— by Alperen Keskin —
Introduction
“The limits of my language mean the limits of my world.”
Ludwig Wittgenstein
More than one hundred years ago Ludwig Wittgenstein, an Austrian philosopher used these words in his only book “Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus” to argue that the limits of philosophy are bordered by our world, while our world is bordered with our words. For his time, the argument that Wittgenstein claimed was extraordinarily assertive because if he was right, it meant that philosophy was over. Everything that we can think about consists of the words we know. That means if we have different ways to explain and think about a specific concept, we are able to have different perspectives to analyze a particular concept or idea.
In our post-modern world, we live in a global village with the rise of globalization. With the complex communication tools, and especially with the internet, the borders between different societies are almost invisible. In comparison with several decades before our time, communication and communication tools have been developed drastically. People with different backgrounds and different cultures can communicate immediately in any language. This development brought us new forms of challenges and opportunities. For example, people can share their opinions with other people who have completely different cultures based on their own cultures in their own languages. On the other hand, lots of people do not have sufficient educational background to understand and empathize with different people which leads to an enlargement of the communication gap between people.
Taking globalization and languages as the origin, this essay aims to investigate the advantages and disadvantages of the usage of more than one language in societies which are examples of both positive and negative aspects. Without any biases, understanding different societies and their cultural construction in terms of language will help us to create a mindset about the advantages and disadvantages of using more than one language in different societies.
Literature Review
Multilingualism is commonly defined as the ability to use or possess proficiency in more than one language. This definition can be further refined to encompass varying degrees of fluency or usage across different languages (Clyne, 2017). In today’s world, we can see examples of multilingual societies in different regions commonly. The examples of multilingual societies suggest that it is a dynamic, multifaceted, and endlessly fascinating phenomenon (Aronin, 2018). In modern times, its importance has expanded beyond local and personal contexts, gaining a much wider global significance, making it one of the most vital social practices worldwide (Aronin, 2018). To understand the effects of multilingualism, it will be helpful to investigate societies with different levels and shapes of multilingualism.
Switzerland and Belgium
Both in Switzerland and Belgium, people have used a variety of different languages for centuries. Modern Switzerland was founded in 1848 when the federal constitution officially declared the nation multilingual (Issa et al., 2022). Today, Swiss people may use either Italian, French, German, or Romansh as the official language. In terms of cultural richness, Switzerland presents us with a valuable example of using multilingualism (Stępkowska, 2020). One of the aspects of multilingualism in Swiss society that contributes to the country’s cultural richness is constructing the educational backgrounds of new generations and helping them to build their multicultural mindsets (Akkari & Radhouane, 2022).
When we look at multilingualism in Belgium, we see very similar outcomes related to the bonds between multiculturalism and multilingualism in Switzerland. Similar to Switzerland, the people of Belgium have been using more than one language officially: German, French, and Dutch. In Belgium, multilingualism helps people to enrich their cultural bonds in the region (Wilde et al., 2016). In terms of art, communication, historical heritage, and even academic development, Belgium is a valuable example of representing and using different languages in the globalized world (Vogl & Hüning, 2010).
Ireland
When we look at the example of Ireland, we see a different perspective on the effects of the usage of more than one language in a society. In Ireland (Republic of Ireland), there are two official languages, namely, Irish and English; however, the number of people who actively use Irish as their native language has been decreasing for decades due to British imperialism (Reg Hindley, 2012). According to the 2022 Irish census, 1,873,997 people, or 39.8% of the Republic of Ireland’s population, reported having some ability to speak Irish, reflecting a 6% increase from the 2016 census. However, the number of daily Irish speakers declined by 2% during the same period, with 71,968 individuals in 2022 identifying as daily speakers of the language (Ó Caollaí, 2023). Contrary to Switzerland and Belgium, in the Irish example, it is visible that multilingualism has become unnecessary. One factor that supports this change is that English is the lingua franca of our world, and the need for a second language in Ireland has decreased (Smokotin et al., 2014).
The examples of China and Russia
The official language in China (People’s Republic of China) has been Mandarin for hundreds of years. Additionally, similar to China, the official language of Russia (Russian Federation) has been Russian for centuries. However, we can see people using a variety of different languages and dialects in both China and Russia. For example in China, hundreds of different dialects such as Yue (Cantonese), Xiang (Hunanese), Min dialect, Gan dialect, Wu dialect, and Kejia or Hakka can be heard even though none of them are recognized as official dialects in China (Tang & Heuven, 2008). To add on, in China, different minorities of different regions use their own languages frequently; however Chinese government has been trying to push down and limit the usage of languages such as Uyghur (Han & Cassels Johnson, 2021).
On the other hand, in Russia, while the official language of the country is Russian, different minorities often use their native languages in a de facto way such as Chechen, Tatar, Bashkir, and Chuvash (Baranova & Fedorova, 2019). After almost seventy years of communist rule in Russia, the spoken languages in the region could not contribute the multiculturalism in different societies in Russia due to the forced centralization of the USSR (Garipov & Solnyshkina, 2015).
