Introduction
Englishisation: One Dimension of Globalisation was written by Robert Phillipson and Tove Skutnabb-Kangas, and Linguistic Imperialism, Globalism, and the English Language was written by Phyllis Ghim-Lian Chew, they both aim at analyzing the phenomenon of Englisation, nevertheless, judging from the perspectives of their argumentation, there are much differences between the two thesises.
Englishisation: one Dimension of Globalisation states that English is deeply involved in the process of globalisation and localization, to research the roles it plays adequately, it should be related to ‘economics, political science, and political sociology, communications, cultural studies, history, discourse analysis, and sign languages’. It uses an example to prove that learning English leading the poor towards economic prosperity is a lie, what’s more, it analyzes that, within wider perspectives - intellectual and material, theoretical and practical, Englishisation itself and the study of Englishisation are not neutral activities, it’s the results of unequal resource allocation between North and South, which is also related to the roles played by relative agencies. In the following chapter, it goes further to analyze that in Europe, some powers tempte to establish the dominant position of English to impose their political, economic, cultural and military influences on other countries, however, the forces impacted by the politicians and ambassadors are weaker than that of medias’. The paper quotes Ammon’s and Labrie’s researches to explain that there are much literatures which focus on EU language policy but less empirical studies, much unanswered questions remain, that is why the paper uses the following empirical study to show the use of English in scientific communication in Denmark. Through questionnaires answered by tenured professors and lecturers, the paper concludes that English using is strengthening in Danish higher education, ‘there is a need for academic policymakers and gatekeepers to pursue more active, explicit, and equitable language policies’. In the last chapter, it draws a conclusion that how English and other languages should be treated equally and in a reasonable range.
Compared with Englishisation: one Dimension of Globalisation, Chew’s Linguistic Imperialism, Globalism, and the English Language is much obvious for us to catch its views and structures. In the thesis, the author brings up the concept that the notion of ‘linguistic imperialism ascribes too muck power to the language, as opposed to the language policy makers and the language users.’ He takes Singapore as a case to illustrate his ideas that the choice of English is a pragmatic realization. At the end of thesis, it concludes that the wide use of English is the results of globalisation in economy, culture and science, to ascribe the growth of the foremost international language merely to the notion of linguistic imperialism does not consider the relentles