Perspectives on the role of English

4.2
Indigenous languages
When two languages come into contact, there is often a mutually beneficial
exchange at the levels of lexis, phonology, grammar and discourse (collectively: Fisiak,

---

8
1993: 96; Kachru, 1994: 139-145; and Kennedy et al, 2001: 51). There is concern
however, because English almost always ‘donates’ far more than it ‘receives’.
Section 2 touched upon the preference for English over local languages in South
Africa. Concern has been expressed that exposure to English can modify, marginalise or
even displace local languages (Holmes, 1992: 55-70; Phillipson and Skutnabb-Kangas,
1997; Tully, 1997; and Wardhaugh, 1998: 348). Warschauer (2000: 516) cites Phillipson
(1992) in this regard, but counters that English can then be turned against the Centre, to
the Periphery’s advantage in, for example, the struggle for independence.
The general consensus among those not opposed to EIL is that Periphery societies
utilise English as an addition to their local language, rather than as a substitute for it.
There exists a diglossia, where societies have generally accepted bilingualism (or
multilingualism) and biculturalism (or multiculturalism) (Tollefson, 1989: 24; Kachru,
1994: 145; Bisong, 1995: 123; Dushku, 1998: 377; and Wardhaugh, 1998: 356).
Crystal however takes a more defensive view:
....people put two and two together and make five, of course, because the reasons
why the languages are dying in Papua New Guinea have nothing to do with the
role of English as a world language, all sorts of things are happening.
(Crystal, 1998: 151).
His point is that English might be present in societies where local languages are
disappearing, but that other, unrelated factors are the cause. This is probably true in many
cases where English, or more accurately, the Centre, has been held responsible, but the
concern expressed by Phillipson and others is to some extent justified, if only because
when language shift or loss occurs, it is difficult to reverse (Holmes, 1992: 74-75).
There are certainly risks associated with exposing a Periphery language to
English. Those risks can however bring greater functionality through lexical,
phonological, grammatical and discoursal enhancement. Where societies face the need to
adapt to a changing world, their languages need to evolve with them to support that
adaptation. EIL might actually be helping in that process. This highlights the importance
of making language planning a coherent part of the larger vision an administration has for
the society it governs. This is discussed in section 6.