Multilingualism: a vibrant and dynamic idea in an enlarged E.U

SCIC Universities Conference Brussels, 4 March 2005

Ladies and gentlemen,

First of all, allow me to extend a very warm welcome to Brussels!

As the first ever member of the Commission with specific responsibility for multilingualism, I am particularly pleased to be with you here today for the official opening of this conference.

It is in fact quite unusual for a conference to bring together not just the players in a given sector but all those involved in the entire process from start to finish. It is all the more useful in that it aims to provide practical information which can be useful to the participants in the practice of their different roles.

It rapidly became apparent to me that there are in fact two sides to multilingualism. The first is what one might term societal and concerns the European citizen in his everyday life. The second dimension is Institutional multilingualism which is the dimension you are here to discuss today.

But they are two sides of the same coin. Multilingualism is clearly an asset to anyone and I am sure that I do not need to expand on that here in the company of so many highly accomplished specialists. That is of course why the Commission’s target for language learning is summed up in the expression “mother tongue plus two”. You may also be interested to know that I will shortly be launching a new Communication in the field of multilingualism.

Some say that this is too ambitious, but I think the facts do not bear this out. After all, multilingualism is far from being the exclusive preserve of an intellectual elite. It is in fact quite the opposite: the vast majority of the Earth’s inhabitants speaks more than one language.

Experts estimate that there are about 6.700 languages in the 220 countries or states identified by the United Nations. Statistically, this indicates an average of around 30 languages per country. However, we all know that statistics do not always reveal the wider truth. There are some (rare) countries that have one single language (Iceland, Cuba) while others have literally hundreds of languages. The most striking example is Papua New Guinea which apparently covers a staggering 817 different languages or dialects!

From a purely functional and pragmatic point of view, the distinction between languages and dialects can often be extremely relative. If a distinction is needed, it is often based on considerations of a demographic, social, economic or political nature. What is considered an official language in one country can be classed as a dialect in the neighbouring country.

What then is an official language? Referring more specifically to the European Union, the official languages are those mentioned in the Treaty and any change must be agreed unanimously by all the Member States. We now have 20 official languages.

More generally, I suspect that nowadays an official language means a written language and I learnt with some surprise that of the 6.700 existing languages or dialects I mentioned earlier, there are only 200 written languages in the world.

In fact, most informed people would agree that there is no such thing as a superior or an inferior language. Each language is a unique cultural expression with its own characteristics and singularly well adapted to the needs of its speakers. As well as a means of expression, it is also a channel of self-expression.

In today’s world where cultures mingle freely, where fashions disregard borders and where geographical distance means very little, it is legitimate to ask if multilingualism is still relevant. Should we not all have a common language?

A great deal of ink has been used on the subject of the use of English in the world. It is, it must be admitted, a subject which generates a great deal of emotion – proof positive that language is not just a tool but something which goes far far deeper. Not for nothing is the European Union’s motto “unity in diversity”.

This respect for other cultures and other languages was undoubtedly one of the major attractions of the EU to the numerous candidates for accession this decade.

But let us keep things in their proper context. “Global English” is not a very close relative of the English spoken by native speakers or those with an excellent command of that language. It is generally rather impoverished and reductive. In simple terms, it is an international lingua franca. This is not pejorative or demeaning, it is merely a fact.

Historically, “lingua franca” originally referred to a mixture of Italian with Greek, French, Arabic and Spanish used in the Levant. Throughout history there has always been a need for a lingua franca although that language has differed over time and across domains. That need is now greater than ever.

Does this mean everybody will speak English and everything else will disappear? Most certainly not!

Firstly, remember the point so eloquently made by the former German Chancellor Willy Brandt:

“If I’m trying to sell you something, we can speak English but if you are trying to sell me something, dann müssen Sie Deutsch sprechen!”

Secondly, both those who admire globalisation and those who hate it agree on one thing: that it is erasing distinctive national attitudes and producing a common culture all around the world. However, I’m afraid that the case is far from proven!

As long ago as the 1970's, some very influential research by Hofstede first highlighted the persistence of national differences in attitude despite the influence of corporate culture.

More recently, a very large–scale study was undertaken in 2002 by International Survey Research (ISR) involving a survey of one million employees of companies in the 10 biggest world economies.

