#18649
02/09/2001 12:05 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757 |
The question raised elsewhere about numbers and changing patterns of Spanish use prompted me to share some stats I came across recently, as they may be of wider interest (or not  ). According to some figures quoted in Describing Language (ibid), here’s how usage of some of the world’s most used languages can be compared. The numbers are in terms of ‘native speakers’ derived from several different estimates (expressed in millions): 1. Chinese 700 2. English 320 3. Hindi 220 4. Spanish 200 5. Russian 150 6. Bengali 140 7. Portuguese 130 8. Japanese 115 9. Arabic 110 10. German 100 11. French 70 12. Italian 60 Source: Sunday Times (1993) David Crystal acted as consultant for this – questions in the upcoming chat session? 1. Chinese 1035 2. English 350 3. Spanish 275 4. Hindi 225 5. Russian 220 6. Bengali 160 7. Arabic 150 8. Portuguese 135 9. Japanese 120 10. German 100 11. French 75 12. Italian 60 Source: Katzner (1986) 1. Chinese 541 2. English 300 3= Spanish 150 3= Russian 150 5. Japanese 100 6. German 95 7. Hindi 90 8= Bengali 76 8= Portuguese 76 10. Arabic 65 11. French 64 12. Italian 56 Source: Voeglin & Voeglin (1977) Why the differences of estimate? Well, some census info is harder to come by (with the opposed poles of say Germany and China). There is change over time of the different sources, too – Hindi has certainly become spoken more extensively, and it will be fascinating to see the changes to the data wrought by the current census started today (can you imagine a census which requires 2 million census-takers?!) Then there is the difficulty of classifying language – for example, China has 8 languages and hundreds of dialects, so the first set of figures relates to Putonghua whilst the second includes all Chinese speakers. Then what does it mean to be a ‘speaker’ of a language – it isn’t always easy to discriminate between first- and second-language use, as the vast majority of the world’s population is multilingual. If you doubt this at first glance from your own experience, consider there are about 4,000 languages spoken in the world today, which with identifiable dialects Voeglin & Voeglin indexed at over 20,000 in total! David Crystal estimates that there are 450 million speakers of English as a second language, providing an aggregate figure of 770 million; however, he also argues that recognition of a category of ‘English users’ based on readership of English language papers and magazines would render a total of English speakers in the world of between 1000 – 2000 million (1985). What effect will the web have on these torrents of language use? Will English gain even wider currency – and if so, will it spawn even greater diversity of language varieties amongst the family of Englishes, or greater uniformity based on commercially-dominant American? Or will the web become more multilingual, as some e-commerce gurus are predicting? http://www.forrester.com/ER/Press/Release/0,1769,355,FF.html
|
|
|
#18650
02/09/2001 1:58 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 771
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 771 |
I just read this statistic yesterday, and it strikes me as apropos of this conversation:
It took until 1830 for the world's human population to reach 1 billion.
It took another 100 years for the population to reach 2 billion.
It then took only 70 years to get to 6 billion.
At this rate, according to some U.N. population projections, the world's human population will be 128 billion by the year 2155.
Considering the rate at which the global population is growing gives some corrolary perspective to mav's language demographic citations. And definitely food for thought...
|
|
|
#18651
02/09/2001 5:39 PM
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,094
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,094 |
A couple of things in response to both posts so far:
1. It seems to me that the native English speakers would be more than that. The US population is somewhere around 280 million. With the UK, Oz and NZ I would think the number would be more than 350 million.
2. I would have to say that the Internet is spreading the need to learn English to communicate worldwide, but I read somewhere, I think in an advertisement for the technology company Accenture, that Chinese would be the dominant language on the Internet in this next ten years or so. This would probably be just within Chinese only websites because Chinese is obviously not a global language, but that's something to think about.
3. About UN world population projections. I've heard that the prediction is that the world's population will even out at around 10 billion. I can't see it skyrocketing like that estimate shows. There are a couple reason that I think the world population is going to be leveling out. China restricts families to only one child, so logically their population should be shrinking. The average number of children per family in the US now is 2.2. I assume this is dropping some. Two children per 2 parents would seem to be the leveling off point, but we also need to factor in single people who aren't having children at all. Also, as Africa becomes more "civilized" I think there will be more contraceptives, therefore lessening the number of new children.
