“Only English speakers need apply”

If you ask an Asian student why they study Spanish or Japanese you will probably get a variety of responses. But if you ask why they study English there are two answers that always come at the top of their list: Because it is compulsory. And To get a job. But is it true that English will help you get a job? We have to consider two types of workers: those who go overseas in search of work, and those who stay home.

During a visit to Dubai the only worker I encountered who wasn’t a foreigner was the immigration officer who stamped my passport on arrival. Clearly English was indispensable to most of the hotel employees, such as the Sri Lankan staff at the taxi desk and fitness club and the Filipino receptionists. Even the Nepalese room-cleaners and Indian cooks could manage basic conversation. I was a little surprised to see that the only job ads I saw in Gulf News that specifically asked for English were for security guards, but I imagine that is because it is so obviously necessary for accountants and executives that the ads don’t even mention it.


However, I never got to talk to any of the thousands of construction workers and manual labourers in Dubai. The likelihood is that they don’t need much English in their jobs. They probably don’t need much Arabic either, being supervised by middlemen speaking their language and living with compatriots (around the city you come across posters offering “bed spaces for Nepali bachelors” or other specific nationalities). Willingness to work for low wages, rather than English, is surely what recruiters in Israel are looking for when they take on Thais to work on agricultural kibbutzim there.

Malaysia is trying to make basic English a requirement for all foreign workers but perhaps they should focus on Malay instead. I once sat on a plane next to a Burmese man coming to work as a builder in a small Malaysian city. He was studying an English-language booklet for immigrant workers published by the Malaysian government but I wonder how often he would need to use English. For a middle-sized developing country, Malaysia has a relatively large proportion of foreign workers. The waiters and hotel staff in the centre of the capital city are definitely employed mainly for their English skills. But the foreign workers employed in factories or on construction sites probably won’t need it much.

What about Asians looking for a job in their own country? Where English is widely used in business, such as Singapore, Malaysia and the Philippines, not knowing it well makes it almost impossible to get a well-paid job. Multinational companies in Thailand pay on average twice as well as local firms, so there is no shortage of people spending money on English courses they can ill afford in the hope of switching to one. However, English shouldn’t be a key factor for getting a job with a local firm in a country where business is mostly done in a local language. And yet it often is.

Beijing Time Out, a magazine aimed at foreign residents but read by many young Chinese, often carries advertisements for bilingual receptionists at small hair salons where few customers are likely to be foreigners. Nowadays most Korean students spend one or two semesters overseas, whatever their major, because they know companies may evaluate them according to their English proficiency – even if they won’t actually need to use the language at work.

Things used to be very different in Japan. Many students were actually reluctant to spend time overseas because they feared the delay would harm their chances of getting a job. Indeed the number of Japanese studying overseas has declined in recent years as the economic crisis there has worsened. This is partly because people do not have as much money as they used to. But it is also because competition for jobs in Japan has become so tough.

However, there are signs that things are changing. Many Japanese companies want employees with high TOEFL or TOEIC scores. In some cases English may be important for them to compete with foreign companies. In other cases, they simply want some way of narrowing down the thousands of students who apply for just one or two positions. Students themselves are also beginning to feel they may need English to work in Japan, because so many Japanese companies are hiring foreign staff nowadays (especially Chinese who can speak Mandarin, Japanese and English). Furthermore, students who have not been able to get a job may feel that they might as well go and study overseas rather than stay in Japan unemployed.

Whether it actually leads to better job prospects or not, my prediction is that the number of Japanese going overseas to study is set to increase again.

Globish (2): Some questions

Last time I wrote about Nerriere and Hon’s book on Globish. I like their idea that we need a simple tool for international communication. I agree that I sold the house to that man is easier than He’s the man I sold the house to and it means almost the same thing. But I have some questions.

Does Globish really not have any cultural viewpoint?
Nerriere and Hon use some words that are not in their list and not explained. It is not unreasonable for them to assume that words like phone are already global. After all, the French say téléphone and Germans Telefon, and Japanese used to say terehon kad (with mobile phones almost no one uses a telephone card now). But for Japanese, ‘phone’ is usually denwa or keitai, for Chinese it is dianhua or shouji, for Thais, torasap. Deciding what is ‘international’ does involve cultural assumptions and generalisations.

Is Globish enough to explain technical things'?
They explain many ‘technical’ words that are not on their list using Globish. But they do not explain 'technical' until page 35. The explanation is ‘tied to a trade or an industry.’ Is this enough?

