Business, trade, and the internet are all now primarily in English. If the rest of the world is to be able to adapt they have to instruct their people in English, which is what they are already doing. Denying English is just being stubborn and prideful, it's time to adjust to the 21st century.
America is the metropolis of the world. I don't know that there's any other place where there's such a diverse variety of cultures. Most cultures have a stake in America. America, sort of, belongs to everyone. And, in America, English is the primary language. America is not just about physical land. The United States reaches all corners of the Earth. Just about every culture in the world would be served well if they could communicate effectively with The United States of America. What better way to communicate with someone than to learn their language? I think that the benefits would outweigh the losses if English were to be appointed the worldwide primary language.
The U.S needs a unifying language because people need something to learn so we all can be the same.
The United States has many languages, the most common are English and Spanish. But most of the people speak English. In some cases people want to have a single language but others want all languages.
The notion of a common language is not a plight for power, nor is it suggesting that any other language family is weaker and less sustainable than English. It is simply the language chosen to communicate in countries overseas; so in fact is it just the standard variety for language communication.
Admittedly, wiping out any other language form would not only be deeply corrupting to people's culture, but also incredibly problematic. People seem to ignore creole and pidgin languages yet they remain, still to this day, as the most pure and indigenous forms of speech. But as a general rule of thumb, taking into account peoples 'second language' and Lingua-Franca, English is the most spoken form and by definition, the worlds vernacular.
One massive source to supply substance to this stance is already in motion. English is the 'business language', countries economized under the Chinese regime still speak the English tongue as their primary tool for communication over their native Mandarin. Coincidence? Or is revolutionizing future about coming together under one helm? Sure it will take time - but all great things do!
Everyone should all know a language and English is the universal language. We need one to be able to communicate and its used for business deals etc. It is not to say English is better and people cannot speak their own language but it is good that people can communicate and understand one another easily!
For the interaction of humans across the globe we definitely need one language that every one knows in order to avoid language barrier. Since English is the language most people knows I think English should be standardized as the worldwide primary language. Because it would be ideal to select a language most of the people know, and spread it among the minority who does not know it. Which is better than selecting an minority language to be standardized as the worldwide primary language.
Our world is the computer... English dominates the html and computer languages... it makes sense if at least in this realm we all speak the language! On Facebook and LinkedIn for example, we can all talk and relate to each other better. No confusion. Think back to shorthand days when it was basically the same but occasionally it was confusing!
English is widespread, it is rather easy to learn and rather easy to learn everything about its grammar as its grammar is easy. I also notice that people who learn it as a second language AND pour passion into it end up having more vocabulary and knowledge as to the grammar than native speakers.
If you don't conform, you suck.
English is already in the process of becoming the universal and primary world language. The argument many have is ignorance or loss of culture, however that's not necessarily true. All pilots are required to speak and understand English already. Students across the globe are taking English as a mandatory class. It isn't ignorant, it's just the way it is. We're already halfway there. As far as culture, other languages don't have to die. English would be the national form of communication is all.
The English Language won't rob you of your culture. You can still speak your own language anytime. The only reason why we have English as a universal language is for us to communicate with each other. This does not mean that French, Filipino, Chinese, Spanish, etc. languages are less beautiful than English. Speaking in English won't mean you neglect your own country. Brothers and Sisters you must understand that this world needs us, the human race, together. Let us not start a World War III just because of an argument about whose language deserves to be the primary language. We need to understand each other, that's what matters.
Important for all the world to be able to communicate. English is one of the biggest languages and would be better for people to understand it and be able to speak to others!! Its not to say that english is better but it is the universal language and should be taught and spoke especially by people who reside in America. It does not mean you can't be bilingual or speak what language you choose but when communicating with someone, its good to have a universal language.
