 We'll move on to our next presentation by another Tom. I'm very happy to present Thomas Rosento professor and chair of The Department of English as an additional language at the University of Calgary, you know just I know we're gonna have questions later, but you know George So George Lakeoff cutting-edge turning Western analytic philosophy on his head wrote a book called philosophy in the flesh Which has as its central tenet embodied realism? So we've come full circle perhaps so it's going back to the body to explain Meaning and and language in a universal way First as has been the case with other speakers. I want to thank David and Chantel for inviting me and for Organizing what has been a spectacular Conference, I don't think we can be too extreme in our praise. It's one of the best I've been to in recent memory and also to the volunteers that have worked in tech and outside at the table and The drivers Albrecht who's you you'll never be unemployed because your skill set is mind-boggling And and so thanks again, I really appreciate I'm honored to be here Well, my talk is going to be a little bit of a change of pace, which I hope is good talking about things like economics and work As well as some things a bit more on the philosophical plane But what I want to talk about today is How the under or non-specification of terms such as politics globalization and Neoliberalism and the subfield of language policy Leads to disputes and contrary positions on important issues Where there might otherwise be greater agreement not necessarily which could lead to a greater possibility of conciliance Some people don't like that term, but I picked it to characterize the possibility of in which principles from different disciplines form a comprehensive theory Even though post-modernists and post-structuralist eschew grand narratives or explanations as totalizing By promoting a view of the universal that derives from the particular I will argue that our lack of sophistication in economics and political theory We talk about those things often Impacts our ability to critically question the corrosive effects of Neoliberalism on language policies and practices in many parts of the world today including in the United States I Argue that we need to have some understanding of how markets of various types Impact choices and options and mostly the lack of or redirection of choices and options especially in low-income countries But not only there while analyses from cultural studies Perspectives may create spaces for and acknowledge the legitimacy of complex non-essentialized personal identities a focus on this approach Underestimates or often doesn't even deal with The Space Sorry, oh underestimates the role and effects of social class on identity options Penny cook for example in 2007 mentions this with regard to global hip-hop his work Claire mentioned it yesterday He said very often people who can do hip-hop globally are privileged. They're people of means And this is often not understood or pointed out enough Currently, I believe there's not enough understanding in applied linguistics on how globalization interacts with national economies and How those interactions may influence the trajectory and fate of languages? This is not to posit a deterministic or monologic Model of cause and effect, but rather it is to say that in the absence of clearly articulated views on Political economy we may have fewer tools read here theories and associated research methods With which to argue for particular policies to effectuate particular desired outcomes whether for example in support of the maintenance of minority languages and cultures and societal multilingualism on the one hand or For the widespread adoption of a global lingua franca such as English on the other So to illustrate my argument about the under specification in completeness or problematic appropriation of ideas from various branches of political and economic theory in Language policy research. I consider competing views on the role of English in non English dominant countries in the world today as Either one a form of linguistic imperialism or two a vehicle for social and economic mobility Or three a global lingua franca necessary for a global demos necessary to achieve global justice The first problem with these views you'll notice or ways of thinking about English in Such stark terms is that they are not falsifiable Positions except on mostly ad hoc grounds often based on case studies that are then Generalized in the case of positions one and two or based on abstract normative political theories the case for position three Additionally a number of constructs are used such as social class that are not well defined or not to find at all something that is well well attested for example in quantitative Variationist sociolinguistic research for example in the work of the above sociolinguistic patterns Which was critiqued by glenn Williams in his 1992 book sociolinguistics the sociological critique So it's not particularly new And They are usually not historically contextualized Leading to generalizations that are untenable Finally, there is often a tendency to accept doxa uncritically often reflexively Therefore the three positions mentioned above could all be true or false or some combination thereof Depending on assumptions often derived from other disciplines that are under specified and or loosely applied This combination of factors often results in arguments and claims that are easy to criticize as merely opinion cloaked in the trappings of obscure and impenetrable arguments accessible only to the most Astute academically trained vines like ours We need to provide more consistent and well articulated arguments if we were to have any hope of influencing public discourse and debates on social justice, I believe by explaining why cultural and linguistic diversity are Integral to meaningful democratic participation of all citizens in a polity and why restrictive hygienic policies to borrow from Debra Cameron are usually contrary to these goals So I'll briefly go through these three positions and then talk a bit about the economic dimension So the first position is English as an agent of linguistic imperialism I'm sure you're all familiar with the work of Robert Phillips in It's 1992 book linguist linguistic