Where do we see evidence of linguistic imperialism in the Anglophone world?

Nowadays, we can clearly see that linguistic imperialism is widespread in the Anglophone world.  The two major forces which spread English throughout the world are British colonialism from the 17th to the 19th and American capitalism in the 20th century. In his book, Linguistic Imperialism (1992), Phillipson describes the spread of English as 'a post-colonial endeavor of core English-speaking countries to maintain dominance over periphery (in many cases developing) countries.' From history, we can see that the dominance of English is asserted and maintained by establishing continuously, 'structural and cultural inequalities between English and other languages.' 

Well-known scholar, Max Weinreich said "A language is a dialect with an army and navy". This is true;, a language has traditionally become and international language for one main reason: the power of its people-especially their political and military power. It can be seen throughout history. It takes military power to establish it but it takes economic power to maintain and expand it. English could operate on a global scale with the introduction of new technology. This helped foster English into mass entertainment, international marketing and advertising, and even pop culture.

Why do we learn English? Individuals want access to scientific and technological information, international organizations, global economic trade and higher education. English makes this all possible. English provides linguistic power.Many countries now see English as key to their economic survival. It has an ideological function of modernity and efficiency. Even among parents, there's been pragmatic realizations that their children's lack in English could mean a marginalization of their children. It would deny them access to extensive resources. The growth of English into a 'lingua franca' certainly increases efficiency as an international medium for communication.

However, despite the advantages of such a universal language, there are damaging impacts on individuals and the community. We associate English with power which makes other languages seem 'unrefined' or 'primitive' in comparison. People who write up their research or scientists who write their reports in languages other than English, will have their worked ignored by the international community. English is now seen as a skill that educated and cultured people must have. This can be seen in many of the education systems we establish today. For example, there is now a standard English Language Testing System. Many students have to take the IELTS or TOEFL to gain acceptance into university or work in a country. Without these qualifications, it is rather difficult to maintain a stable economic lifestyle. 

If you go further, you have to ask yourself, will the emergence of a global language hasten the disappearance of minority languages and cause widespread language death? Well, statistics show that at least 50% of the world's 6,000 or so living languages will die out withing the next century. When a language dies, so much is lost. It is similar to the conservation of the species and the environment. 

Language is a tool of knowledge, it's how we communicate ideas. We see the history and the culture people. We see their identity. Language is a chief means of showing where we belong, and of distinguishing one social group from another. All over the world, we continuously see evidence of linguistic divergence rather than convergence.  

However, in recent times, the rising dominance of English has actually stimulated a stronger response in support of local languages. Movements for language rights have played an immense role in many countries like the Maori in New Zealand or the Aboriginal languages in Australia. This is because of people's need for identity and language provides this. 

Paper 1 Text 2 Analysis

The article titled "Food Crisis in Sahel" is an online piece released December 2011 on the Oxfam International Website, informing the reader on the predicted food crisis across West and Central Africa and Oxfam's contributions. At first glance, this article may seem like the typical charity piece yet during closer inspection, we see that it is merely an advertisement for the Oxfam charity foundation.

The author's outlook on Western and Central Africa is seen through their language and structure. He refers to them as places to be 'helped' and 'vulnerable'. The lack of personal terminology suggests that the audience is not from the same region. In fact, it would infer that the audience would originate from more economically developed countries. The purpose would be to inform their readers of the situation in Sahel and subtly persuade them to donate towards Oxfam, in support of their efforts in the region.

The article begins with a picture of a woman riding a donkey in a desolate, dry and vast land. This sets the tone of the text and gives us a face, a person to identify with. It also gives us an idea of the conditions they are living in, making it easier to imagine what the author is saying. The text begins with a general introduction that discusses the possibility of an upcoming food crisis in the Sahel region of West and Central Africa and directly indicates the issue. Saying that if effective action is not taken, the consequences will be severe. They support this with the experiences of past food crisis going on to say it 'affected more than 10 million people'. This immediately puts a number and image in your head, tugging on your emotional strings, urging you to read on. It goes on supporting their claims with the suggestion of a well-thought-out strategy and the claim 'we can work to break the hunger cycle', again pulling the reader into the situation.

The structure is a close resemblance of the Problem/Benefit technique that many advertisers use to persuade people. This can be seen by the sub-headings; 'The situation in the Sahel' and 'What Oxfam is doing'. The first part, is mainly to inform the reader. Using Logos, it states the current status of the situation, basing it on facts and statistics. Moving on to 'What Oxfam is doing', the purpose becomes to introduce the possible solutions. Notice how the author does not say what the reader can do to help. It is implied repeatedly through the tones of urgency and language such as 'early response', 'action' and 'support'. Furthermore, the article only presents Oxfam's solutions. It does not give any space for other charities or even suggest other actions. Almost, as if subtly forcing you to focus on what Oxfam is doing. This implies that they are only trying to persuade you to donate to Oxfam. Despite this being a good cause, it does imply that there is not as much care for the situation in Sahel, in comparison with Oxfam. Although, being quite informative, the article only provides us with one action they've started, the rest are goals. Thus the majority of the work is 'so what?' claims. We don't see any evidence of effect or change or even the possibilities. Combining these two sections, portrays Oxfam in a positive light as the noble and ethical organization.

The mood of the article is urgent using words such as 'crisis', 'insecurity' and 'erratic'. Yet, the mood is also surprisingly neutral since it does not demand sympathy but rather allows the reader to focus on the message. The tone is serious and maintains the level of professionalism needed for such a large organization. The large bold quote jumping at you first is "the humanitarian response must tackle the underlying causes of crises like this to prevent them recurring." The mood is immediately set as critical with words such as 'crises' and 'must tackle'. Also appealing to Ethos with words such as 'the humanitarian response', effectively implying that if you don't do this, how can you be a human?
Yet despite this, the tone also seems to be didactic. We see the use of many statistical facts and how the straight-forward claims leaves an air of confidence and security despite the magnitude of change that they are implying. Similar to what we analysed in the introduction.

The main literary devices utilized in the article are logos, pathos and ethos. Ethos is persuading people with ethics, reputation and credibility. This is done using words such as 'humanitarian aid', 'protect' and etc. It provides us with a sense of urgency, pushing us to support Oxfam. The introduction gives us the responsibility to take action and prevent more lives lost. It uses ethos to encourage us to do the right thing. Logos is spread throughout the article, especially in the statistical analysis of the current situation in the Sahel.  This gives an internal consistency to the message. To make sense to the audience. It assures legitimacy to the article and thus to Oxfam as well, sealing their reputation.
Pathos is an appeal to the audiences' sympathies and imagination. This is seen especially when the author combines image and language. For example, the final passage with the line; "300,000 children dies from malnutrition-related diseases in a 'non-crisis' year". Pathos is being used with the claim of using children, we associate this with innocence and thus we feel more for them. As the last sentence, this leaves us with this image as our final thought as thus are more likely to help.

In conclusion, we can see how Oxfam has employed a variety of advertising techniques and literary devices to persuade the audience.