To start off, most international companies use English as their "official" language. Examples include Nokia, which is Finnish, and SAP, which is German. Also, countries that are growing economically are learning English at a massive rate. My cousins live in another country where English is not the main language. However, they know it anyway because it has been taught to them since elementary school. It's easier to talk with them in English than the native language, which is harder for me to communicate in. An argument against English as the official language is that it destroys cultures. However, just because we make English the official language of the world doesn't mean we have to get rid of other languages. We can speak them on the street, at home, with family or friends. We can talk and text with them. We can even learn them if we wanted to. Most people also argue that English shouldn't' be the official language because Mandarin Chinese, Hindi and Spanish all have more native speakers than English. However, English is more widespread, being officially spoken in over 60 countries and unofficially in more. Mandarin is only spoken officially in 3 countries(including Hong Kong), so it's concentration is limited to China, Taiwan, and Singapore. Singapore also speaks English and is one of the leading Asian countries in speaking English, along with Malaysia. Hindi has 2 countries where it is officially spoken, India and Fiji. The only reason it is officially spoken in Fiji is due to the large Indian population there, thus restricting Hindi to Indian only populations. Spanish is spoken in 21 countries officially; most of these countries are in Latin America and Spain. Also, Chinese ranks first in numbers of speakers, at 1 billion. However, the majority of those speakers are concentrated on the Chinese Mainland and not internationally. English comes in second at 510 million speakers while Hindi and Spanish have 490 and 420 million people respectively. In the end, standardizing English in the world will lead to better communication, which leads to more commerce and growth. Making English the official language of the world doesn't really change anything; it's already the de-facto language. But making it official gives it more of a presence and more of an incentive to learn it.
We think that it is positive to have English as a world language, because people can understand each other much better. The language is also useful for business and trade. There are already peple who are talking English as a second language. It is good as a second language, because everyone can decide on his own if he or she would learn the language. English is already the language of the internet. But there are also problems. The minority who does not know the language must learn it by heart. And there could be also other languages which can be world languages. To have only one world language can destroy the culture and the identity.
If a member from India goes to Europe and France, it becomes difficult for them to communicate with each other. So, if English would be the universal language it would be easy to communicate and there will be no religious fighting and everybody will stay in happy and harmony. Let's make English the common language
English is used to communicate worldwide and is also used by political leaders. It is easy to learn, simple to understand and can be written with ease too. So it should be made the global primary language.
Esperanto was created but, alas, it failed. The governments fail to implement dual learning at schools ( the native language of the country and a language for all the inhabitants of the world ) . Nevertheless the need of a common language is more and more important. The world must unite to be able to face he dangers that are pollution and obscurantism and others. Step by step English is becoming the language of the world. I opine that it should be the language of the world in an official and supported way, because it is already widespread, popular, its grammar is rather easy to learn. The world is a cacophony , if everyone could understand the other the way for a better world would be paved.
Everywhere you go in the world you will see signs and logos and many, many other things written in English. I don't walk around the street in the U.S. And see signs written in Japanese. In the U.S., people will take a wide variety of language classes, because nobody is sure which language they want to learn. In foreign countries, English is almost always the second language that people choose to learn, due to its relevance. English already is the worldwide language.
English is already the de facto language of the Internet, and many foreign countries teach English as a second language as a mandatory subject. Also, because of the influence of Hollywood with respect to television and movies, many people learn how to speak English anyway. An international language is important to facilitate communication and trade. And as one that is frequently used already, English is the most appropriate choice.
Your linguistic heritage is far less important than the continuity of the world and humankind (consider the current international relations and technological means that countries have to destroy one another). English is currently the international standard and is being learnt by children in school over the entire world. If we are to gain more understanding of one another, we shall need to move towards one another and a common language will help us communicate that much easier. I see many people speaking of pride (please, pride is exactly what causes suffering) and English being hard to learn. English is actually one of the easiest languages to learn (even for people who do not speak a language that belongs to the same language group: look it up if you must). From a non-native speaker.
There exists more than one language in the world today only because previous geographical isolation meant people had to develop their own methods of communication without outside influence. This wasn't a problem back then as most people didn't travel beyond their own borders. With globalisation, electronic communication and easy travel, however, the fact that we now have more than one language in the world is proving to be a major hindrance with a huge amount of effort spent on constant translation.
