English: A Language Forged from Foreigners
The assertion that language is “backed by social and political forces, and therefore potentially seeded across the globe” is indeed correct. But why it is correct seems to be up for debate. What was the original function of language? Has language always been used by social and political forces? While some rulers imposed a particular language on a people, the overwhelming evidence points more to the true reason that language is seeded across the globe—communication. Political forces may have initiated the global spread of the English language, but the social forces embraced, corrupted, and renewed the English language. Although a standard does exist, English is still a living language. And "...because a living language is by definition dynamic, these [standards] are subject to change over time" (Jenkins, 21). Language and culture are so closely related that oftentimes a language is just as much a person’s identity as is their culture (Jenkins, 61). History defines a civilization, in its broadest sense, as a way of life for a group of people. Most people would say that the culture is what defines a civilization the most. But in order for a civilization to function and develop a culture, the people must be able to communicate with one another. Throughout history, English served as a unifying language for different cultures who shared a local civilization. Today, English serves as a unifying language for different cultures who share a global civilization. While the world today maintains smaller, geographic civilizations, technology has made it possible for there to be a simultaneous global civilization. Economic trade, education, customer services, and military protection have never been so globalized. In order for countries, for people, to share and participate in that global civilization, they must be able to communicate. The English language adapted to maintain communication.
The English language adapted to the changes after war. The original inhabitants of Briton were the Anglo-Saxons. When Rome conquered and claimed the territory, some Latin influenced the English language. Later, when the Germanic tribes invaded, the Anglo-Saxons again added vocabulary and, over time, even certain pronunciations to the English language (Crystal, 2018). Beowulf offers great insight to the culture of the sixth century, including Old English. Although the text is considered to be written in Anglo-Saxon English, Norse influence is highly evident with names like King Hrothgar and words like mead. In fact, the entire story resembles more of Nordic sögur or “sagas” than that of Anglo-Saxon (García, 2013). Several place-names even survived today, which are, in Crystal’s view, the “most important linguistic developments of the period. In fact, “over 600 [of these place-names] end in -by, the Old Norse word for 'farmstead' or 'town', as in Rugby and Grimsby” (Crystal, 2018). Even though the political forces began these changes, the social forces, citizens of the land, continued these linguistic changes. Many Danish words replaced common English words completely. The word “take,” for example, was niman in Old English. But taka, the Old Norse word for “take,” “is first recorded in an English form toc (‘took’) during the 11th century.” By the time the language had shifted into Middle English, the only recorded word for “take” was taka, the Old Norse word (Crystal, 2018).
It was not until the Anglo-Saxons reclaimed their land from the Romans and the Norse invasions of the eleventh century occurred that the English language explicitly showed variations. The first variation appeared in written documents that must have been “influenced by normative forms associated with courts and powerful religious houses” (Bailey, 17). Since the Danes now controlled the land, the language of the courts and records was no longer English. Thus, “a long linguistic frontier was established with Norse as the predominant language on one side and English the predominant language on the other” (Bailey, 18). But as the Viking invasions changed to Norse settlements, spoken language also began to vary. The Anglo-Saxon settlements often overlapped with the Norse settlements. Now that they both called England home, they needed to socially interact with one another regularly. Therefore, the languages mixed in such a way that English was forever impacted.
The English language adapted to preserve and embrace culture. Alfred the Great is credited as the one responsible for essentially “split[ting] England in two” when he signed a treaty with “the Viking leader, Guthrum” (Crystal, 2018). Both rulers wanted peace and were willing to share the land. If one had completely conquered the other, an unmeasurable amount of culture would have been lost, or at least skewed more than it was. During this time of peace in England’s history, King Alfred “fostered his great enterprise of translating Latin works into English,” to preserve cultural elements of the fallen Roman Empire; but he was not alone. Each translator wrote in the English dialect that he spoke—Alfred in “West Saxon for his translation of Orosius’s History of the World, while Bishop Werferth chose his own Mercian dialect for Englishing Gregory’s Dialogues” (Bailey, 19). Ironically, in preserving the culture from the Romans and ancient world, King Alfred preserved his own culture and a crucial part of the English language. While there does not seem to be a definite standard, the differences in the written works are far fewer than that of the spoken differences (Bailey, 19). This fact might represent the “purity” of English and level of education the translators possessed in comparison to the humble farmers more heavily influenced by the Danes. Nonetheless, King Alfred wanted to better communicate history with his people, which could be accomplished more in English (the language of the people) than in Latin (the language of the courts and records).
Later, when Phillip II of France conquered Normandy in 1204, yet another language infiltrated England. French speakers were appointed in various positions of power and influence, but the predominant, daily language remained English. When the people speak one language and the rulers another, problems arise. Thus, in 1362, Edward III adopted an act that stated “all pleas which shall be pleaded in any courts whatsoever . . . shall be pleaded, shewed, defended, answered, debated, and judged in the English tongue, and that they be entered and inrolled in Latin” (Bailey, 23, originally from 36 Edward III 15). Here the English language explicitly expanded through political forces. Language barriers were not exclusive to the courts, though. Positions of power included the religious houses. The members of the churches, who primarily spoke English, complained and even protested that “’aliens’ were unable to carry out priestly duties because of their inability to communicate: they ‘do not know or understand either the patois or the language of England, and the ordinary people do not understand their language either’” (Bailey, 24, originally from Rolls of Parliament [Edward III] 2:173a [1347]). In an effort to embrace the culture, religious leaders in the early fourteenth century were instructed to conduct services in English, even though the official language of the clergy remained Latin. Ultimately, it was the people, the social forces, that backed the English language for the purpose of communication.
The English language adapted through conquest. Originally, the Portuguese, Spanish and Dutch visited remote places and started word borrowing (Bailey, 60). History books teach children the famous adventure stories of explorers like the Venetian, Marco Polo. He had no interest in colonizing the people; in fact, it was quite the opposite. He was extremely fascinated with the advanced civilization, scientific and technological discoveries of the Chinese. He even lived among the people for over ten years, learning some of the language and how the people lived (Pietrobelli, Rabellotti & Sanfilippo, 2010). It is important to note that these early European explorers were not settlers “but travel writers who explored new worlds in books” (Bailey, 61). These explorer-authors were simply fascinated with the world’s culture and resources and wanted to begin exporting as well as simply learning! And so they expanded the English language through social forces for the express purpose of communicating culture and advancement.
It was not until the English began trading with these other European countries and reading their explorers’ works that they desired the wealth these other peoples possessed. By reading and trading, the English learned these new borrowed words and adapted them into the English language. Unlike the European explorers, the English settled the land, and either “subdued or displaced the natives peoples.” The pattern started in North America repeated itself in the Caribbean and West Africa (Bailey, 62). Many of these natives had seen white people before because of the presence of periodic explorers. But the explorers always went back to their home country. Unlike those early Portuguese, Spanish and Dutch explorers expanding resources and culture and language through social forces, “British expansion flowed from economic and political forces” (Bailey, 67). Americans are most familiar with the affliction British colonialism brought the Native Americans and Caribbeans, but Africa and India were also affected in a great way. While exploration might have begun with good intentions, colonialism “was neither a natural nor a neutral process, but one involving large-scale coercion and displacement” (Jenkins, 58).
The English language further adapted to preserve and embrace culture. Perhaps two of the most informative literary examples of coercion and displacement are Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness and Chinua Achebe’s Things Fall Apart. Conrad’s novella tells of European explorers deep in the Congo jungles of Africa, romanticizing imperialism. He “gave the myth modem coinage when he depicted the modem imperium endangered by African savages” (Raskin, 118). Heart of Darkness reflects the mindset of most explorers who viewed the “’discovery’ of lands, as [if] these territories were not already populated and home often to large numbers of human beings” (Jenkins, 59). The fact that Heart of Darkness focuses on the Europeans trying to civilize the natives proves that not only did they not even recognize the culture as culture, but they did not see it worth preserving.