Is correct spelling so very important?
They say English spelling rules are too difficult, but we need only 1500 words, so we only need to learn the spelling of these. English spelling is indeed difficult and the words in their list include some of the most difficult. (In fact, longer and more difficult words are often easier to spell.) But most incorrect spelling is close to how words sound, so I can usually guess words that are spelt incorrectly. But maybe I think like this because I make many spelling mistakes!

Are short sentences easier than long ones?
They also say it is best to use short sentences. So Globish is very useful for short messages, like the ones we send from our phones. At the back of the book they change a speech by Barack Obama into Globish. The Globish version might be easier. But it is much longer.



Is it easier to learn one expression with several meanings than to learn several words with one meaning?
For them, the center of Globish is limiting the words we use and making sure everyone understand basic words. It’s not a bad idea. In fact it is an old idea. Basic English, invented 80 years ago, has 850. Perhaps it is easier to learn 'go up' instead of 'ascend', and 'go out' instead of 'exit'. But 'go off' can mean 'depart' or 'explode' (which are in the Globish list) and 'rot' and 'proceed' (which are not). And is 'sleeping without clothes' clearer than 'sleeping without pajamas' or 'sleeping naked'? At first that expression was not easy for me to work out.

Are short words easier than long ones?
I tried to write these two entries about Globish in Globish. But when I checked my writing, I had to change 'advantage' to 'edge' and 'mentioned' to 'wrote in passing'. But I am not sure if these are easier to understand. Both 'edge' and 'pass' have a lot of different meanings.

If we know part of a word, is it easy to understand all of it?
To my surprise, 'adaptable', 'entry', 'expression', 'figurative' and 'guideline' are all in the Globish list - because it has 'adapt', 'enter', 'express', 'figure', 'guide' and 'line'. If we know 'mind' and 'set', do we understand 'mindset'? I am still not sure if I should use 'activity' or 'effectively' or 'maybe' (the list has 'act', 'effect', 'may', and 'be').

However, Nerriere and Hon say that few native speakers of English fully understand how useful Globish is, so my questions may be unreasonable. I would like to hear the opinions of ESL speakers.

Globish (1): Some good ideas

In the entry on international understanding 18 months ago I wrote in passing about Globish. This is a simplified English that Jean-Paul Nerriere observed non-native speakers using effectively with each other when he worked for IBM. By chance I just came across a book that he and David Hon wrote about this. Of course they wrote it in Globish – with a few additional words that they explain in Globish, like pajamas and punctuation.

The first part of the book is about why we need Globish. In an increasingly globalized world, more and more people use English. Most are non-native speakers. They have no time, and no need, to use English like native speakers. But they can learn Globish easily. Globish cannot take the place of English for Americans and Britons. It cannot take the place of Spanish for South Americans, or Hindi for Indians. But it is enough for most international communication.

Nerriere and Hon also explain how non-native speakers of English have an edge over native speakers. They are more adaptable. They are used to hearing different kinds of English. They know how to make good use of simple words. And because they are using a foreign language, they are not forcing their own cultural ideas upon anyone.

The second part of the book gives some details about what Globish is. There are few hard rules, but there are guidelines. For example:

We need only 1500 words. (They give us a list.)
We should use short sentences.
We can improve understanding with body language when speaking.
We can improve understanding with punctuation when writing.
We should avoid figurative language.
We should use the active voice. (He wrote it, not It was written by him.)
We should avoid humor. (Unless we know our listeners well.)
We should spell correctly.
We should stress words correctly.

But we do not need to sound like native speakers. A 2009 experiment showed about seven sounds that are difficult for most non-native speakers to say. Native speakers and other non-native speakers may not understand them when non-native speakers say them. If we master these sounds and use stress correctly, it is enough.

Globish is a good idea. It is similar to other ideas that I wrote about before, like EIL. I agree with many of its aims. I do not think all English should be like American or British English. And I do not think native speakers always communicate better than non-native speakers. However, I also have some problems with Globish. I will write about them in the next entry.

Tsunami and Ganbare

Sometimes an event in one part of the world attracts so much attention that it creates a new global word. This was the case with tsunami after the disaster in the Indian Ocean in 2004. This Japanese word was already in use in English but not so widely known, and few people were clear about the difference between a tsunami and a tidal wave. After 2004 almost everyone in the world knew what to call a sudden rise in the sea level caused by an earthquake or volcanic eruption.

