Skip to main content
Language and globalization

Academic capitalism and the spread of English

By July 11, 2010May 25th, 20198 Comments3 min read17,595 views

In 2009, I contributed a chapter about the social inclusion of migrants in Australia to an edited book about immigration policy published in Japanese in Japan. The book is doing well – a second edition has just been published – and that piece of my research writing is more widely read than some of my English-language peer-reviewed work. However, when it came to recording my 2009 research “output” for my university, the paperwork for entering a non-English publication proved formidable, and I had the record returned to me three times with queries for additional documentation and evidence – that I’d really published the piece, that the publication was really legitimate, and even because I had put the translation of the title in the wrong line on the form … Now, I have to admit that I resent the paperwork associated with documenting my “output” at the best of times. With all that extra hassle I was tempted to just skip recording that particular chapter. Fortunately, my PhD students took over and took on some hardcopy-and-signature -ferrying errands, which ultimately got the record of that chapter and all the associated documentation into the university’s research inventory.

Why am I telling this story of bureaucratic tedium? Because no one ever made an explicit policy decision that research publications in languages other than English are less desirable than those in English. However, mundane bureaucratic practices – such as making record entry for a publication in a language other than English more difficult – conspire to have exactly that policy effect. In this way many decisions that seem to have nothing to do with language end up as implicit language policy decisions – the fact that English-language journals dominate the academic rankings is another example from academic publishing.

This point about the naturalization of English as the language of choice in international academia is well-made in a case study of a language controversy at the Chinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK) published in the Journal of Education Policy. The author, Po King Choi, shows how a far-reaching language policy decision – to teach a larger share of courses in English – was initially not made as a policy decision at all but through a series of internal notices, directives and instructions at various levels of bureaucracy.

CUHK used to be the only university in Hong Kong with Chinese as the principal medium of instruction. It was originally intended to take the students from Chinese-medium secondary schools, and it was also meant to place a high value on the promotion and development of Chinese culture and of Sino-Western exchanges. In 2005, a significant increase in the use of English as the medium of instruction resulted in a language controversy and, eventually, a language policy that accorded English a much higher status than had previously been the case.

Po King Choi explores how the expansion of English was naturalized through a simple equation between English and internationalization. CUHK administration put forward an argument where “English” was equated with “internationalization,” “academic excellence” and “career success.” The author explains the fallacy inherent in this argument with a metaphor: in the same way that water doesn’t start to flow if all you do is install a tap without having the plumbing in place, you don’t get excellence by simply switching the language of instruction.

[T]he CU administration insisted on using English because the use of English served as a useful label, a sign indicating that this was a first class university. There was no need to demonstrate or to explain how the use of English would give rise to a cosmopolitan mind-set or ‘international vision.’ In the market where higher education is bought and sold as a commodity, more for its exchange than its use value, […] (p. 245)

Anyone interested in how English spreads in higher education by piggy-backing on the spread of academic capitalism needs to read this paper.

Choi, P. (2010). ‘Weep for Chinese university’: a case study of English hegemony and academic capitalism in higher education in Hong Kong Journal of Education Policy, 25 (2), 233-252 DOI: 10.1080/02680930903443886

Ingrid Piller

Author Ingrid Piller

Dr Ingrid Piller, FAHA, is Distinguished Professor of Applied Linguistics at Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia. Her research expertise is in bilingual education, intercultural communication, language learning, and multilingualism in the context of migration and globalization.

More posts by Ingrid Piller

Join the discussion 8 Comments

  • YUYANG SHE says:

    This is the current trend of academic language use. English still possesses the dominant place of academic language. It reminds me the discussion about academic writing standards. Most of the publishment and works are in English and in English writing style. People have to follow the western writing style to get published, deliver the work. It may not be so fair for those who are used to other writing systems. The difference is not just about the writing but more related to the thinking patterns. As one of the consequence, the validity and reliability of English language proficiency test such as IELTS are questioned. Do the writing standards take the difference into consideration?

  • Ulfath Sadia says:

    English has turned into a global language and it is connected to internationalization of the education. In my country all the courses in the higher education level are taught in English. Though English is taught as a second language in Bangladesh all the textbooks at the universities are written in English. The University authority promotes class lectures in English as well. The main reason behind high emphasis on English is to compete with the academic excellence in the international level. Universities want to produce work force with high competence in English as in the present world English competency plays a great role in the career development and success.

