English is 'Marmite'? ...wut?
 |
| Image credit: Gorilla Studio |
The international use of English as a language gives rise to contradictory feelings and emotions, a ‘marmite’ language if you will. English is intricately bound with political, economic, cultural, and social issues and therefore is not a neutral phenomenon.
Attitudes towards a language can be determined by a number of things. International writers, film makers, and broadcasters have a love/hate relationship with their use of English and, as such, perceptions towards it vary wildly. This article will explore some of the motivations regarding love and hate towards the English language and its use.
Writers in South Africa have a choice of eleven official languages, English being one of them. The predominant languages used in their literacy are English and Afrikaans. Although measures were made in post-colonial South Africa, which intensified in the 1990s with the release of the anti-apartheid leader Nelson Mandela and which continues to be “at the heart of such critical debates.” (Johnson, 2012, p. 206), English remained important and crucially it provided its users with greater opportunities. This is because “it was the lingua franca among educated South Africans” (Englishes Revisited, 2012). This suggests that English is used by people with a level of education and therefore of a higher class, with an income, demonstrating a sought-after display of social identity. This importance determines the value held, the attitude towards the use of English, and how writers and broadcasters alike could simultaneously feel positive and negative feelings for its use within their work.
Conversely, the consequences of the British Empire’s colonial period had resulted in English being viewed by some as a colonial language, in itself considered a negative attribute. That said, opportunities would be lost if writers in South Africa, such as Ndebele, choose to write only in their own mother tongue. Ndebele describes a definite tension when using English, but he is also “at the same time aware of the value of using it.” (Englishes Revisited, 2012). With the dominant and more favourable publications in South Africa being written in English, the need and demand for writing in its other mother tongues is reduced. Reading an English book in South Africa often suggests to some observers that the reader has money and is likely to have had a level of education.
Furthermore, since Magona speaks of adults who “can only speak or read Xhosa are not very educated and therefore they have lowly jobs” (Englishes Revisited, 2012) it is possible to imagine that Xhosa speakers could feel cold towards English whilst at the same time knowing its worth. What is significant to its users is that English is “the primary language of government, business, and commerce.” (Brand South Africa, 2021) which further reinforces its strength and status whilst being a well established non-South African language.
According to Low (The Politics of English, 2013) an attempt was made to return some of the African linguistic culture and traditions as they were before the British Empire’s arrival. Then, once British settlers had established themselves, English “became the language of law, education, and most other aspects of public life.” (Crystal, 2003, p. 43). During the post-war period decolonisation, literary canons were used as an important resource to uphold a repelling of the British Empire as a political body. This acted as a double-edged sword, since the withdrawal of the British political force was aided by London publishers – by creating the African nationalist canon in their search for rewards in marketing. Importantly, the African desire to create their own writing in order to teach at their schools, was also met by British publishers. It is important to note, too, that these teachable texts for Africans were written in English after the “failures of the existing education system to meet those demands” (Johnson, 2012, p. 190). As such, the decolonisation of Africa has been advantaged and further enhanced by the ‘colonial language’ of the British Empire while simultaneously being somewhat unwelcome.
This feeling is not exclusive to South Africa, a similar example of ambivalence can be seen in Hong Kong too: “When Hong Kong was a British colony, Hongkongers appeared to perceive English as a threat to their identity, although it was valued as the language of government and finance.” (Englishes, 2012). See here to learn more about English and its role in Hong Kong’s cultural identity.
Beyond that, what is also important when presented with a choice of language in, for example, a new film is that the international film maker is likely to consider English as one of the most promising choices for highest earning potential and a more widespread target audience. However, it also carries the risk of sacrificing their own identity and culture in order to do so.
