Stephen van Vlack

Sookmyung Women`s University

Division of English Language and Literature

English in the Era of Globalization

Fall 2007

Week 3, Day 2 - Answers

Trimnell 2003, Chapters 7 and 8

1. Of all the different things one can do in the business world with a foreign language which one do you think is the most important?

Here, Trimnell lists seven different things which he thinks are quite important in being able to function in the business world. Which one any particular person perceives as being the most important will probably depend on the type of job they either have or envision having in the future. Looking at the seven we can probably break them down to a few basic areas which relate to globalization in the first place. First it is obvious that all of these are somehow related to access to information, whether it be accessing information using the Internet or print material or simply being able to talk directly to people as well as being able to observe and actually accurately understand what you were observing. As we mentioned in the last class knowing somebody`s language also makes you much more interested in them. You are interested in a person because you can be. When you do not know the language of the region in which you are working then it is obvious that you are going to need to shun contact with people around you firstly because you might be ashamed in not being able to speak with them and secondly because there is little point in trying to contact with somebody when you cannot communicate with them. The effort is too great and generally outweighs the rewards. So this is the first big thing in being able to use a particular language that allows us to access information at different levels, maybe the most important aspect being the interpersonal level, again depending on what your job is. The second thing is that language allows you, the multilingual, to operate with a much higher level of comfort and confidence. There is nothing worse than going into a business situation, or any situation for that matter, when you are constantly worried about how things are going to turn out. You cannot prepare for a meeting when you don`t really know what is going to happen in the meeting and you lack the ability to control anything. Being familiar in the language of this meeting, for example, will enable you to actually function productively and this makes you more comfortable and much more confident, two factors which are extremely important in not just business but all types of encounters. The third advantage being a professional is that it shows how much you respect the people you are dealing with. The importance of this third aspect cannot be underestimated. All transactions, all encounters, are based on a sometimes tenuous partnership between different people or organizations. Partnerships tend to work better when the partners treat each other as equals. By meeting your partner halfway and learning at least some of their language (obviously the more the better) you are showing that you take your partnership seriously and this makes for an overall better relationship. And this really is the essence of globalization, the idea that in this globalized world all of us need to meet the world halfway. What these three aspects all equal up to is a more globalized, sensitive individual who has highly marketable skills.

2. Based on the fact that, according to Trimnell, it is hard to do business only in English do Koreans as well have to learn lots of other foreign languages for business purposes? Why or why not?

What this question is basically hitting on is the idea that if Americans need to learn other languages to do business then what about other countries which use other languages. So, for Koreans, the question is, is it enough to just be proficient in Korean and English? If we are taking Trimnell`s book as a model, for not just how Americans might want to go about becoming more globalized, then the answer is a definitive `no`. In this globalized world for some people English simply won`t be enough. In relation to what we mentioned in the previous question it would seem highly appropriate for a Korean doing business in Japan, for example, to speak Japanese with her Japanese business partners as a very important sign of respect, if nothing else. It would also be helpful in that same business relationship if the Japanese company would also furnish at least one Korean speaker to deal with some of their Korean partners.

I think what are the main points that Trimnell is trying to make in this book is that English hegemony has been going on unabated for quite some time and other regions of the world are becoming quite sick of it. The world is changing and things are becoming less centralized around the United States alone and simply more global. In the current situation and increasingly so, all roads do not lead to New York or Washington, DC. In the modern world business deals can and do occur totally outside of the US or American influence. This means that any particular country will need to start to form more direct alliances with trading partners and in these trading situations English may no longer be the exclusive language of communication. It may be useful in the beginning but ultimately should be faded out if an enduring and productive relationship is expected to ensue. As a recent example if we look at the free trade agreement signed between Korea and Chile we would need to wonder in which language this agreement was negotiated (at this early point in the developing relations probably English) and more importantly how will this trade ensue. If trade between Korea and Chile blossoms beyond the occasional bottle of wine then more Korean companies will need some Spanish speakers and Chilean companies will need to employ some Korean speakers. Working solely in English will make everything harder and more expensive, in the long run. Maybe! We need to remember that most international agreements and international law is reliant on English, so contracts between this Korean company and Chile in partner will need to be drawn up in English which means everything will need to be first negotiated and decided on through the medium of English, and if these two companies decide to sell their products in a third part of the world then they will need to conduct that portion of the business possibly in English (depending on where they sell). Looking at this, things become much more complicated. Because so many of the world`s major institutions function in English, it is still the most efficient language for dealing with major aspects of business.

It should also be clear from this discussion that the world still needs a lingua franca. If we think of all the different languages in the world then we quickly realize that the idealistic concept of having an expert in each language where a particular company does business is prohibitively expensive and extremely complicated. If a company has one expert in, for example Uzbek, then they need to have absolute trust in this individual because nobody will be able to second-guess what he or she is doing. Most companies do not like this type of situation.

At this point as well we need to admit that the world is not a fair place. Powerful and rich countries and companies will be able to do things that smaller poorer countries and companies simply cannot do. A country like Korea can afford to educate its citizens in several different languages, but a place like Suriname, for example, simply cannot. In fact, most countries cannot even afford to keep the languages they have. Moreover, because Korea is economically one of the strongest countries in the world foreign companies may actually try to employ people who can speak Korean because they want to access the Korean market and Korean goods. The same is most definitely not true for Suriname, not only is the market small but Suriname produces few marketable goods while at the same time having several different (approximately 6) languages. For countries like Suriname English is a great equalizer. English gives them opportunities to markets and allows them to get goods from outside which they would never otherwise get. So, it is important to remember that even though we are advocating a highly idealized version of globalization in which there is a greater mix all different languages based on common respect and understanding, we still need to realize that the global economy is fuelled by the English language and the tremendous advantages that a lingua franca like English brings not only to rich countries like the United States but also some of the poorest countries in the world like Suriname. In our idealized view, though, what we are saying is that some of the rich are more powerful countries need to set good examples for some of the struggling more developing countries and really it is about respect and understanding. They can certainly afford to do so.