  • Although I fully understand the academic plight of the non-English speaker, and the previous posts have clearly illustrated the difficulties associated with the dominance of the English language in the realm of academia, one must not lose sight of the overwhelming benefits it poses to humankind. Effectively, educational institutions that elect to offer a significant proportion of their courses in the medium of English tend to spawn graduates who are equipped with a universally adaptable set of skills acquired in a language that is understood worldwide. This is the true essence of a Global world, as difficult a concept as it may be for ultranationalists to accept. In order to reduce misunderstandings and the likelihood of feuds, the Global language can transcend international boundaries; bridging gaps in knowledge as well as fusing cultural divides.

    • That’s the theory, Paul. Unfortunately, the reality of the global spread of English is not the emergence of the kind of utopia you sketch out. English is simply another means to reinforce old and new inequalities as we keep documenting here on Language on the Move.

  • Po King CHOI says:

    Thx, Ingrid, for mentioning my paper on English hegemony and academic capitalism. Ive taken this language issue very much to heart, because, as Kimie-san pointed out, we dont do research or write merely to get a place in the English-speaking world. We do that because we feel committed to the community or society we are researching on (most likely living in), and we want to communicate with the people with whom we feel a strong sense of allegiance. And, Im surprised, Ingrid, that what we encounter here in Hong Kong is what you encounter also in Australia! Here, our publications in Chinese (our first language and language of the majority) dont count – or, they count so little that most of our career-minded colleagues just dont bother to write them. The interesting (and sad) thing is that it affects our psyche so much that we who write in Chinese do sometimes feel that we publish very little, or dont have any publication, as Kimie-san reported. It is not only unfair on those of us who feel committed to write for their own community, but it also closes the mind of academics not only in our own society, but also in the English-speaking world.

    Back to my paper, Ive had reviewers (not of JEP, but of another journal) who commented that its ironic that I wrote about this issue in English. Ironic, indeed! One reviewer of JEP said I should put in more references from the British literature, so that readers in Britain can relate to my paper. The irony here is that in my own society (Hong Kong), the JEP is not considered a British journal, but an INTERNATIONAL journal proper!

  • vittoria says:

    this is an interesting topic – i am wondering about student research output in languages other than English. Macquarie has a large number of overseas students and agreements with overseas universities so should publications in other languages expect to increase?

  • Thanks, Kimie. Your example points to another issue: the adoption of English as the medium of instruction in non-English-speaking countries and the choice to publish research mostly in English ultimately divorces universities from the societies they serve. The result is an isolated elite (as also pointed out by Professor Choi in her paper) – lacking roots in their local societies and marginalized anyway in global academia” they end up ineffectual all around … Way to go, Japanese-Korean research project!

  • Thanks, Ingrid, for bringing this issue up. Having contributed a chapter to the same book, I, too, was amazed by the fact that there were two different forms/procedures – one for publications in English and the other for publications in other languages, with the latter necessitating more documentation and explanation than the former…

    Legitimacy of publication in languages other than English is an issue that many of us encounter on a regular basis. I don’t know how many times I’ve heard scholars claiming “I have no publication” and it turned out that they have tons of publications in their first language. As you point out in this post, there are myriads of academic discourses that make us believe that publications in languages other than English do not count or they are not as worthy as publications in English. That’s why the following incident was an eye-opening moment. A colleague of mine got research funding from the Toyota Foundation and launched a website where he and his team showcase interview studies with Korean residents in Tokyo. All the information including the interview transcripts are bilingual in Japanese and Korean. I asked him if they would have English translations so that ‘the international community of researchers’ can learn about their project. He said, “Huh? Why? It’s about the Korean residents who speak Korean and Japanese and we want the Japanese to understand their life trajectories in Japan.” I protested that he would miss out an opportunity to showcase his work internationally, to which he said, “if the viewers can’t read Japanese or Korean, then, they can use all sorts of online translation tools. Google Translate for one? That’s what we do with publications or websites in English. Translating our website into English will cost so much money and time and I’d rather use that time and money to do a quality work and make the job easier for my collaborators.” I found his stance refreshing and it was an opportunity to rethink my own belief about who has to accommodate for whose needs.

Leave a Reply