imperialism set off a whole series of research projects and writing and counterwriting and Deconstruction and problematizing etc. But it got the argument going he argues that English is integral to the globalization Processes that characterize the contemporary post-cold world war phase of aggressive casino capitalism economic restructuring McDonald's Asian and militarization on all continents the dominance of English is also Consolidated in other dimensions of globalization such as military links NATO UN peacekeeping operations the arms trade and Culture Hollywood products BBC world CNN MTV Phillips and acknowledges that quote while there is no simple correlation between the use of English and either British culture or US corporate interests These developments embody and entail Hegemonizing processes that tend to render the use of English natural and normal and to marginalize other languages and quote There is undoubtedly a relation between the global economic cultural and political influence of the United States and the growth of the popularity of English in many countries today Phillips's response as an alternative to what he calls the diffusion of English paradigm is the ecology of languages paradigm Which quote builds on our linguistic and cultural diversity Attempts to ensure equality for speakers of all languages and uses the human rights system as a counterweight to the free market and free isn't scare quotes To advance the cause of the ecology of languages requires efforts at all levels from the local to the global Whereas the conceptual apparatus for linguistic imperialism depends on an analysis of the negative effects of Western economic imperialism on mostly low-income countries with putative bad effects on their thousands of languages under pressure from neo-colonial languages The construct ecology of languages is undefined and abstract How can equality for speakers of all languages his phrase? Be understood let alone attained Phillipson says that efforts are required at all levels from the local to the global But if English has gained its great global power Because of a complex set of developments in global expansion, especially in the last 50 years What actions could be implemented to halt this expansion that are relevant for the protection of languages and Achieving equality for speakers of all languages. This seems to be at least at a conceptual level Perhaps an untenable project perhaps desirable, but difficult to conceive Furthermore It isn't really English per se That is the problem I would argue Phillipson reveals as much in his own recitation of the components for the ecology of language paradigm Which calls among other things for quote? economic democratization protection of local production and national Sovereignty's and redistribution of the world's material resources, but he has a laundry list which has no higher a hierarchy System to say which proceeds which so while this this is an important point. I think It's not argued to be a foundational imperative for change Which many including myself would argue that it is that is to say these changes have to be part and parcel of Creating the circumstances whereby local resources Would become a focus and therefore literacy and local languages would be necessary and important Okay, so now I'll go to position to English as a vehicle for social and economic mobility a Contrary position to linguistic imperialism is described by Janina Brut griffler 2005 all of these names and dates are on your handout. Do you all have the references? okay she writes that quote Exclusion from high proficiency in English is a prime determinant of lack of access to wealth in the world They and now she's talking about poor South Africans in habit and quote She criticizes those who support the teaching of mother tongues over English as being insensitive to the economic Aspirations of oppressed and impoverished people as they seek to escape poverty with the aid of English This argument has been associated with supporters of English only in the United States and with English Triumphalism globally we heard yesterday, and I've written about this about a case in Amarillo, Texas or yellow, Texas That's the English word Yeah The the irony wasn't the judge didn't quite understand that judge Reinhardt basically Said that a Mother teaching her daughter Spanish speaking to her in Spanish and the daughter spoke English well not that That should be an issue But it was a form of child abuse and of course as you know, there are many cases for example, Ron uns the Silicon Valley chip maker billionaire who helped spearhead a movement to overturn bilingual education in California, Colorado, Massachusetts He won in California, Massachusetts lost in Colorado The name he gave to his movement for overturning bilingual education was English for the children We could go on and on about this However, in this case brute griffler argues That the denial of English language Medium education helped to maintain social and economic segregation in the former British colony Bazutalan That's what though during the late 19th and early at the early 20th centuries and that this pattern persists in South Africa today However, as penny cook points out so that was a historical context a particular interpretation of the denial of of English to keep people segregated in You know in certain menial occupations, etc The problem with you know selected examples and not seeing a bigger picture Concelions penny cook though Points out that part of the argument here about access hinges on whether we are looking at Individual rights to English or whether we are looking at how access to English can alleviate poverty across a broader domain It is perhaps disingenuous to argue for a need to deal with class and then to argue in terms of individual access And this is a huge problem with contemporary liberal theory In fact, this is what happened in Tucson with banning of the books and the programs, right? I believe the argument was that You can't talk about groups Right, you have to talk about individuals. So liberalism this wonderful thing was invoked To basically ban books and to outlaw programs. So as I argue liberalism in folks is highly problematic There are contradictions Which people like Harvey write about about liberalism? Okay Ruth oh 2002 that's on your