What happens when a colleague turns to you in a meeting and says in a strong Cockney

accent: "We'll have a second bite at the cherry."? As a native English speaker, you might
not know what that means. If English is your second or third language, you probably will
not have a clue. A new research paper looks at English as the lingua franca in the
globalised business world.
Dr Pamela Rogerson-Revell, an expert in applied linguistics from Leicester University,
studied the use of English by a group of European actuarial associations. Her findings
showed that, apart from the use of idiomatic language, another problem was timing: by
the time a non-native English speaker had caught up with the discussion and formulated
a response, the argument had moved on.
The Groupe Consultatif Actuariel Europen has set up a task force to consider how to
encourage more active participation of non-English speakers in the organisation, as it
fears that Anglo-Saxon views are more likely to predominate.
Rogerson-Revell, a leading specialist on the use of English in international commerce,
said the dominance of the language in global business was quite a big issue.
"The difficulty of getting heard in business interactions, particularly in international
meetings, can be extremely frustrating," she said. "Many international organisations are
rightly concerned to make such events as equitable as possible."
Her research showed that some accents of native English speakers were more difficult
to understand than others. Nearly half of her respondents cited London English,
Australian, African, Scottish, Irish, Tennessee and New Orleans American as hard going.
'Heavily regional' and 'uneducated' accents were also problematic.
Asked if they found it generally easier to communicate in English with native or nonnative speakers, respondents gave inconclusive answers, with 43% finding it equally
easy to talk to either, a third preferring native speakers and almost a quarter finding
non-native speakers easier.
Several people in her survey appealed for English participants to speak slowly and
clearly and not to use jargon, metaphors, unusual words or colloquialisms. Respondents
also said it would be helpful if fluent English speakers repeated ideas in different ways
and related what they were saying to other people's cultures and situations.
Using English for international business: a European case study, Pamela RogersonRevell, English for Specific Purposes 26/1. 103-120
www.sciencedirect.com

The English language is, far and away, the dominant language of international business. It is
used in offices thousands of miles away from any native English speaker. It is heard in the
German postal service, Finnish manufacturing companies, and the Chinese textile industry
(Rogerson-Revell 2007: 104, Nickerson 2010: 511). The universality of English is undeniably
useful, providing a communicative bridge between people who would never have a common
language otherwise, and opening up new markets for businesses all over the world. It has
been used to facilitate company mergers across international borders, such as Paper Giant
and Scandi Bank in Sweden and Finland (Nickerson 2010: 514). But do all people benefit
from this situation equally? And what price are they paying for their new lingua franca?
Rogerson-Revell (2007) investigated the status of English at the Groupe Consultatif Actuariel
Europeen (GCAE), a multi-cultural group of financial risk assessors who provide legislative
advice to the European Parliament. English is used for the majority of the Groupes
meetings, despite native English speakers constituting a minority of its members. All nonnative English speakers in the Groupe described difficulties communicating in Englishlanguage meetings, such as finding the right words, and translating their thoughts in time to
participate in a conversation. (2007: 115-7). One participant described a time when they
were thinking of the right English words to use to make a point, and the meeting moved on
to another topic before they were able to speak (2007: 111). Another said it was often
easier to be quiet than try to express their ideas in English. (2007: 116). Native English
speakers in the Groupe were also aware that they held an unfair advantage over nonnative English speakers (2007: 117).
In certain contexts, then, the use of English in International Business creates a hierarchy.
Native English speakers find it much easier to express their opinions than non-native English
speakers, which, to quote concerned members of the GCAE, results in the dominance of
Anglo Saxon ideas (2007: 112). This suggests that, while non-native English speakers
benefit from having a common language with a greater number of potential business
partners, they suffer the consequences of having to compete in the boardroom with people
who can use their mutual tool of communication with greater fluency than they ever will.
English does not only dominate business, it is a business. The British Council, one of the
largest English teaching organisations in the world, made 705 million turnover in the
financial year 2009-2010 (Gray 2012: 141). The high demand for English therefore has a
direct financial benefit for British individuals and companies, and this demand exists in part
due to Englishs association with international business markets, an association which
pervades as far as Japan and Thailand (Nickerson 2010: 515).
In 1996, President Kagame of Rwanda made English the new language of education in his
nation, opening up a new market for the British Councils services. There were a number of
political factors affecting this decision, but not the least of them was Kagames desire to
access the customs union of the Anglophone East African Community (Gray 2012: 144).
However, as only a tiny minority of Rwandans spoke English at the time, the ability of
teachers and students to teach and learn was hugely damaged, doing so as they were in a
completely foreign language (Gray 2012: 145). So at the same time that new incomes and
career opportunities were being created for the British, Rwandans were almost completely
losing their access to even a basic education.

We can see then, that whatever the benefits of English as a lingua franca are, they do not
apply to all people equally. Native English speakers are profiting a great deal from the
increasing demand for English in business and education, and the same demand is drawing
opportunity and wealth away from native speakers of other languages. So while English in
international business may be considered good, it is certainly not equally good for
everyone.