The Politics of English: A
Marxist View of Language by Marnie Holborow. London: Sage, 1999. vii
+ 216; index. £17.99. ISBN: 076196018X.
‘Life is not determined by consciousness, but
consciousness by life’. This famous quote from Marx, given right at the
beginning of Holborow’s book, underpins her examination of the politics of the
English language. One does not have to be a Marxist, though, to appreciate her
attempt to ground linguistic analysis in its social context. By doing so she
walks (to a certain extent) in the footprints of Pennycook [1994] who has
written on the ‘worldliness of English’.
In her study Holborow casts a critical eye on
several important fields of research in sociolinguistics. To begin with, she
argues convincingly that the Saussurean distinction between ‘langue’ (the
abstract language system) and ‘parole’ (language as it is spoken) - and the emphasis that was for most of the
past century put on the former rather than the latter - has led to a neglect of
the social dimension of language use. She contrasts this with the Marxist view
of language (further developed by Volosinov) which sees language and the social
world as inseparable.
In the Chapter entiteled ‘Money talks: the politics of World English’ Holborow sees the global spread of English as being connected to the capitalisation of the world. However, she is both critical of ‘triumphalist’ scholars, who see English as a panacea to the world’s ills, and ‘alarmists’ like Phillipson [1992], whose theory of linguistic imperialism is too static to account for the use of English in post-colonial and global settings. While the imperial background of the English language needs to be acknowledged, social circumstances and not the English language are to be blamed for present inequalities between the West and the so-called developing world. Indeed, Holborrow convincingly argues that English can be used as both instrument of repression and empowerment.
Holborow is at her most provocative in her
treatment of women’s language, an important field in sociolinguistics. She
exposes so-called ‘feminist’ studies of language as reinforcing rather than
challenging stereotypes about how men and women behave and interact. Holborrow denies that women have a language
distinct from men. It is invalid, she argues, to lump women together regardless
of such factors as age, race, education of social class. While one does not
necessarily have to agree with her argument, Holborow does provide an
interesting alternative to mainstream literature on gender and language.
The last area of Holborow’s analysis is the
debate surrounding Standard English. This is probably the weakest part of her
study, as she only reiterates well-known criticism of archconservative
defenders of an imagined ‘pure’ English language. Holborow points out that
Standard English is not a neutral tool but that it developed in a rigid class
based society.
Despite its subtitle this book will not only
appeal to Marxists but to all students, (university) teachers and professional
linguists who are interested in a challenge to mainstream views on
sociolinguistics. Class and class struggle, it is true, are somewhat
overemphasised – with the effect of sometimes overly simplifying more complex
issues. However, Holborow’s success in exposing weaknesses in traditional
sociolinguistic theory makes her study a valuable starting point for
discussion, essay writing and further research.
Pennycook, A. (1994), The Cultural
Politics of English as an International Language. London: Longman.
Phillipson, Robert (1992), Linguistic
Imperialism. Oxford: OUP.