For those that say "we should preserve languages"...Why? Culture? Well firstly there are many aspects of culture and changing the language wouldn't change the fundamentals. Even so, culture isn't fixed...Food, clothes, attitudes...All changing each generation yet the core culture remains easily identifiable. How about "well it's just nice to have diversity". Sorry, that's cute and all but it doesn't justify the enormous difficulties we all face in the basic task of talking to our fellow humans. So ask yourself...What advantage is there to all these different ways of saying "hello"?
I've read a few comments here saying a single world language would be impossible to implement as locals always change it. Yes they would, but so what? English is my first language and I can easily understand anyone from America, Australia, South Africa, New Zealand, Canada etc. Their dialects don't mean I need a dictionary!
Of course, the world language could be anything...Thai, Hindi, Japanese...Whatever. But since English is already spoken by 1.5 billion people and dominates the internet (45% of all webpages) and entertainment, it makes sense to push the trend further so that one day it will be the only language and you can say "hello" and everybody everywhere will understand!
Despite the normalizing effects of modern media such as the internet and television, language is always changing. Any attempt to standardize a language worldwide will fail because languages will diversify to mutually unintelligible dialects over time. This is shown by the fact that many separate varieties of English exist in the world, which over time may drift further apart in similarity.
the world is full of many different cultures and languages and to think that English is the only important language to speak is an uneducated statement. Maybe someday we can have a universal language but to claim one current language as the best is not a very wise thing to say.
I don't see any reason to standardize English, for any purpose. Enough people around the world already know English, so successful communication is abundant. Standardizing English would amount to forcing it down the throats of people who are perfectly content to communicate in their own native tongue. It's basically a non-issue as I see it.
there is absolutely no reason for one world language. That would destroy so much culture and diversity. And plus the english language is made up of so many other languages whats the point? If this ever happens than the new world order might be up to something and we should be worried lol.
This would mean that we would lose valuable parts our our culture. Take Chinese for example, frequently used proverbs and sayings contain beautiful peices of literacy that do not exist in english. However, if most people could be bilingual and understand english well enough, we could be able to acheive the same efficeincy without so much compromising culture.
Just because, America is a big and important country in the world doesn't mean English should be the world's primary language. That would be like saying America is better than everyone so use our language.
English is the 2nd most spoken language, not the first anyways. If you did want a primary world language, it should the the most spoken language which is Mandarin.
If we did do that we would have to give classes to everyone that doesn't know it. That would be expensive but also some people find it difficult the learn a language we shouldn't force them to.
It would also interfere with culture. If you went to France, you would want to hear people speak French, it would make the culture more alive to you.
Doing this would be just because it's convenient and it's not worth it.
English is not currently the predominant language across the world. While many other cultures teach English in school systems, it is not the first language learned by many. Numerous countries and cultures are bi-lingual, and it is somewhat arrogant to assume that all humans should speak English, when many native English speakers do not care enough to learn another language. Mandating English demeans the culture and practices of other nations.
First of all, why not Spanish or Chinese? These language have much more native speakers. Besides the lack of empirical observations endorsing such a standardisation (by the way, which kind of standards? American? British? Simple English for global communication?),we should not see languages as simple cosmetic tools, but rather as mirros of cultures heavily enrooted in local and regional spheres. Although English is a convenient tool for communicating, one must not forget merging all the languages would mean merging all the cultures, which is even more unlikely than the first assumption, considering people's attachment to their national history, customs, monuments, artistic productions... Apart from this low likelihood, it seems that many patches of resistance even tend to reject products of globalisation, reasserting the prevalence of local values. Whether these claims are valid is another debate, but such negative displays testify that there is no strong wish to embrace such an Anglo-saxon centered trend.
If English became the world's primary language, who could describe to the next generation the intricacies of words like saudade or schadenfreude? Each language has its own way to view the world and express those views. We would lose something of tremendous worth were we to select one language to the exclusion of all others.