handout argues that for many of the world's poor English language education is quote an outlandish Irrelevance and quote and quote talk of a role for English language education in Facilitating the process of poverty reduction and a major allocation of public resources to that end is likely to prove misguided and wasteful and quote penny cook Concludes that quote we need to distinguish very clearly between individually oriented access arguments about escape from poverty And class-oriented arguments about large-scale poverty reduction all right third position Which I mentioned earlier is English as a global lingua franca as a necessary Element perhaps precursor for a global demos This is best represented in the work of Philip von Parie. I mentioned this earlier. It's on your handout his book 2011 has been long awaited by people and Interested in language policy and particularly in the European context He's written extensively about the benefits of a lingua franca such as English He himself is a francophone from Belgium in helping achieve Social and economic justice globally he argued in a 2000 article that promotion of the teaching and learning of English in Low-income countries would help reduce out migration of highly trained English-speaking citizens Who flee in great numbers to the wealthier knowledge economy countries? He says that the reclamation of lost income and corporate Lost income taxes and corporation taxes would thereby be used for massive investment in English language teaching Keeping you know more people in the country Leading to economic growth and GDP keep those people here invest in English Etc. And This is in his he said this is the argument that he makes for why we need a lingua franca in Europe and across the world he says quote It's adoption that is English as a lingua franca and Spreading creates and expands a transnational demos by facilitating direct communication Live or online without the cumbersome and expensive mediation of interpretation and translation It enables not only the rich and powerful, but also the poor and the powerless to communicate Debate network Co-operate lobby demonstrate effectively across borders This common demos is a precondition for the effective pursuit of justice and This fact provides the second fundamental reason why people Committed to egalitarian global justice should not only welcome the spread of English as a lingua franca But see it as their duty to contribute to this spread in Europe and throughout the world The ends that he is hoping for include greater justice Distribution of income etc As I mentioned, he's a native francophone from Belgium fluent in English a world traveler teaches at Harvard among other places However his plan for dramatically increasing the numbers of English speakers worldwide Includes massive subsidies from the free riding anglophone countries There's a price to be paid who benefit unfairly in a number of ways By the arbitrary luck of having been born in English dominant and wealthy countries such as the inner circle English dominant countries that cash through mentions his argument for a global lingua franca necessary for the strengthening of a global of Global fora and institutions that could serve to advance global interests of economic justice Environmental sustainability and the reduction of conflict is certainly appealing If not original as it would help move the world towards communication at works less tethered to ethnic and nationalistic Identities and the myriad languages that reflect and constitute those identities This is another side of the argument. In fact our introductory comments By professor consta I think alluded to some extent to that point a Big problem with the position of von paris in my view is his downplaying of the contradictions between the values and goals of economic neoliberalism and the values and goals necessary to promote a meaningful democratic world order in Which economic justice in my view could only be feasible if the debilitating values and manifest negative effects Of the current neoliberal global regime were reversed or at least severely modified in other words a Global lingua franca is or would be merely an epiphenomenon of the very system i.e. globalized neoliberal economic and political policies and associated institutions which are Anathetical to the values of a global demos so to expect that this system could somehow Be linked with a global language to promote justice to me underdetermines doesn't really come to grips With the contradictions that are inherent between those systems Now I'll talk about the limitations of liberalism and the inevitability of neoliberalism in quotes inevitability Although the three positions briefly outlined in this paper appear to ascribe English Somewhat incommensurate roles i.e. as a language of oppression a language of economic opportunity and a language necessary for global democracy The often under specified common factor is the pervasiveness of economic global globalized neoliberalism in the world system today and its role in Relationships with flows of opportunities that might advance or retard the interests of differently positioned And situated individuals in various contexts globally as political philosopher Michael Sandel puts it Liberals exaggerate our capacity for and the value of individual choice in the Contemporary world in which we live this extends to the domain of language as whole borough 2007 on your handout puts it quote No one could fail to recognize the fact that real language choice Hardly exists anywhere in the unequal world of today in the end social and economic mobility Are of course not caused just or only by proficiency in English or any other language Proficiency in English whether as a first second or third language may provide an advantage for careers and employment in certain sectors of the global economy But the numbers of available jobs and the number of jobs being created that requires significant Knowledge of English is very very small compared to the numbers of workers seeking jobs worldwide The policies of the rich countries Supported and abetted by major international institutions such as the International Monetary Fund the World Bank and the World Trade Organization Seek generally to exploit countries with relatively lower wages Limited workers