Language in the world: properties and powers
Access to linguistic resources - structure
This fossilized view of culture, in emphasizing its supposed homogeneity, overlooks the reality, of how access to cultural and linguistic resources is structured, in two senses. Firstly, we need to recognize that there are deep and abiding social divisions among speakers of the same language. As Holborow (1999), for example, has pointed out, it is dangerous to equate interests with countries. Critical of Phillipson for failing to explore 'how national states are themselves enmeshed in global capitalism' (p.76), she recognizes that, while there may be good arguments for the championing of local languages, it is important not to overlook how they can be 'used by local elites for their own purposes' (p.80). Material resources are unequally distributed, and this inequality is linguistically and symbolically mediated. Thus speakers are not equally placed to realize their linguistic assets as 'capital' (Bourdieu 1986), when the 'correct' accent, for example, or native speaker facility in the dominant language is a pre-requisite for social and occupational mobility. This suggests that the notion of a shared 'mother tongue' as the basis for access to a shared history is a far more fractured and contested notion than is acknowledged by the writers we have been discussing (a fact that is similarly obscured by politicians who appeal to 'the national interest' and 'the national way of life'). Secondly, there is the issue of access to World 3. Like the supporters of 'linguistic human rights', we are very much opposed to the barriers which prevent any of the world's citizens from moving around the cultural realm. Access to this knowledge is via language - usually written language, and often one of the most widely spoken language varieties, such as English. 'Access to English parallels access to the fruits of society', as Holborow (1999: 58) puts it. But the distribution of this access is a political issue, not an issue of either the nature of language or the nature of knowledge. This is why arguments in favor of 'cosmopolitanism' need a political critique of the current global order and its vast inequities. Such a critique may involve the support of minority language rights, where this is politically progressive.