3. Is there anything in the list of tips Trimnell gives for learning a language which were new to you or surprised you? What was it?

The purpose of this was really not to supply you with things that you didn`t necessarily know but rather to get you to think about the difference between somebody who is bilingual and somebody who is monolingual. I think this chapter is really written for the lowest common denominator of monolingual, really a person who has never really sat down to study a foreign language. And in trying to understand or reconstruct their thought processes I think this chapter is actually quite useful. Everyone who read through this was probably quite dumb struck by the simplicity of the concepts presented as well as the way in which they were presented. That`s exactly what I wanted. In fact, it would be somewhat disconcerting if any of you who have reached this level of English as well as being exposed to other languages to various degrees had not already figured all these different things out. So, having basically said that, why don`t we just go through and use this to give us a picture of how monolinguals might actually perceive the world.

But the main differences between bilinguals/multilinguals and monolinguals is that the latter don`t seem to be able to perceive things (and here I don`t just mean linguistic elements) with the same degree of sensitivity as the former. Monolinguals generally have a tendency to be stuck in their own frame of mind because simply they have never been challenged in those assumptions. The longer one is a monolingual the more fixed their ideas become to the point where they begin to simply see what they do as being necessarily correct and proper while the things that others do are sen as being strange, weird, or just plain wrong. While adults are often quiet about such feelings, it is often quite interesting to watch children as they are exposed to a second language situation, even as bilinguals, when they are given a word in a new language they will often declare it to be wrong. Or they often refuse to speak with their grandparents (for a brief initial period of transition) in the language in which they have received less exposure when they go to visit them. Adults in being confronted by the same situation have these same feelings on a grander and more internally vicious scale, but they might not acknowledge them openly. They see the other speakers of the aberrant language as making little sense.

This is important to us because the difference between monolinguals and multilinguals can, in a general sense be equated to the difference between globalized citizens of the world and people who are restricted to their own regional norms. The former is able to think in more expansive ways, which requires a high degree of sensitivity (more on this idea later in the course) while the latter just bulldozes his or her way though life oblivious to outside forces in a sea of incessant familiarity which requires only standardized repertoires of behavior enacted without thought or any necessary sensitivity.

4. Nowadays many young Koreans go abroad for a year or two? What do you think are some of the advantages or going abroad like that and do you think it really is necessary?

This is an increasing trend in Korea and is also one which inspires great controversy and discussion within Korean society. It pertains to what we are doing in this course because it centers really around the position of English not only in the world but particularly here in Korea. Based on this we could say that the English language seems to be a fixation in Korea currently. People seem to be fixated on English as a foreign language and are willing to spend phenomenal sums of money to ensure a certain level of proficiency in English. Under optimal conditions or even less than optimal conditions there are lots of advantages to actually being able to go abroad to experience English. The question we need to ask though is whether it is a necessity to do this and what are the disadvantages of spending so much money to send people abroad when they could be educated here in Korea.

In considering the possibility of going abroad for a time and the possible effects and dangers one must first think about age factors. Certainly children can get benefits, but they because they are developing both cognitively and physically (the physical components childrens` memories, the hippocampal region of the midbrain for example, are still under construction well into their elementary school years) they might pick up things relatively fast but they will lose them even faster. So if a child spends three years overseas and comes back to Korea at the age of ten or so, by the time they enter middle school the things they learned while overseas may very well be gone. Then there are the possible problems encountered in cognitive development. These warnings are not to say that children cannot have an excellent experience overseas which will change the entire timbre of their lives, but there are so many variables that have to be considered and the potential for all kinds of results are there. Parents are often too bullish on the prospects and may blame the child and not themselves if the results of this extremely expensive venture are not all they hoped for. In general it is probably better to wait until the child has reached a certain stage of both linguistic and cognitive development in their first language, but then we have not so much deep cognitive developmental concerns but affective ones. Affective disturbances, disturbances to the emotional framework of a teenager, can have acute effects which may last for a lifetime. The basic idea is nothing is guaranteed in such a sea of possible complications and any such venture is not to be taken lightly.

Then there is the issue of the cost. All this is expensive and just maybe it would be better to try to use at least some of the money floating out of the country on developing better educational programs here. It is a truism that the preference for overseas experiences and education is severely debilitating the Korean public education system. As a compelling example, I just found out that one of my own graduate students won a scholarship to go overseas for two years from the Korean government. They are going to give her 160,000,000 won over two years and two people in each providence in Korea receive such a scholarship every year. With eight provinces and 2 people in each of them receiving such a scholarship the amount of money each year is phenomenal (2,560,000,000won) just to get 16 individuals a master`s degree in English education overseas. If the government were to annually invest such huge sums to the development of a master`s program here it could certainly be one of the best in the world. That is where the call of globalization can be draining, even to rich countries like South Korea. Sometimes we need local solutions to local problems for better, fairer local development. A blind adherence to the romantic virtues of globalization can and does stifle local industries and local development.