rights and environmental protections Relatively stable governments and taxation and repatriation policies that will provide a safe haven for foreign investors The jobs in these exploited countries are disproportionately very low-wage jobs temporary jobs with no protections no benefits kind of like Sessional instructors For which but you need English I guess for which only minimal competence if any in English is required In cases in which high degrees of English is required as with call centers in India and elsewhere Educated workers who also happen to speak or can master a variety of English acceptable to American consumers Blumart 2009 will have an advantage over those who don't speak this variety of English But given the relative numbers a policy that promotes English as a means to social mobility Let alone global justice even in the long run While not acknowledging and addressing the underlying dynamics of transnational Capitalism its effects on employment and migration patterns that often work against the development of local economies Especially in low-income countries cannot be justified I'll just talk a bit about Some of the numbers with regard to jobs and mobility there's much more and a longer version of this But given the time constraints, I'll just talk a bit about it Castells 2006 estimates that only about 200 million of the world's formal workforce That's important because there's a huge informal labor force, which often doesn't get reported and without that It's hard to imagine how much poorer poor countries would be But only about 200 million of the world's formal workforce of three billion workers or about seven percent Find work through the fifty three thousand or so multinational corporations and their related networks yet This workforce is responsible for forty percent of global GDP and Two-thirds of the world trade. This is in Williams to 2010 on your handout Linguafranchi are used in these companies regardless of their location and English is by far the most common Ammon Reports 1995 that the German Chambers of Commerce Recommend the use of English as the sole language of communication for transactions with 64 countries German is recommended as a co-language for 25 countries and Spanish for 17 These data suggests that English is a global lingua franca for players in the knowledge economy and English French German and Spanish are European lingua franca Given that trade involving Japan the US and Europe accounted for 50% of world GDP in 2000 the special status of these languages appears to be justified Again, we can turn to the processes of neoliberalism and their globalized effects to account for the movement of skilled labor to countries whose state or national language is English or to companies Who use English as the primary language of their activities? European mergers and acquisitions exceeded 1 trillion during 2005 the US alone accounted for another 1.16 trillion in the value of mergers and acquisitions Followed by the UK at 305 billion Many of these mergers involve technology companies These new mega companies have to have no obligation to retain their headquarters in the home country And they increasingly tend to move to countries with the most favorable corporate taxation regimes For example, 600 American companies are in Ireland employing 100,000 people And they told Obama either lower the corporate tax rate to 20% and we're just not going to be in the States in 2010 the OECD countries with combined corporate income tax rates significantly lower than the US Included Ireland 12.5% Iceland 15% Switzerland 21% Denmark 25% Finland 26% Sweden 26% Norway 28% UK 28% the Germans lowered their corporate tax rate drastically when jobs started to flow out of the country Clearly English is the dominant language in technology and the knowledge economy and these countries have English either as the national language Or language spoken by higher percentages of the relevant workforce The trifecta of favorable corporate tax policies a highly educated workforce and one that speaks English Helps perpetuate and increase disparities between poor and rich countries by attracting corporations beholden to share holders interests As David Harvey puts it in 2005 neoliberal concern for the individual Trump's any social democratic concern for equality democracy and social solidarities and Again, I'll be arguing that these this creates great problems for the status of not only workers But also the languages which could be developed as resources locally and the are on the article by Paul Brutho 2002 provides more detail about how that would look a Relatively few world languages serve the economic interests of large transnational corporations and banks Even though the percentage of the world's workforce that benefits is Disproportionately skewed towards the most highly educated people from the richest countries And especially multinational corporations themselves even in Europe only about 4.5 million European citizens with tertiary level Qualifications are mobile across state boundaries within Europe, which is only about 1.4 percent of the total population The massive inequalities and global wealth occur not Because not enough people speak English or some other language But rather because many of the poorest countries and their citizens play a very particular and narrow role in the global system Which is to provide cheap labor and natural resources to richer countries To be used in the manufacture of finished goods with rich countries blocking the export by poorer countries of locally manufactured products Such as textiles. There's a lot written on this through the protectionist policies of the wealthy countries This has the effect of retarding local economic development as Targeted investments are made by the rich countries for the benefit of rich countries short-term economic gains and not for long-term Sustainability for what is best for the less powerful nation, which would entail use of local resources Including local regional languages requiring some level of literacy in those languages necessary for local micro economic projects The belief that by somehow expanding access to English poor people will escape poverty is delusional and does not reflect reality on the ground However, even in poor countries there are class divisions and