The conclusion drawn by the ISR study is extremely interesting, but – at least to us in this room- not really unexpected:

Do not treat the world as if it is, or will become, homogeneous. Accept diversity and profit from it.

Cross-border mergers work best when managers do not attempt to impose a single culture but use the opportunities provided by high levels of cultural divergence.

My own conviction, but I am certainly not alone, is that globalisation is far from being a uniform trend that will genetically engineer us into identical clones. Globalisation is a fragmented, sometimes contradictory and often puzzling process.

The increases in indicators such as tourism, international telephone calls, etc, show a rapid rise in social exchanges across borders but international migration still only affects a limited share of the world population.

Also contradicting the perceived trend is the growth in the number of nation states – a supposedly doomed concept. UN membership has risen from 154 in 1980 to 191 today.

Nor has there ever been such a passionate and widely-expressed interest in languages, or to be more precise, languages and identity.

Final consideration: as far as I know, the European Union with its 20 official languages is the world leader in multilingualism. Yet, the Council of the Union has recently received official requests to consider adding more languages: Basque, Catalan, Galician, Irish.

To conclude on this point, multilingualism is vibrant, dynamic and very much alive.

Be assured that I accepted my portfolio with the unshakeable conviction that this is an over-arching priority for the people of Europe and will remain so for a long time to come.

It is difficult to overstate just how important the contribution of the Universities is and will be in the future. I would add that this is not just in multilingualism either, important though it is.

You may already know that I am a fervent promoter of Universities and, let me add immediately, not just because I was myself an academic for a while.

No, it is because I believe that if it is self-evident that if Europe cannot compete on the basis of cheap costs, there is undoubtedly one crucial area where it is extremely competitive: KNOWLEDGE.

The revised Lisbon strategy recognizes this and stresses the importance of the role to be played by the Universities.

As a matter of fact, I shall shortly be presenting a Communication on Universities and the knowledge-based society to the college of Commissioners. In the strategy I shall be proposing, the key players are the universities because I believe that knowledge has 3 facets:

• research (the creation of knowledge);
• education (the dissemination of knowledge);
• innovation (the application of knowledge).

I have noted with pleasure that all three feature in your conference.

A billionaire property developer was once asked for the secret of his success. “There are three things that are important” he announced, “location, location, location!” For me the three key points for our joint success are “diversity, diversity, diversity!”

Earlier in this presentation, I quoted the European motto: unity in diversity. I believe diversity is a good thing and that we should do our very best to preserve it. I developed this first in the context of languages and then also in the context of cultures.

I now intend to repeat it a third time with reference to Universities. I also believe diversity is a good thing for universities. I say it is a good thing because this diversity means that we are equipped with many different ways of meeting the educational challenges of the present and the future. We all have our individual or systemic strengths and weaknesses.

We can all learn from comparisons throughout Europe, betweendifferent systems and approaches - and their effectiveness. This is indispensable in order to raise standards across the Union, remove barriers to learning opportunities, and meet the educational challenges of the 21st century.

In 2000, Heads of State and Government, meeting in the European Council in Lisbon, set the Union the goal of becoming: “the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based society in the world.” This is the so-called Lisbon Strategy.

Subsequently, at the Barcelona European Council, the Ministers of Education agreed on three major goals to be achieved by 2010:

1. to improve the quality and effectiveness of EU education and training systems;

2. to ensure that they are accessible to all;

3. to open up education and training to the wider world.

The newly revised Lisbon Strategy strongly highlights the role of knowledge in ensuring growth and jobs, and in particular the role of universities. The mid-term review states:

“Spreading knowledge through high quality education systems is the best way of guaranteeing the long-term competitiveness of the Union. In particular, the Union must ensure that our universities can compete with the best in the World through the completion of the European Higher Education Area.”

In conclusion, I would therefore like first to extend a special greeting to the representatives of the 64 Universities present today and to wish you well.

A particular salute also to the three Costa prize- winning students and SCIC bursary-holders. Their theme, provided by the philosopher Karl Popper, is particularly close to my heart, as you have certainly understood by now:

“The value of a dialogue depends to a great extent on the diversity of competing opinions. If the Tower of Babel hadn’t existed, we would have to invent it”.

Last, but certainly not least, I would like to wish you all a day of fruitful discussion. You are all “enablers” and your work is very important since its fruits allow everyone else, and particularly the European Union, to work more effectively.

Thank you for your attention.