ÍNDICE DE FLUIDEZ

In European language history, the changing patterns of linguistic diversity and political power have led to a number of languages achieving a wider than regional

prevalence. Latin, for instance, was the lingua franca in most of the Roman Empire, not only because of its political, economic, technological, and military dominance, but also owing to its literary tradition and cultural superiority.

Much more recently, the Anglo-American dominance of the last century and the effects of globalization have both contributed to the affirmation of English around the world, Europe being no exception. For twenty-first century Europeans, in many cases, English serves a wide variety of purposes well beyond face-to-face contact. Not only does it function as the default language of communication in many multilingual and multicultural settings, but its presence within national borders has also become established in a number of domains, such as in tertiary education, advertising, mass communication, the media, science and technology.

The increasing opportunities for contact with and use of English among Europeans and other English speakers have contributed to the language’s functional range and societal depth. Contrary to the traditional notion of the Expanding circle (Kachru 1985), in which language users follow native speaker norms, according to Berns (2009: 195), these functions have contributed to, “the identity of an English that is distinctly European in its formal manifestations and in its functional allocation”34.

Contrary to other regions, Europe35 is quite diverse in the sense that it has a distinct sociolinguistic situation. To refer to English as solely a native language (e.g. in the UK and Ireland) or as a foreign language (part of the Expanding circle) in Europe, seems therefore inadequate. For that reason, Berns (1995: 7) claims that there exists a distinctive “European-using speech community” with its own specificities, which include: the multiple roles English plays, the ongoing nativization or europeanization process, and shared patterns of acquisition and use.

In the first case, within the European scenario it must not be forgotten that English plays several roles – as a mother tongue, a second language, a foreign language and an international language. While it acts in great part as a native and second language in Great Britain and Ireland, in other countries, such as in Portugal, it takes on the role of a foreign or, rather, an international language. In the latter instance, knowledge of English is normally estimated as widespread, particularly in

34 _{For further development on this issue, see Berns et al. (2007), Hilgendorf (2007), Modiano (2003) or}

Mollin (2006).

35 _{When referring to Europe here, the member states of the EU and those countries part of the Schengen}

Agreement are contemplated. In fact, the free circulation of people and goods has contributed not only to strengthening cultural exchanges, but also to intensifying linguistic interactions.

Nordic countries, where proficiency levels are considerably high. The reality of Southern countries though is quite different, as English was only implemented as a compulsory language at a much later date, and proficiency at a national level is still a project in progress.

Secondly, a nativization, or even europeanization, process is currently underway. It is visible that Europeans are instinctively, or even intentionally, adapting and introducing innovations from their mother tongues that, in effect, de-Anglicize and de-Americanize their English. Among the linguistic processes involved, the most striking ones include lexical borrowings, functional allocation and discoursal nativization (see also Mollin 2006). Although these features are exclusive to the European context, they do however reflect specific contexts of use and the recognition of a speech community described by “those uses of English that are not British (and American or Canadian or Australian or any other native variety), but are distinctly European and distinguish European English speakers from speakers of other varieties” (Berns 1995: 7).

Lastly, the third feature common throughout Europe includes the shared patterns of acquisition and use. Assuming that in continental Europe contact with English is not solely restricted to the classroom, but is also present on a daily basis, Europeans share similar opportunities of exposure to English and interact with both NSs and NNSs. Preisler (1999) thus refers to two types of English contact: English from above and English from below. In the former case, language is transmitted from a top-down learning process where “the promotion of English [is done] by the hegemonic culture for purposes of ‘international communication’” (Preisler 1999: 241). Customarily associated with a formal language-learning environment within national borders, English from above comprises essentially three functions:

1. Constituting a formal element of education by way of preparing people for the international aspects of their professional lives. 2. Providing a foundation of the individual’s formal acquisition of

‘English from below’ in any of its particular manifestations, including the ability to participate in activities representing subcultural interests and self-expression.

3. Ensuring that nobody leaves schools without a minimum of reading and listening skills in English and a realisation of the importance of maintaining such skills.

In comparison, English from below alludes to language learning by way of a bottom- up process or even individually. This type of process is common in pop music, sports or with other youth subcultures (e.g. hip hop, interactive Internet gaming). In subcultures, similarly to what happens in science and technology, vocabulary is habitually in English and, from early on, there is a type of ritual in which English and code-switching are a part of these underground environments. Consequently, contrary to what happened in the past, when what was learned in school was afterwards employed in the outside world; today, external knowledge is brought into the classroom, contributing to a new reality, and establishing a point of departure for both teachers and students to develop and work on their language skills.

Considering these three features, it is safe to say that in Europe, English no longer simply takes on the role of a foreign language as conventionally established, especially since most interactions take place among NNSs. Bearing this in mind, Berns (2009: 195-196) argues that the different uses Europeans give to English encompass the four functions characteristic of a profile:

1. As a medium of instruction, it is visible at every education level and fulfills an instrumental function. From primary school onwards students study English and due to EU policies, this role has especially been on the rise in universities because of the internationalization of the student population (e.g. Erasmus programs).

2. The interpersonal use of English is seen in social contacts among Europeans (as well as between Europeans and non-Europeans) of all ages. Knowledge of English is also associated with a symbolic value as it may confer someone, or a specific group, with a certain status or prestige. 3. The use of English for institutional purposes is not very frequent within

individual EU member states; nonetheless, it is an official EU language that is often the default language in meetings or conferences.

4. English and its innovative function have contributed to creative uses of the language in advertising, as well as in other media formats, for example, blogs, chat rooms, messaging or popular music.

In view of these issues, it may be assumed that the establishment of a EU, the free circulation of citizens (Schengen Agreement 1990) and the rise of a common

language among Europeans (especially among younger generations) have contributed not only to shared patterns of language use, but also to the development of a European identity; and, as Mollin (2006: 63) suggests, “this European identity could well be connected to English as the European lingua franca”. In this sense, individuals no longer assume only one identity, but several identities at various levels, such as regional, national and supra-national identities. Consequently, depending on the situation, the language they make use of will also vary accordingly. As Wright (1999) argues, the notion of monolingual speakers at a national level has given way to bilingual or even multilingual speakers whose essential features allow them to negotiate within their multilayered identities:

(…) national languages will not disappear although they may cease to play such an exclusive role in the various national spaces. (…) language practices are likely to follow political developments [therefore,] both linguistically and politically we may need to accustom ourselves to plurality: an acceptance of multilayered political identities and affiliations and personal bi- or multi-linguism which will allow us to be actors at all the levels where power is exercised.

(Wright 1999: 97)

These notions of English use and identity will obviously vary from one country to another, especially when considering the different historical events. For that reason, it is important to understand each situation individually in order to fully grasp the circumstances in which English is used.