According to Low (The Politics of English, 2013) an attempt was made to return some of the African linguistic culture and traditions as they were before the British Empire’s arrival. Then, once British settlers had established themselves, English “became the language of law, education, and most other aspects of public life.” (Crystal, 2003, p. 43). During the post-war period decolonisation, literary canons were used as an important resource to uphold a repelling of the British Empire as a political body. This acted as a double-edged sword, since the withdrawal of the British political force was aided by London publishers – by creating the African nationalist canon in their search for rewards in marketing. Importantly, the African desire to create their own writing in order to teach at their schools, was also met by British publishers. It is important to note, too, that these teachable texts for Africans were written in English after the “failures of the existing education system to meet those demands” (Johnson, 2012, p. 190). As such, the decolonisation of Africa has been advantaged and further enhanced by the ‘colonial language’ of the British Empire while simultaneously being somewhat unwelcome.
This feeling is not exclusive to South Africa, a similar example of ambivalence can be seen in Hong Kong too: “When Hong Kong was a British colony, Hongkongers appeared to perceive English as a threat to their identity, although it was valued as the language of government and finance.” (Englishes, 2012). See here to learn more about English and its role in Hong Kong’s cultural identity.
Beyond that, what is also important when presented with a choice of language in, for example, a new film is that the international film maker is likely to consider English as one of the most promising choices for highest earning potential and a more widespread target audience. However, it also carries the risk of sacrificing their own identity and culture in order to do so.
Nigerian movies, otherwise known as Nollywood movies, are generally not produced for political or social purposes. They are predominantly created to draw upon the marketing area because people “realise they can make these films and make money out of them” (Englishes Revisited, 2012). Similarly, Nollywood films are produced in a variety of languages, yet the English productions reach the largest audience and make up 44% of the films’ produced chosen language.
That said, without the contribution of official economic media support from international media companies, coupled with a lack of official supply and distribution, a Nigerian black market has grown and thrived from within its segregation in global media. Therefore, Nigerian film makers may feel ambivalent to the use of English since its financial success depends largely on the choice of language.
Yet, as with Nollywood films, the English language is not an official Nigerian language. Therefore, identity in Nigerian culture and traditions may be compromised or even sacrificed as a result. What is significant, though, is the case of another form of foreign film known as Bollywood.
When contrasted with Nollywood films, the use of Hindi as a chosen language enables the viewers of Bollywood films to engage in learning Indian vernacular since it can be a “prime source from which these communicative means are developed.” (2012, p. 253). This, in itself, adds to the notion that in the case of Nollywood producers, ambivalent feelings can develop because a great deal of value can be lost by choosing to use a non-Nigerian language when creating Nigerian films.
Beyond that, the power of English reportedly skews the global news narrative. It is used globally by state funded broadcasters to deliver news “in order to increase their influence in the world” (Allington, 2012, p. 232), and the primary global news choice is still English even in countries that aren’t English speaking. The use of English can reach ‘elite’ audiences on an international scale; people from whom opinion-making becomes credible or, moreover, it has a direct political value.
Consequently, international broadcasters may feel ambivalent to using English because their news is likely to reach ‘elite’ audiences, but simultaneously runs the risk of not being heard or seen by non-elite audiences and therefore losing credibility and authority. The result of this is a loss of depth of understanding for their chosen news broadcasts. So, broadcasters will be making significant choices on what content to deliver, which can in itself be a controlling factor, further influencing a love/hate feeling towards English as a language.
Furthermore, and in accordance with David Crystal, “English will retain its role as the dominant language in world media and communications” (Crystal, 2003, p. 113). This dominance is linked to the pressures of market forces, weighted by the sheer number and interconnectedness of anglophones, and the perceived value of said anglophones to national and international broadcasters.
The global progression of English has been accompanied and brought forward, in part, by English literary canons, which in themselves “carry political, economic, social and personal ramifications for the people of the countries where they have established themselves.” (Englishes, 2012, p. 50). These canons can be seen as formidable cultural texts from which teaching is researched and delivered or standards are set. Literary canons have been enjoyed by international anglophones and used as a tool to expand knowledge in English on a global scale, allowing the best of English literary writers to become guiding literacy experts – further cementing a love/hate relationship towards the use of English. A hubris of its own doing.