Given the number of people who speak English, it would appear to make sense that we adopt it as the official language of the planet. But there are drawbacks to this. English has too many rules, too many exceptions to the rules as well as too many exceptions to the exceptions. It is a very difficult languiage to learn as a second language. Other languages all have a common root and similarities in format and structure. English is unique.
because it would deny too many of their cultural identity. Despite the difficulties of verbal and written exchange between people that speak different languages, to standardize English as the language of the world would deny many indigenous people of their cultural identity. It would not be fair to millions of people to tell them that they must all be able to communicate in English. The evolved language of individual societies should remain the dominant form of communication in that society. English as a second language should be considered for those that want to communicate without the need of interpreters.
Everyone all over the world has the right to express their own culture. Whether its religion, speech or the way that they live, everyone has the right to express what they want to within reason. If everyone speaks the same language people all over the world will drift apart and our world as we know it could be in trouble
Everything in this world looks beautiful, if it's different. For example, the color combination of many flowers together in a vase makes it attractive. Similarly, different language of the world are unique as its hold a lot of cultural and historical heritage.
English is important but it shouldn't be standardized as primary language because they are many under developed countries, where they do not know English. many people have understood the importance of English and that's is why, countries like China and Korea have started teaching English in schools. As of now we cannot agree on making English as worldwide primary language but yes, English is important.
Many people have no access to lessons for English, and teaching everyone English is unnecessary. Languages are tied closely to culture, and making English the standard gives an upper hand to countries that are already prospering.
Having different languages creates diversity and uniqueness within a country. Making everyone speak the same language is unfair because not everyone would want to speak English. People of other heritages should be able to use their own language or languages without being forced to speak another one. It would also cost lots of money to pay and hire people to teach English which could raise our national debt.
Worldwide is a very big word, so, regardless of the number of speakers, due to its antiquated and illogical pronunciation English would be an extra burden for the majority of world's population. Since the language also carries a substantial part of the culture of the British and the Americans, which is not readily acceptable or "digestable" for many ethnic groups and communities, it would bring unnecessary and sometimes harmful changes into other native and frequently more people-centered, more human cultures. One of the pro-arguments is that it would aid communication and trade, consequently it would accelerate production and distribution of goods, but why are we obsessed with making more and do things faster all the time? The diversity of languages and cultures is more beautiful than the superfast development when we don't take time to enjoy life at its best pursuing always something different and more. We don't need a primary language and we don't need a worldwide language.
It's not fair for the non-English speaking people to just suddenly be told to start talking a totally different language. There shouldn't be a specific language that everyone needs to speak and write and read. Everyone has their own choice and are taught different languages. There are many countries in the world that don't speak English so to them maybe their language should be the primary world language.
English is popular right now, but in another twenty or thirty years, it will be totally discredited as the language of the barbarian.
Ignore that English is not the most logical choice for a world wide language (many European languages have a Latin base and would be easier to learn)...we're a young species with a lot of history! And to lose all that history for the sake of language convenience isn't logical to me. I take pride in my Germanic history and the language of my people; as should Russians, Chinese, and English.
Language is an important part of culture. It doesn't make sense to require that English be spoken in a country where English isn't part of their culture. Many people in other countries learn some English as a second language, and their schools may require it. But it would not be reasonable or possible to require everyone in the world to learn English.
Languages are tied to the way humans think. English shouldn't be the world's lingua franca, as it shouldn't be French or German or any other language, in this regard. Languages are vectors of culture and boiling the world's culture down to one language is dangerous for the humanity. Just look at the yes group proponent : they are mostly English native speakers (Americans?) who have a warped view of the world and its very nature : diversity. I believe diversity is good and benefit all of us. "just about every culture in the world would be served well if they could communicate effectively with the united states of America." That sums up pretty much the dangerousness of a common language which would just benefit only one country over the others.
I oppose making English the worldwide primary language, because it takes away from other cultures. It's easy for me to say that I would love that, because it would make things easy when traveling to different places. But, it strips cultures of their own language and identity. I believe that, if you are in the United States, you should speak English, and that it should be the official language of the U.S. But it should not be for other countries that have other languages.