Just my rambling two cents.
|
|
|
#18652
02/09/2001 6:30 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,773
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,773 |
Jazz, I hope you are right about the population leveling off. We need to be kinder to our planet.
You commented that "The average number of children per family in the US now is 2.2. I assume this is dropping some. Two children per 2 parents would seem to be the leveling off point, but we also need to factor in single people who aren't having children at all."
I believe that single people are already included in that calculation of 2.2, whether childless or not. Regardless, 2.2 is already about the replacement rate, since not all children born survive to adulthood. Perhaps you can expand on your info?
|
|
|
#18653
02/09/2001 6:30 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400 |
Jazz, i wish it was increased exposure to clean water and basic medicine (and clean water is much more important of the 2) that will cause the population to level.
As societies get clean water- infant deaths drop, and families (women, especialy) realize that they don't don't have to have 10 or more children just to even the odds that 3 or 4 will survive to adulthood. Birth rate closely follow infant survial rates, which closely follow clean water.
But i am frightened at the prospect of two major diseases, HIV/Aids and BSE/nvCJD. Both diseases are ravaging the world. Millions in Africa are infected with HIV, and while drugs will allow you to change HIV into a chronic infection, rather then a deadly disease, the drugs are not available at an affordable price.
and then there is BSE/nvCJD. Cases in Brittan are increasing exponentialy-- and the MBM(meat and bone meal) that is one of the sourses of transmission, was exported for years to third world countries. though labeled as "not for use as feed for Cattle", and only for pigs and fowl, i suspect that a good deal of it ended up as cattle food. Non literate societies are not going to be too fussy when looking for a cheap sourse of animal feed to make sure it only get feed to some of the animals. MBM was exported and sold for animal feed for 10 years, after England banned its use at "home".
just as US drug manufactures sold defective baby formula in africa--(it lacked enough of one of the essential amino acids, and was banned from Canada, Europe, and other literate societies) -- so, England sold off its contaminated MBM to thirds world countries...
(i didn't want this to sound like an anti british rant-- it is really a anti "corporate" rant--and i don't see US corporations acting much better than English, and we could go on to how the French handled contaminated blood supplies-- i see it as corporate greed, that knows no national boundries.)
nvCJD is in some ways worse than HIV/Aids, since there is no cure or even treatment yet. and with up to a 20+ year incubation, we might just be seeing the very tip of the iceberg when it comes to nvCJD!
We might find effect (cheap) cures or treatments for either of these, but i suspect both with have large impacts on populations and demographics... Both diseases can be found through out the world-- borders are meaningless, and both will have major impacts.
|
|
|
#18654
02/09/2001 6:31 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757 |
It seems to me that the native English speakers would be more than that...Know what you mean, Jazz. Perhaps this is partly because the research looks at the population of such large countries in detail and classifies segments as say, Spanish first language, or Cypriot, or whatever. I know, for example, that there are many thousands of speakers of Chinese within the UK population - yet it has no officially recognised status at all, and if any white middleclass English person were to be asked they would swear on their mother's grave that England is a monolingual country! Indeed, it's one of the oddities of major urban settlements in the richer countries that it is frequently possible to say "there are more people speaking XXX in city YYYYY than in their original capital city" (insert language and major city of choice!) America of course has always had a proud and distinctive role in offering a new home to groups of people from all ethnic and linguistic backgrounds. I seem to remember, even years ago when I worked in Joisey for a while, that there were predictions that (within a measurable span) Spanish was set to become the numerically dominant language in the USA. (edit:)I have also just found a relevant quote from Crystal: "The estimated population of the USA was just under 239 millions im 1985, of whom about 215 million spoke English as a mother tongue" I guess "fings ain't always what dey seem"  But perhaps the big picture we should retain is the stunning worldwide growth of English over time. When the Romans invaded this little island in the North Sea 2,000 years ago, "English did not exist. Five hundred years later, Englisc... was probably spoken by about as few people as currently speak Cherokee - and with about as little influence. Nearly a thousand years later,... when Shakespeare was in his prime, English was the native speech of between 5 and 7 million... it was, in the words of a contemporary, ' of small reatch, it stretcheth no further than this iland of ours, nai not there over all.' Four hundred years later... Englsih is used by at least 750 million people... is more widely scattered, more widely spoken and written, than any other language has ever been. It has become the langauge of the planet, the first truly global language." (The Story of English, McCrum et al)
|
|
|
#18655
02/10/2001 7:53 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,146
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,146 |
I had a wee fiddle with the figures that Mav produced. I've graphed them in a document which I've put up on Max's Driveway.com website for your edification.
What it shows that although the exact numbers may be in dispute, the proportions are pretty much okay. So much so that I think we can take them, as a group, as being a good indicator.
The idiot also known as Capfka ...
|
|
|
#18656
02/12/2001 2:06 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,511
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,511 |
Just curious: do any of these stats take into account individuals who are native speakers of two (or possibly more?) languages? Not as first and second, but those brought up bi- or trilingually? For example: Hindi/English... Danish/Norwegian... Oz/Zild... [ducking-from-MadCapK'n'Max-emoticon]
|
|
|
#18657
02/12/2001 6:04 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757 |
OK, if I answer you, will you answer me about the quote you used? I think they don't, other than making the already-noted attempt to discriminate between 'mother tongue' users of English and others who may be part of a wider community of users as a second or third language. If you come across any info on this I'd be very interested. Thanks for the graph, CapK - yes, that does seem to show a fair degree of correlation, doesn't it? I suppose a bar type would also show the comparative values betweeen the languages [hint-hint-emoticon]
|
|
|
#18658
02/12/2001 11:34 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 38
newbie
|
|
newbie
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 38 |
Those numbers are probably like most of the stuff I have to work were the people being surveyed are only allowed 1 choice. Someone who is of mixed background, must chose something or leave it blank. ex. parents are Japanese & Italian must chose either white or asian.
We have recently seen an increasing # of students choosing not to indentify themselves ethnicaly*(probably not a word)
CJ
CJ
|
|
|
#18659
02/13/2001 12:23 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,439
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,439 |
people being surveyed are only allowed 1 choice. Someone who is of mixed background, must chose something or leave it blank.
As in the 1990 census the category Native Hawaiian was available for the first time and many with Native Hawaiian blood made that choice.
wow
|
|
|
#18660
02/13/2001 7:58 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,146
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,146 |
I suppose a bar type would also show the comparative values betweeen the languages [hint-hint-emoticon]
Your emoticon has been answered. It's "Language Speakers 2".
The idiot also known as Capfka ...
|
|
|
#18661
02/14/2001 1:45 AM
|
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 3,409
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 3,409 |
In reply to:
As in the 1990 census the category Native Hawaiian was available for the first time and many with Native Hawaiian blood made that choice.
In the next NZ Census, due on Mar 6 this year, while the option to identify oneself s Maori is, of course, available, the option to identify oneself as Pakeha has, somewhat controversially, been removed. Many New Zealanders whose European ancestors arrived here in the mid-1800's, feel that the designation NZ European is misleading, as many feel no kinship with Europe, and appreciated being able to use a uniquely New Zealand designation.
|
|
|
#18662
02/14/2001 8:13 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,146
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,146 |
Many New Zealanders whose European ancestors arrived here in the mid-1800's, feel that the designation NZ European is misleading, as many feel no kinship with Europe, and appreciated being able to use a uniquely New Zealand designation.Dammit, Max, you're right! Something's been bugging me about the census for years, and you've just put your finger right on it. I'm going to prepare my trusty speedboat, fire that sucker right up and spend twenty-four hours outside the 12-mile limit on March 6 in protest.
The idiot also known as Capfka ...
|
|
|
#18663
02/14/2001 12:43 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757 |
Thanks for the chart, CapK. And thanks all, for some really good contributions on this aspect about how someone identifies their own 'ethnicity' - it certainly underlines the problems inherent in any glib surveys.
|
|
|
#18664
02/14/2001 5:52 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 3,409
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 3,409 |
I'm going to prepare my trusty speedboat, fire that sucker right up and spend twenty-four hours outside the 12-mile limit on March 6 in protest.What an absolutely Wizard idea!  I do think that the absence of Pakeha is odd, but that's bureaucracy I guess. While my maternal ancestors did arrive arrive here around 1845, I'm seriously toying with the idea of identifying myself with the land of my father's birth, and ticking "Asian" [naughty namaste emoticon]
|
|
|
|
|
