And in that time, I have seen a lot of changes. Now that statistic is quite shocking. And I want to

talk to you today about language loss and the globalization of English. I want to tell

you about my friend who was teaching English to adults in Abu Dhabi. And one fine day,

she decided to take them into the garden to teach them some nature vocabulary. But it

was she who ended up learning all the Arabic words for the local plants, as well as their

uses -- medicinal uses, cosmetics, cooking, herbal. How did those students get all that

knowledge? Of course, from their grandparents and even their great-grandparents. It's not

necessary to tell you how important it is to be able to communicate across generations.

But sadly, today, languages are dying at an unprecedented rate. A language dies every

14 days. Now, at the same time, English is the undisputed global language. Could there

be a connection? Well I don't know. But I do know that I've seen a lot of changes. When

I first came out to the Gulf, I came to Kuwait in the days when it was still a hardship post.

Actually, not that long ago. That is a little bit too early. But nevertheless, I was recruited

by the British Council, along with about 25 other teachers. And we were the first non-Muslims

to teach in the state schools there in Kuwait. We were brought to teach English because the

government wanted to modernize the country and to empower the citizens through education.

And of course, the U.K. benefited from some of that lovely oil wealth.

Okay. Now this is the major change that I've seen -- how teaching English has morphed from

being a mutually beneficial practice to becoming a massive international business that it is

today. No longer just a foreign language on the school curriculum, and no longer the sole

domain of mother England, it has become a bandwagon for every English-speaking nation

on earth. And why not? After all, the best education -- according to the latest World

University Rankings -- is to be found in the universities of the U.K. and the U.S. So everybody

wants to have an English education, naturally. But if you're not a native speaker,

you have to pass a test. Now can it be right to reject a student on

linguistic ability alone? Perhaps you have a computer scientist who's a genius. Would

he need the same language as a lawyer, for example? Well, I don't think so. We English

teachers reject them all the time. We put a stop sign, and we stop them in their tracks.

They can't pursue their dream any longer, 'til they get English. Now let me put it this

way: if I met a monolingual Dutch speaker who had the cure for cancer, would I stop

him from entering my British University? I don't think so. But indeed, that is exactly

what we do. We English teachers are the gatekeepers. And you have to satisfy us first that your

English is good enough. Now it can be dangerous to give too much power to a narrow segment

of society. Maybe the barrier would be too universal.

Okay. "But," I hear you say, "what about the research? It's all in English." So the books

are in English, the journals are done in English, but that is a self-fulfilling prophecy. It

feeds the English requirement. And so it goes on. I ask you, what happened to translation?

If you think about the Islamic Golden Age, there was lots of translation then. They translated

from Latin and Greek into Arabic, into Persian, and then it was translated on into the Germanic

languages of Europe and the Romance languages. And so light shone upon the Dark Ages of Europe.

Now don't get me wrong; I am not against teaching English, all you English teachers out there.

I love it that we have a global language. We need one today more than ever. But I am

against using it as a barrier. Do we really want to end up with 600 languages and the

main one being English, or Chinese? We need more than that. Where do we draw the line?

This system equates intelligence with a knowledge of English, which is quite arbitrary.

And I want to remind you that the giants upon whose shoulders today's intelligentsia stand

did not have to have English, they didn't have to pass an English test. Case in point,

Einstein. He, by the way, was considered remedial at school because he was, in fact, dyslexic.

But fortunately for the world, he did not have to pass an English test. Because they

didn't start until 1964 with TOEFL, the American test of English. Now it's exploded. There

are lots and lots of tests of English. And millions and millions of students take these

tests every year. Now you might think, you and me, "Those fees aren't bad, they're okay,"

but they are prohibitive to so many millions of poor people. So immediately, we're rejecting

them. It brings to mind a headline I saw recently:

"Education: The Great Divide." Now I get it, I understand why people would want to focus

on English. They want to give their children the best chance in life. And to do that, they

need a Western education. Because, of course, the best jobs go to people out of the Western

Universities, that I put on earlier. It's a circular thing.

When students come to us from abroad, we may not be giving them enough credit for what they know,

and they know it in their own language. When a language dies, we don't know what we lose with that language

Let us celebrate diversity! Mind your language. Use it to spread great ideas.