Language developed together with a culture and it has more meaning inside than just reporting. The language reflects how the culture developed and how it changed. For example, we can see lots of pictures in ancient Chinese. It shows that ancient language was made by drawing similar pictures. Also, Italian, French, and Spanish are all very similar that even Italian can read some French words. It shows that Italy, France and Spain share similar cultures. By this example, we can see that language is a part of one country's culture. That's why people in minority groups are trying to save their own language. However, if we make people learn English as their primary language, then it will result many cultures to disappear.
Even though English is the popular language right now, this is only because America is the most powerful country right now. It may not be the best language to everyone. The fact that America is the leading country doesn't mean this benefits us. If we force others to learn our language, it would mean that we are trying to impose on them. Also, there are more easy and interesting languages to learn. There are so many different languages we could learn and cultures to experiance, but making English the primary language would prevent this from most people who doesn't have the time and the price to learn anything besides their own language and English.
Every language is inside a culture, which means you learn a language, you learn a culture. If English is set as first language we'll lose all the diversity since the "native culture" would be standardized as well, I cannot see how that can be a good thing. Also, it's not only one way to speak English, so which one is better? That's a never ending debate.
No, English should not be standardized as the worldwide primary language. The standardization process is already expensive, difficult, and beastly, much less on such a large scale. Standardization would compromise much of he cultural and linguistic diversity already present in the world without any really concrete benefits. Not only should it not be standardized, but I doubt such a thing is even possible on such a large scale. People can hardly agree on which of two candidates to vote for in US presidential elections, much less which language to make the de facto global standard.
First off, there arn't enough people who speak it, english is only the 3rd most spoken language, so going by shear numbers Mandarin (Chinese) should be the official language. Second, english is probably one of the most difficult languages to learn, it has so many rules, exceptions, and inconsistencies that it would send people's heads spinning. Finally, it would be almost impossible to make an official world language considering that the USA doesn't even have an official language.
Many Americans find it bad that we are losing our culture to other countries. But when you think about it, people can choose whatever culture they prefer. We're in the country of Freedom, so we should be able to choose what culture we want to have, which includes the languages. But by saying that English should be primary would be hypocritical because other countries have their own cultures and languages. So we'd be taking over and maybe even destroying their cultures because we don't want it happening to us. People are going to "flip-flop" their cultures no matter what. You can't stop that by taking over other cultures and trying to cut out their languages. Instead of helping our own country, we're too busy trying to destroy everyone else's. What would that prove, though? That we're stronger and can take control of everyone? Well that's what Britain did to us hundreds of years ago and we hated it. Hence the Revolutionary War. We've already had two World Wars, and trying to take over other countries cultures and traditions, languages and techniques, etc., we are being hypocritical.
If anything, a neutral language like Esperanto should be standardized as a global language. English is not inherently superior, logical, easy to learn, or 'better'. Yes, at this point in time English speakers are probably the most powerful bloc, but historically at any given time this could change. So it makes no sense to impose English on the rest of the world.
In reality, English is a language with a comparatively limited number of speakers and geographic range. Spanish, which is the most prominent language in the world, is spoken natively in many more countries, by many more people. Chinese, which is really only spoken in one country, still has many more native speakers than English does. Really, there should be no such thing as a worldwide language. People should speak their languages and enjoy the beauty of their diversity.
There is no reason that English should be the primary language around the world. English is simply not spoken in enough different places. So, this would not be fair to some of the smaller countries that don't know the language. If English were to be the primary language, you would lose much of the different cultures that come with all of the different languages. This is just not a good idea. Let each country have their own language as the primary language to be spoken.
Language is not only words but a means to transmit culture so standardization would kill cultural diversity! People who are bilingual or who are able to communicate comfortably in a number of languages are proven to be more successful at dealing with stressful situations. It means that a person is also more adaptable when placed in any context. Everyone should be encouraged to learn more languages but not at the cost of a primary education in their native language.
Despite the difficulties of verbal and written exchange between people that speak different languages, to standardize English as the language of the world would deny many indigenous people of their cultural identity. It would not be fair to millions of people to tell them that they must all be able to communicate in English. The evolved language of individual societies should remain the dominant form of communication in that society. English as a second language should be considered for those that want to communicate without the need of interpreters.