Analysis
Taking into consideration the examples mentioned above, the advantages and disadvantages of using more than one language can be interpreted in different ways due to the differences between societies. In the example of Switzerland and Belgium, multilingualism, directly and indirectly, helps the multiculturalism level of the society by strengthening their bonds with the region and providing valuable aspects to them in terms of art, history reading, and even conducting academic research. Hence, we see clear advantages of multilingualism at a globalized level.
The example of Ireland shows us the dominance of globalization over regional values. A lingua franca, in this example English, has become more dominant than the native tongue of an entire nation in Ireland. As I stated previously, we cannot overlook the role of imperialism in the case of Ireland; however, this specific example suggests that multilingualism does not always have any advantageous or disadvantageous perspectives, sometimes the nature of human development can pave the way for the fall of multilingualism.
Lastly, the examples of China and Russia suggest relatively more disadvantaged situations about the usage of more than one language in a society. In both China and Russia, the power of centralized governments suppresses the possible multicultural acquisitions of multilingualism. The histories of those countries led to deeply centralized -or centralized tryouts- social policies nowadays. Even though dozens of different minorities with different histories, cultures, and languages could contribute to their countries’ cultural atmosphere; because multilingualism is suppressed -in some cases prohibited-, cultural diversity could not become an issue.
Conclusion
When we investigate the role of multilingualism in different societies in today’s globalized world, we cannot entirely talk about an absolute advantage or disadvantage. The impacts of using different languages in a society rely on the structure of the particular society. For example, In some countries, people speak different languages and this situation helps them to develop different understandings of their cultures and mindsets. From the point of the opposite view, multilingualism may be very ineffective or even prohibited due to the social policies of a specific society. In this case, due to the consequences of globalization, we cannot say that those societies are underdeveloped, slow, or going backward; however, we can say that using different languages can cause irritation for the non-minority society of the country due to policies and laws. In the long term, using different languages can harm the vision and the status of the culture of a minority population. Last but not least, in some special cases like Ireland, multilingualism does not affect society. This case can be interpreted as the absolute win of globalization over multilingualism in terms of possible advantages of disadvantages for a society.
Bibliography
Akkari, A., & Radhouane, M. (2022). Intercultural Education in Switzerland. In A. Akkari & M. Radhouane, Intercultural Approaches to Education (pp. 105–115). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70825-2_8
Aronin, L. (2018). Lecture 1: What is Multilingualism? In D. Singleton & L. Aronin (Eds.), Twelve Lectures on Multilingualism (pp. 3–34). Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781788922074-003
Baranova, V., & Fedorova, K. (2019). ‘Invisible minorities’ and ‘hidden diversity’ in Saint-Petersburg’s linguistic landscape. Language & Communication, 68, 17–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2018.10.013
Clyne, M. (2017). Multilingualism. In The Handbook of Sociolinguistics (pp. 301–314). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405166256.ch18
Garipov, Y. Z., & Solnyshkina, M. I. (2015). Linguistic Diversity and National Unity: Sustainable Demographic Development of Multi-Ethnic Population in Russia. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences. https://doi.org/10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n1s1p540
Han, Y., & Cassels Johnson, D. (2021). Chinese Language Policy and Uyghur Youth: Examining Language Policies and Language Ideologies. Journal of Language, Identity & Education, 20(3), 183–196. https://doi.org/10.1080/15348458.2020.1753193
Issa, D. M., Kamal, M. M., & Ali, M. A. (2022). Multilingualism in Switzerland: An Overview. Journal of European Studies (JES), 38(2), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.56384/jes.v38i2.255
Ó Caollaí, É. (2023, May 30). Census 2022: Fall in percentage of daily Irish speakers but greater proficiency among youth. https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/2023/05/30/census-2022-fall-in-percentage-of-daily-irish-speakers-but-greater-proficiency-among-youth/
Reg Hindley. (2012). The Death of the Irish Language (0 ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203059944
Smokotin, V. M., Alekseyenko, A. S., & Petrova, G. I. (2014). The Phenomenon of Linguistic Globalization: English as the Global Lingua Franca (EGLF). Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 154, 509–513. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.10.177
Stępkowska, A. (2020). Swiss Multilingualism: A Historical Background to Language Policy. Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric, 59(1), 69–84. https://doi.org/10.2478/slgr-2019-0029
Tang, C., & Heuven, V. J. van. (2008). Mutual intelligibility of Chinese dialects tested functionally. Linguistics in the Netherlands, 25(1), 145–156. https://doi.org/10.1075/avt.25.16tan
Vogl, U., & Hüning, M. (2010). One Nation, One Language? The Case of Belgium. Dutch Crossing, 34(3), 228–247. https://doi.org/10.1179/030965610X12820418688570
Wilde, J. D., Praet, E. V., & Rillof, P. (2016). Contesting the monolingual mindset: Practice versus policy. The case of Belgium. Journal of Language and Politics, 15(2), 121–146. https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.15.2.01dew
