As China continues to rise as a global economic and military power and with it, the spread of the Chinese language aka Mandarin, worldwide, and that the world is moving from a dominant Anglo into a non-Anglo muti-polar world, time may be ripe to ask: what will happen to English, currently, the dominant international language? And how secure is the future of English under a rising Chinese linguistic transactional world?
Indeed, should the world fail to make room for two competing economic superpowers, can it accommodate two transactionally linguistic regimes and ensure their peaceful co-existence?
Questions such as these fall under the purview of what is called ‘linguistic futurology’ which involves predicting the future of languages—their rise and fall—at different scales. Futurology is of interest, as it helps manage uncertain futures of languages.
The spread of the Chinese language
The Chinese language is spreading fast. It is estimated that 20-30 million people outside China have already embarked on learning the Chinese language which include more than 70 countries and all regions in the world. These regions, outside China have already introduced Chinese language courses into their education systems. The number of people who have already learned Chinese is believed to be somewhere between 100 and 200 million.
These linguistic data may be modest compared to the unquestioned dominance of English in the world. However, we are talking about the two linguistic regimes at different stages of their historical evolution. For Chinese, it is the beginning of its journey towards global eminence while for English it may be returning home of the linguistic hero after its global triumph.
The spread of the Chinese language learning is following in the footsteps of the global diffusion of English. Many scholars have rejected the theory of linguistic imperialism—the view that English has been spread by English-speaking countries for their material and ideological interests by creating structural inequalities between English and other languages. If the theory does not work for English, it won’t be suitable for Chinese either. Any forceful linking of the imperialism theory to Chinese may be a case of imperialism without an empire, as no empire in its traditional sense can be associated with Chinese.
Although English linguistic imperialism may be unsubstantiated, the role of the British Council as a global agent for English spread cannot be denied. Such linguistic agencies can also be found for other major European languages such as French, German, Spanish and Italian – all former colonial powers.
The Confucius Institute (recently rebranded as Centre for Language Exchange and Cooperation) is the Chinese equivalent of British Council and other European language agencies which is working towards the global spread of Chinese. The number of such institutions has grown over the years, currently standing at 541. Although the more collaborative operation of Confucius Institutes is different from the mainly commercial character of the British Council, their impact cannot be denied now or into the future.
‘Linguistic futurology’: Chinese language education in Saudi Arabia
Will the global spread of Chinese and its continued popularity end the hegemony of English? There are some interesting insights emerging from a PhD study which is currently underway in Saudi Arabia.
In early 2020, the Saudi government introduced Chinese at the secondary level of education on a pilot basis. The aim of the PhD research is to understand policymakers’ motivations behind introducing Chinese and Saudi teachers’ and students’ perceptions of teaching and learning of the language. One of the critical issues that emerged from the fieldwork is how Saudi students learning Chinese made sense of English and Chinese and how they accommodated both languages in their language life. Student responses are insightful which can be extended to the existence of the two languages at the societal level.
A common perception across societies is to project a zero-sum relationship between two or more languages. A monolingual conception of language and the human mind suggests that the learning of Chinese will take away the cognitive capacity and affordance for learning English. However, the students’ views demonstrated no conflicts in accommodating the two additional languages in their repertoire which includes Arabic as the first language. They pointed out that English was already established as the “mother tongue of the world”, a position from where it could not be dethroned by the inclusion of Chinese. English is needed for education, communication, and employment not only in Saudi Arabia but also globally. In their views, the changing world has also created a space for Chinese which is mainly related to its instrumental value. They suggested that although this potential was currently fulfilled by English, the future would be with Chinese as well as English. For them, if English were for the present, Chinese would be for future, while Arabic would be for forever, they implied. Therefore, there were no conflicts between these languages; they co-existed peacefully in their learning agenda and life. At the individual level, they projected a linguistic future in which Chinese wouldn’t replace English; both languages will play important roles in their life and therefore they need to learn both, despite the challenges in learning.
This individual level language management displayed by Saudi students is reflected at the societal level management of English and national languages in non-Anglophone parts of the world. Saudi Arabia itself is a clear example, where national leaders feel confident about managing three languages in the national linguistic ecology. While it is true that China is aggressively promoting Chinese in the world in line with its superpower ambitions, it is not doing so by ignoring English, which is equally important, at least in the foreseeable future and this is consistent with China’s rise as an economic superpower in a multipolar world.
As a postcolonial nation, India’s recognition of the value of English is no secret, as it needs the language for local political reasons. Both would-be superpowers have recently reduced the role of English at the policy level as an expression of resurgent nationalism. However, this political cutback on English in both nations is political moves which are unlikely to have a real impact on teaching, learning and valuing of English.
Therefore, the world may not be giving up on English even in the rise of Chinese and potentially a few other international languages. Does this mean that English-speaking societies can relax, assuming English will continue to provide them linguistic security in the future? The answer may be no, although this is not an invitation to lose faith in English.
In a Chinese-dominant future, China will have the option of playing both Chinese and English cards, while these nations will be forced to play the same old English card. The emerging linguistic trends suggest that future communication will demand playing with multiple cards; this may not be just a question of advantage, but the norm. The global spread of Chinese can be read as a global response to this future linguistic scenario. Individuals and nations must realise that they will need Chinese as well as English, regardless of how they judge other products that are made in China.
The authors:
Dr. Obaidul Hamid is an Associate Professor at the University of Queensland, Australia
and
Ziyad Ahmed Alkhalaf, a Saudi national, is a PhD scholar at the University of Queensland in Australia
Note: The paper is based on the research of experiences of the introduction of the Chinese language in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia