Source:
https://scmp.com/article/443945/serious-business-english

The serious business of English

I was chatting with a European businessman who was staying briefly in Hong Kong. He had some curiosity about this region, although no deep familiarity with it, and the inevitable topic of Singapore versus Hong Kong soon cropped up. He felt that Singapore had the edge. I asked why. Because, he said, they speak English there. Significantly, he did not include the word 'better'. His impression was simply that the majority of Hong Kong people do not - and presumably cannot - speak it to any recognisable level of competence. Regrettably, he was right.

Many of us may derive some idle amusement from the malapropisms, grammatical and syntactical errors, strangulated pronunciation, improper emphases, and the like, disgorged on the purportedly English channels of local TV and radio, as well as from the often cryptic or simply incorrect English of many public notices and advertisements. A recent half-page recruitment spread in the South China Morning Post from a leading local bank under the banner headline: 'Join the Bank that pursuits excellence', is but one sad example.

Worryingly, although these things may be good for a laugh, they are often the source of key first impressions for visitors. Mistakes could probably be excused - rather in the same way as an Englishman may forgive, or at least tolerate, the damage inflicted on his language by Americans and Australians - if most of the population nevertheless comprehended the language and possessed some fluency of expression in it.

Alas, that is not the general case with English in Hong Kong. And the message which one tends to get, both from talking to employers and from one's own casual observation, is that standards of English have slipped in recent years. It would, however, be a mistake to think that no one in government cares. I recently reread the Legislative Council speech made just over a year ago by Secretary for Education and Manpower Arthur Li Kwok-cheung, which keenly recognised the problem and itemised a number of laudable initiatives to address it.

He deserves rather more active support from others in government - not least from those who tend to be struck dumb by political inhibition when it comes to endorsing anything relating to Britain. But it takes time for action plans to bear fruit. Will they be enough? It may turn out that a lot more money and more forceful measures are needed. I am not sure who is to be credited with the modest programme of English tutorial videos screened on some buses, but that sort of thing, while commendable, is only a drop in the ocean.

The English language was one of the reasons London was able to perpetuate its lead in international financial business in the second half of the 20th century - American bankers would almost certainly not have been so enthusiastic to cultivate the eurodollar market if it had germinated in linguistically alien territory. Hong Kong, in turn, lists English as one of the key factors contributing to its role as an international business centre. But the current English deficit is a potentially large threat to that position. There are plenty of alternative locations with established reservoirs of English speakers, and the mainland is producing excellent standards of English in seemingly exponential progression.

The challenge is doubly daunting because of the competing demands for competence in Mandarin. The danger is that, in having to juggle three languages, Hong Kong may simply fail to deliver adequately on the two most important ones - English and Mandarin. Mainland cities, not to mention Singapore, already see the opportunities that Hong Kong's failure to provide this twin competence may present, and are snapping at our heels.

The mere mention of the possibility of being overtaken at something by Shanghai or Singapore is usually enough to elicit a Pavlovian response from our government. For once, I wish the dog would bark a bit louder.

Tony Latter is a visiting professor at the University of Hong Kong