Should We Be Concerned About the Dominance of English?

For linguist Claude Hagège, the dominance of English, which is aiding in the disappearance of national languages, is a threat to the heritage of humanity. His thesis has provoked a lively debate amongst readers of L’Express.

The linguist Claude Hagège critiques the excessive use of English in French society. His arguments?

1) The English language represents a unique system of thought, advocating wealth and consumerism. 2) It is vague and leaves room for misunderstanding. 3) Trying to impose English as a universal language destroys cultural diversity. 4) It becomes a poison to the French, who use it in excess, especially in the media. 5) It limits the opportunities for trade more than it promotes them. 6) It is debilitating to the education system, which offers only one language in primary school, or focuses more on study trips to England or the United States.

In this declaration of war against English, a large number of Internet-goers spoke out: JeanJacques said he was “appalled by the abuse of the French language,” including television and radio for using a sort of “Franglais” to attract the general public. This promotion of English by the media was also critiqued by GrandPapa, who is skeptical of French television programs with English titles, such as “Secret Story” or “50 Minutes Inside.” For Barlabar, the broken English of the French hurts Anglo-Saxons themselves, and he insists that a native language is representative of one’s thinking. Sirius67 puts English as a reflection of liberal hegemony: “tasteless and lacking consistency.” Concerning the study of English in school, Krokodilo and FriscoD defend the choice of having several languages available. Krokodil finds it similar to Esperanto, and as a means of revolutionary struggle against English or any other language.

“One can speak English without selling his soul!”

As the fight from Claude Hagège unites, it also divides: Cocolamontagne — although very respectful of men of the arts — is sorry that their commitment is made under the threat of an imaginary “sword of Damocles made in Britain,” regretting the disappearance of dialects, which “are also part of life.” Courriel believes that the ratification of the Charter for Regional or Minority Languages is an anti-republican measure that breaks up fellow citizens. Shadoko finds the writer’s vision too extreme, anti-American and anti-capitalist. He says: “How could the U.S. seek to impose their language on the entire world when they do not even declare English their official language at home?” According to this Internet user, the ambiguity of certain words — belonging to English according to the linguist — is found in other languages, including French. Jeffromparis believes that one can easily speak English “without selling his soul.” Antafargat concludes elegantly: “I don’t see how English is a danger; Arabic, Russian or Chinese … just like a second wife, or a third, or a fourth … if you are able to learn several languages, you’re lucky!”