Perspectives on the role of English

3
Language in the development of society
This section discusses the uses that EIL has been put to in making new
technologies available to the Periphery and the ways in which it has enhanced choice and
opportunities in leisure and work.
3.1
Modernisation
One of the main roles EIL plays in social development is in modernisation.
Copious literature exists pointing out that English is the language of science and
technology (Strevens, 1980: 62; 1992: 31; Kachru, 1990: 7; Seaton, 1997: 381; Hyrkstedt
and Kalaja, 1998: 345; Master, 1998: 716; Kennedy, 2001: 83). Indeed, Kaplan notes that
80-85% of the world’s scientific and technical information is available in English (1987:
139, citing McArthur, 1987). Two reasons for this phenomenon are that, firstly, English
'has repeatedly found itself in the right place at the right time' (Crystal, 1997: 110). In
other words, it has generally been the Centre which has developed new technologies.
Unsurprisingly, the associated terminology is in English. Secondly, English seems
capable of supporting a very wide range of functions (Kachru, 1994: 135).
The Periphery is therefore often required to use English to obtain and use these
technologies when developing or modernising their services, industries and
infrastructures. Indeed, Kaplan points out that:
....where industrialization and modernization have been chosen [in the Pacific Rim]...
the relative achievement of those objectives is significantly tied to the availability of
English because, for better or for worse, English is the language of science and
technology.
(Kaplan, 1987: 144).
In other words, he views access to English as a concomitant factor for successful
modernisation.
Concerns however have been expressed that the process of modernisation affords
the Centre opportunities to exploit and/or control Periphery societies. In support of this
view, Phillipson writes:
....the export of English to formerly colonized countries has not paved the way to
modernity and prosperity, as was foreseen by at least some planners in the post
World War II era......Far from being a neutral medium allowing for international

---

4
communication and access to the technology of developed countries, English has
served the political, cultural, and economic interests of the principal colonial powers,
Great Britain and the U.S., at the expense of local and national development in third
world countries.
(Phillipson, 1992, quoted by Ricento, 1994: 422).
Phillipson is claiming that English failed to help former colonies (Periphery
societies) share in the technological and scientific advances made by the Centre. He
attempts to explain this by claiming that English provided a back-door by which Great
Britain and the United States (US) could exploit their former colonies, to the detriment of
their development.
Though English may be a necessary, concomitant factor in modernisation, it
should not be viewed as a sufficient one. How can any language, on its own, assure a
society’s development ? English, or any other language, is no substitute for a viable,
coherent plan for modernisation, supported by sufficient funding and appropriate and
adequate political and economic policies, implemented by a competent government. It is
unreasonable therefore to hold English as a language, or the Centre as its perceived
‘owners’ responsible for the failure of former colonies to develop, particularly when the
prevailing social, economic and political contexts in places like India and Africa are far
more influencial and potentially detrimental to development. Of course the Centre gains
from selling its technology to the Periphery. That is the nature of capitalism. Were the
roles to be reversed, it is most likely that the Periphery would do the same.