The next time everyone around the world was saying tsunami was March this year, and this time the focus was on Japan itself.

There is almost nothing good about this Asian addition to English and many other languages. Perhaps 20,000 people have already died. Thousands have lost their homes. Entire towns, together with their factories and farms and fisheries, have disappeared and may never be rebuilt. And now people throughout Japan are worried about the possible effects of damage to nuclear reactors.

Yet there is another Japanese word that is also becoming widely known around the world and has a more positive meaning: ganbare. I found nearly half a million hits on Google for Ganbare Nippon! and another 200,000 for Ganbare Japan! All of them led to English-language websites. Many of these concern fundraising activities by Japanese groups overseas, such as the Japanese Red Cross Branch in Hong Kong (see picture above); So Restaurant in London; Leicester University’s Japan Students Association; and an organization for Canadian Nikkei. But many more have no direct connection with Japan.

For example, an interactive media firm in Cambridge is collecting artwork to raise awareness for the tsunami victims:
http://illustrationrally.blogspot.com/2011/03/japan-tsunami-appeal-ganbare-nippon

A university in Florida held a charity concert:
http://www.fullsail.edu/news/minute-2-minute/2011-04-19-ganbare-nippon

An elementary school in New York posted a video on Youtube in which children from almost every background except Japanese shout ‘Ganbare’ to encourage people in Japan:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=a4JTHnFrka

You can also find Ganbare mugs, Ganbare T-shirts, and even a music complication by UK-based DJ Gilles Petersen called Ganbare Nippon!

Ganbare gets translated into English in various ways, including: 'Don’t give up!', 'Fight!', 'Hang in there!' and 'Stay Strong!' Petersen’s English title for his music mix is ‘Pray for Japan’. But in many cases the word is not translated at all because it is assumed most people will know it.

When people around the world think of Japan I hope they will not think only of tsunami. I hope they will also think of the spirit of ganbare.

Some languages are more equal than others

恭喜发财and Happy Year of the Rabbit！


While in Beijing recently I read an article in The China Daily about the dissatisfaction of people who had trained to become teachers of Chinese as a foreign language. A few weeks ago I described Chinese as ‘the other world language’, with over 30 million people learning it around the world and the Chinese government promoting its soft power through language and culture classes at a rapidly growing number of Confucius Institutes. And yet this article claimed that the great majority of people qualified to teach the language to foreigners in China end up doing other jobs, such as doing deskwork in government offices or translating for private companies. The main reason seems to be low pay.


In this occasional blog, based on experiences travelling, working and studying around Asia, I try to emphasise my view that not only all varieties of English, but also all languages, are equally important and valid. However, sometimes I read something or talk to someone and wonder if my view is too idealistic or romantic.


According to the China Daily piece, newly qualified teachers of Chinese can expect to earn only 30 to 40 yuan (about $5) per hour, compared with thosese qualified to teach English, who can get 120 yuan. Despite the apparent boom in demand for the language, the economic value of Chinese thus seems to be only a quarter of that of English! The situation of one qualified teacher is especially poignant: he was earning about 40 yuan an hour to teach Chinese while paying 200 yuan per hour to learn English – from a teacher who was probably less qualified than him.



Of course the value of a language can never be reduced merely to how much money it is worth, but we can guess that the main problem for these teachers is that there are simply far more people in China needing English than Chinese. In a country where speaking Chinese is a matter of course, and where the number of foreigners is still relatively small, this is a matter of simple arithmetic. However, the value of English is augmented by the fact that English-speakers in China, whether they are foreign or Chinese, and whether they use the language as a first, second or foreign language, are generally wealthier than non-English-speakers. The noticeboards in the clubs and community halls of areas of Beijing where foreigners and wealthier Chinese live are targeted by maids, cooks, child-minders, drivers and many other people anxious to advertise their English skills in order to get jobs with a better salary than they could expect from working for people who never use English.



The situation in the rest of Asia is not so different. Whether we like it or not, the fact is that English skills command better salaries than other languages. Some countries, such as Malaysia, have tried to redress this imbalance by requiring government employees to have qualifications in an Asian language; but the result is that many graduates with good English skills ignore the public sector and get jobs in the better-paid private sector.

