The English Behemoth.

(I quite like the word 'behemoth'.)

So I've nearly finished the 5-day in-class foundation course for Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL, but you may know it as ESL or EFL or any number of other acronyms), and I'll have lots to say about that over the coming weeks when I've had a chance to work out what I think about it all.

In the mean time, a question of language ethics that was raised in today's class:

"With twenty five languages dying every year, how can we go around teaching English?"

It wasn't actually me who asked that question, believe it or not, but it's definitely one I've been thinking about for a while. Isn't teaching English the same as building a Starbucks on every corner, playing the Top 40 on every radio station, and giving someone an ipod for Christmas?

(Thanks for being incompatible with everything on my computer, ipod! I'm so glad I had to buy into the apple empire to use you and now none of my media work in their original format!)

But it's not a flippant question. Aren't languages, like independent coffee shops, interesting local bands, and original file formats, losing the battle against cultural behemoths? Why give more power to this giant?

The thing I wonder though is if there's such a simple relationship between the English language and other language loss?

I think certainly when English is promoted, whether by colonial force or the economy or world media or whatever, then a perceived need is created to speak the language.

They're English. They're cool. Who doesn't want to be like the Beatles? (image: www.theguardian.com)

This is an argument for teaching English, I think; I haven't personally created the need to speak English to gain viable employment, for example, but if that need exists then by teaching English I am potentially helping people to deal with the situation.

However, with such a situation in place, parents who are native speakers of other languages may deliberately choose to have their kids speak English only, especially if they don't see the possibility of raising their kids bilingually; or the kids may learn both languages but then make their own choice to speak English, in order to stand out or fit in, whichever one it is that kids want to do. This sort of thing seems particularly common when the kids are being raised in an English speaking country, and so the intergenerational transfer of the native language goes into decline.

On the other hand, I'm not sure - or rather, I'm curious - about the influence of language knowledge by itself, without external forces. Because as a general rule, knowledge of a language does not necessarily lead to it being spoken.

How many people in Wales know Welsh, for example, but never use it on the street, in the shops, or even in their own homes? Or, how many people in France know English, but continue to speak French? And why?

I'm about to go round in a full circle in my head, so just to be clear as mud: if other forces create a situation where English is required, but English language knowledge by itself does not necessarily lead to English language use, then a) what does? and b) where does that leave teaching English as a second language?

So, uh - more thoughts on these questions when I've caught up on some sleep, I think!