tend to paint English in the best light possible and don’t ever consider the homogenizing damages that maintaining a monolingual society can impose on linguistic (read ideological and cognitive) diversity, and many folks don’t see language itself as a form of (beautiful) expression, indeed a very high art form that we all practice every day. Any language large or small is a very intelligent sense making process that we take for granted, and a process that helps to construct the reality and the societies that we live in daily. This is where public policy and language education should hone in on, and this is where we should focus our cognitive abilities in. Everyone is intelligent, and when we can all express that intelligence to each other (not always only through ONE language), then we know we are truly able to communicate, and language itself “is but a convenience.”