therefore a small number of socially advantaged citizens Will benefit from neoliberal policies because they have access to the right education. I Talk about that in recento 2010 and they have political power or access to it As long as the current rules of international trade are maintained i.e. capitalism for the poor countries and socialism for the rich countries Attempts to develop language policies to support education and local languages or regional lingua franca's Based on regimes of language rights I argue will not succeed since people who already speak the right language and have the right Education and cultural capital will not need any more rights and Those who speak the wrong language and lack education access to education or relevant skills or cultural capital Will not benefit by the granting of such rights Which are based on liberal concepts of individual rights in general even though group rights are written in various charters Basic apparatus of Western jurisprudence is on individual rights to conclude fairness and justice are abstract concepts moral precepts that are debated and stipulated by political philosophers, and I've been reading quite a bit of this Rawls that etc But what I would argue is that In the neoliberal globalized world all that matters in the end is power How to get it and how to keep it even though we're talking about nation-states Becoming more porous the pressures and globalized capital do have very tangible effects on distribution of wealth and policies in poor countries This is written about by Stiglitz Nobel Prize economists from Columbia who worked in as a chief economics Officer For the World Bank and it was in the Clinton administration. He thinks it's a travesty So these are liberal, you know American people That are decrying these the same they're making the same argument that I'm making although they have more hope I Suppose than I do or more belief and all of that stuff So They're so for example those with power Have made decisions about who will be winners large financial institutions most recently right and who are losers countries forced into austerity programs To comply with conditions imposed by banks called conditionality in the language of economics and this power has accelerated within a global economic system that began roughly With the election of Margaret Thatcher as Prime Minister of England in 1979 Who famously said that there was no such thing as society only individual men and women? Deborah Cameron mentioned this the other day perhaps a distortion, but certainly not a refutation of modern political Liberalism, that's the key. I haven't Had time to talk about it, but that's really a key point and certainly a manifesto for contemporary Globalized neoliberalism the mainstream media in the u.s Overwhelmingly and uncritically endorses and accepts the basic tenets of neoliberal political and economic philosophy Making it difficult for citizens to have a clearer and deeper awareness of the real forces in the real world That lead to the crisis of capitalism. We've been witnessing in recent decades although inequalities between languages Would still exist irrespective of political domination or social stratification as Heim's noted in 1985 The ways in which inequalities evolved can be analyzed by looking at the historical record And I do this and for example in my 2010 article one way to understand whether or not Contemporary political liberalism is compatible with other normative political philosophies with greater claims to Communitarian values and will kimlicka in 1989 argues that contemporary mainstream political liberalism is Compatible with humanitarian and leftist philosophies a view I find unconvincing is to analyze whether or not liberalism in its contemporary globalized forms is supportive of socio-economic and Political conditions that would support linguistic equality. I have suggested that the preference for English as a global lingual Franca especially over the past half century is conditioned by and correlates with Processes of economic globalization and expansion of the digitalized knowledge economy which greatly and disproportionately Benefits some workers in some sectors and geographical regions, but mostly benefits the corporations which employed those workers The question of which political system would promote the most egalitarian society One that supports individual choice on what constitutes a good life Cannot be answered even in the most abstract way Which political philosophers do unless we consider how local political economies within a globalized context have evolved historically With regard to modern political liberalism and its most recent version The evidence strongly suggests that the corresponding economic values that dominate most forms of globalized trade and other sorts of global economic Activities support the preconditions necessary for some people to lead a good life at least in a material sense But falls short for those many billions of people whose native language educational attainment and Geographical locations severely limit access to the liberties and resources that Kimlock suggest our preconditions for Individuals to quote lead our life from the inside in accordance with our beliefs about what gives value to life and quote At this point in history knowledge of certain varieties of English Coupled with particular skill sets obtainable only through high levels of education Generally not universally accessible is likely to enhance the social mobility of some individuals States that provide affordable access to English Language learning and literacy and which have highly educated workers with skills and demand in the knowledge economy related services are In the game Defined and described purely in economic terms States lacking in both are out of the game and will continue to lag behind At least in this sector of the corporatized globalized economy and as measured by GDP and Admittedly skewed partial accounting of wealth, but English is merely the language of the moment Not the inherent hegemon Not the de facto oppressor but most certainly not the ticket to social or economic mobility That it is claimed to be either overtly or often implicitly By supporters and apologists for the current world neoliberal economic order. Thank you. Thank you very much Tom