Language and the Ingenuity Gap

Over the past centuries, first Latin and then French, German, and Russian, have receded in perceived importance as languages of science. Other powerful languages, with extensive internal scientific discourse, such as Japanese and Chinese, have always been largely excluded. The dominance of English, brought on by the economic power first of the UK (in the 18th and 19th centuries) and then of the USA (in the 20th and 21st), has elevated the reputation of English-language universities and advantaged native speakers of English by creating a self-reinforcing loop of language flow. Abstracting services insist on English-language abstracts; citation indexes often include only English-language citations; thus English appears to dominate scientific discourse, and English-speaking universities invariably head the lists of leading scientific institutions. The inexact assumption appears to be that, with enough pressure, others will simply be forced to learn English in order to compete. In fact, language frequently limits their participation even if they partially master English. Thus scientific advancement circumscribed by the English language is erroneously equated with scientific advancement in general. Valuable work in other languages is often simply lost — among other reasons because native English speakers are unwilling to learn the other languages that they need to access this discourse. Solutions for the reduction of this advantage and the distortions and misperceptions that result from it include the use of a simplified style or form of English, a taxation system whereby the powerful languages assist those who are native speakers of other languages, or the use of an easily mastered neutral language that puts everyone on an equal footing. If this discriminatory situation is to change, first the rhetoric must change: the advantaged must acknowledge their advantage and be open to ways of redressing the imbalance, and discriminatory practices must be acknowledged for what they are.