In closing, ambivalence towards English as a language from some international writers, filmmakers, and broadcasters is fuelled by a mixture of personal and/or external motivating factors. And these factors run deep. This isn’t necessarily deliberate, nor is it an act of sabotage towards English. The love/hate emotions derived from English are a product of the cause and effect of its use as well as the geographical and geopolitical nature of its use. Welcomed or otherwise, English as a language has wide-scale ramifications whilst simultaneously offering many advantages. Therefore, English is firmly set for further use and will continue to be subject to conflicting opinions — continuing its ‘marmite’ status — since it can never be a neutral phenomenon.
Beyond that, the power of English reportedly skews the global news narrative. It is used globally by state funded broadcasters to deliver news “in order to increase their influence in the world” (Allington, 2012, p. 232), and the primary global news choice is still English even in countries that aren’t English speaking. The use of English can reach ‘elite’ audiences on an international scale; people from whom opinion-making becomes credible or, moreover, it has a direct political value.
Consequently, international broadcasters may feel ambivalent to using English because their news is likely to reach ‘elite’ audiences, but simultaneously runs the risk of not being heard or seen by non-elite audiences and therefore losing credibility and authority. The result of this is a loss of depth of understanding for their chosen news broadcasts. So, broadcasters will be making significant choices on what content to deliver, which can in itself be a controlling factor, further influencing a love/hate feeling towards English as a language.
Furthermore, and in accordance with David Crystal, “English will retain its role as the dominant language in world media and communications” (Crystal, 2003, p. 113). This dominance is linked to the pressures of market forces, weighted by the sheer number and interconnectedness of anglophones, and the perceived value of said anglophones to national and international broadcasters.
The global progression of English has been accompanied and brought forward, in part, by English literary canons, which in themselves “carry political, economic, social and personal ramifications for the people of the countries where they have established themselves.” (Englishes, 2012, p. 50). These canons can be seen as formidable cultural texts from which teaching is researched and delivered or standards are set. Literary canons have been enjoyed by international anglophones and used as a tool to expand knowledge in English on a global scale, allowing the best of English literary writers to become guiding literacy experts – further cementing a love/hate relationship towards the use of English. A hubris of its own doing.
In closing, ambivalence towards English as a language from some international writers, filmmakers, and broadcasters is fuelled by a mixture of personal and/or external motivating factors. And these factors run deep. This isn’t necessarily deliberate, nor is it an act of sabotage towards English. The love/hate emotions derived from English are a product of the cause and effect of its use as well as the geographical and geopolitical nature of its use. Welcomed or otherwise, English as a language has wide-scale ramifications whilst simultaneously offering many advantages. Therefore, English is firmly set for further use and will continue to be subject to conflicting opinions — continuing its ‘marmite’ status — since it can never be a neutral phenomenon.
Bibliography
Allington, D. (2012) ‘English and Global Media’ in Hewings, A and Tagg, C. (eds) The Politics of English: Conflict, Competition and Co-existence, Abingdon, Routledge pp. 219 – 245
Brand South African (2021) The Languages of South Africa [Online]. Available at https://www.brandsouthafrica.com/ (Accessed 12 October 2021)
Crystal, D. (2003) English as a Global Language, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press
Johnson, D. (2012) ‘English Literary Canons’ in Hewings, A and Tagg, C. (eds) The Politics of English: Conflict, Competition and Co-existence, Abingdon, Routledge Press, pp. 179 – 206
Englishes (2012) English in the World, Milton Keynes, Routledge Press
Englishes Revisited (2012) Worlds of English - Faculty of Languages, Milton Keynes, Routledge Press
Shankar, S. (2012) ‘Reel to real: desi teens’ linguistic engagements with Bollywood’ in Hewings, A. and Tagg, C. (eds) The Politics of English: Conflict, Competition, Co-existence, Abingdon, Routledge Press, pp. 252-258
South African Gateway (2021) The Languages of South Africa [Online]. Available at https://southafrica-info.com/arts-culture/11-languages-south-africa/ (Accessed 12 October 2021)
The Politics of English (2012), Worlds of English. Milton Keynes, Routledge Press