In the Chancellor’s Lecture at Amherst in 1975, Achebe accused Conrad of being “a thoroughgoing racist” and his work of “dehumaniz[ing] Africans, depicting Africa as the antithesis of Europe and world civilization,” which validates that many explorers did not view the natives as humans who already occupied that land (Unaegbu, 2017). Even if some explorers did view the natives as human beings, they certainly did not view them as equally valuable if they were willing to murder them just to expand their own empire. Achebe’s novel, specifically Part 1, details an Igbo tribe in an effort to prove that the natives were indeed civilized. The novel ends with the British military arriving, implying that the entire village was about to have a cultural adjustment, and it would be enforced. When asked why he chose to write his novel in English instead of his native tongue, Achebe declared it was “in order to reassert African identity and as part of the growth of Nigerian nationalism” (Alam, 2014, originally from Post-Colonial Literature by O’Reilly, 2001, pp. 61). He recognized that the Nigerian culture had changed because of British Colonialism, but he did not want his people to forget their distinct history, heritage, and identity. So much of a person’s identity stems from their native language, as Jenkins illustrates (p. 61). Achebe demonstrates his conflicted identity since his novel is written in English, the national language of Nigeria, but peppered with Igbo words, such as chi and egwugwu and ogbanje, to which there are no adequate English words to describe those specific Igbo cultural elements. Achebe is a wonderful example of a non-native English speaker that has adapted the English language in a way to preserve his culture. His works could be viewed as utilizing political and social forces, but the purpose behind both is still communication.
A civilization cannot function and thrive properly without a common language as the basis of that civilization. English’s first purpose was to provide the Anglo-Saxons a way of communicating with one another. The difficulty with studying the English language, though, is that it took preeminence in every aspect of life at different times in England’s early history due to the ruling power at that time. And based on the ruling power, their language brought changes to the English language. Then through war and conquest, English further experienced a change during the colonization period. Explorers wrote about cultures and included borrowed words; then the colonized people developed creole and pidgin languages. Both later affected the postcolonial generation’s English into what is called “New Englishes.” People of different linguistic backgrounds and levels of education have left their mark on English, which ultimately changed the very language itself into the language it is today. The English language has an early history of foreign influence and a more recent history of foreign adaptation. Now that technology has made it possible for physical and virtual interactions, a global civilization exists outside the geographic, cultural civilizations. The English language was always localized to the land because the civilization was localized, so the language was originally spread more through political forces. But because of colonization, there is now such a thing as a global civilization. This global civilization then needs a global language. The English language survived due to the social forces at work and now serves as the world’s unifying language. Therefore, the English language ultimately adapted to maintain communication.
References
Alam, Mahbubul. (2014). “Reading Chinua Achebe’s Things Fall Apart from the Postcolonial
Perspective”. SemanticScholar. Accessed 12 June, 2020:
Bailey, Richard W. (1991). Images of English: A Cultural History of the Language. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Crystal, David. (2018). “Old English”. Discovering Literature: Medieval. British Library. Accessed 5 June,
García, Jaime. (2013). “Beowulf, the Icelander: A Comparative Study Between the Poem Beowulf and the
Nordic Tradition”. Universidad Complutense Madrid, Academia.edu.
Jenkins, Jennifer. (2015). Global Englishes: A Resource Book for Students. New York: Routledge.
Pietrobelli, Carlo., Rabellotti, Roberta., Sanfilippo, Marco. (2010). “The ‘Marco Polo’ Effect: Chinese FDI
in Italy”. Chatham House, London. Accessed 13 June, 2020:
Raskin, Jonah. (1967). “Conrad’s Heart of Darkness”. Journal of Contemporary History, Vol. 2, No. 2,
Literature and Society, pp. 113-131. Accessed 12 June, 2020: http://www.jstor.org/stable/259954
Unaegbu, Jeff. (2017). “A Contextualized Critique of Achebe’s ‘An Image of Africa: Racism in Conrad’s
‘Heart of Darkness’”. University of Nigeria: ResearchGate.
Comments