We cannot assume that English will continue to have the most economic power, however. If the number of people learning the language continues to grow as it has done, some day sooner or later it is likely that most people around the world will speak the language, at least to some extent. Knowing English will become a matter of course. When that happens, it will be the languages that people know in addition to English that will attract the higher salaries. But that day may still be quite far away.

Younger and younger

When out cycling around my Tokyo suburb I sometimes see a group of small children playing in the park with their teacher. Most of them look Japanese, but he looks European. And they all chatter away in English. They are from a pre-school popular not only with the small number of foreign parents in my locality but also with many Japanese who hope their kids will grow up to be bilingual.

It was not until this year that English classes were officially introduced into the Japanese elementary school curriculum, after many years of experiments and debate about whether this would mean too much work for children and teachers alike. But increasing numbers of parents are circumventing the standard education system by finding opportunities for their children to learn English. In 2006 it is estimated that 21% of Japan’s five-year-olds were taking private lessons. Are their parents’ expectations realistic?

Yuko, a Tokyo housewife who tries to teach her daughter basic English after she comes home from elementary school, feels Japan’s education system is in crisis and wants her child to have chances that she never had because of her own poor English - including the possibility of going to an overseas university. Doubts about Japanese higher education are growing as the decline in the birth-rate forces many universities to lower standards in order to compete for fewer and fewer students. But for Akiko, an elementary schoolteacher, Yuko’s views are unrealistic. Teaching English to young children means either increasing total classroom hours or reducing time spent on other subjects. And she worries that ability to read and write Japanese will decline.

Almost everyone knows of some child picking up two or more languages quite easily by being in a multilingual environment. But the evidence that young kids learn languages much more easily than older ones is not as clear as many people think. One of the strongest factors in language acquisition is the amount of exposure. It is rare for older children, let alone adults, to be able to immerse themselves in another language because they have so many activities in their lives. But if they did, perhaps they could learn quickly too.

Many other Asian countries have been much more enthusiastic about early English. In the major cities of China and Taiwan, children start the language from grade one, and those parents who can afford it have their kids in private English classes from much younger – a practice that is increasingly common in Saudi Arabia too, where state schools don’t offer English until age ten. In South Korea, where English starts in the third grade at state schools, 74% of children get a head start by taking private lessons in the 1st and 2nd grade. There are even English DVDs for babies. In a survey conducted by Park Yaku of Gyeonggi National University of Education, over a third of parents of 1st- and 2nd-graders said they spent $60 – 100 a month on these classes. Significantly, parents said they would be likely to spend even more on private English if the government carries out plans to introduce the language from the 1st grade. “It’s not that I’m so crazy about English,” one young father told me. “I just don’t have much choice. If I don’t send my son [to private English classes] he’ll fall behind the others.”

Bangladesh

In many of the countries frequently mentioned in this blog, English is a practical tool of communication for people with different language backgrounds. India, for example, has hundreds of languages, thirty of them spoken by communities of more than a million people. Although Hindi is widely understood in the north, it is less well-known – and less loved – in the south. English is often the choice for inter-regional communication, and is also favoured by the educated elite. In neighbouring Bangladesh, however, the picture is quite different. Except in a few remote areas, virtually all of its 160 million people speak Bangla/Bengali.

Indeed Bangla, which is also spoken in India and ranks sixth among the world’s languages, was a major reason for the creation of the country. Formed originally into East Pakistan when India was divided into Muslim and Hindu territories at independence in 1947, the Bengali people came to feel isolated and disadvantaged by policies made in more powerful – but less populous – West Pakistan that favoured the Urdu language. Reinforced by economic problems, linguistic nationalism led to a war with the West resulting in the foundation of Bangladesh in 1971. Bengalis remain proud of their language and less than 3% of them speak English. Rabindranath Tagore, who was from over the border in Calcutta but owned land in what is now Bangladesh, was the first Asian to win the Nobel Prize for Literature. Although educated in London, he wrote mostly in Bangla.




Despite all this, English has a prominent position in Bangladesh. It is used widely in higher education and law – indeed it is the only language of the higher courts, and lawyers who are poor in English cannot expect to get well-paid work. It is also considered the key to business success. The streets of Dhaka are full of advertisements for English courses.


Why should English be so important even in a country where most people speak the same language and are proud of doing so? Perhaps it is partly because of economics. While conditions have improved greatly in recent years, Bangladesh remains one of the world’s poorest countries. Trading, working and studying overseas are seen as crucial to economic improvement.