One thing that I constantly hear mentioned by people here in Spain is that when they do business abroad or have an international event in English, they don't have such a problem communicating with people from other countries. However, what will make them very nervous is when people from the UK are present or the event is held in the UK. Dealing with native speakers puts the fear of god in them.
The fact that English is used in these meetings and for International business as a whole should not simply be looked at as an advantage for us. In this time of economic crisis with announcements this week of a dramatic fall in exports, it is essential for British businesses that they can maintain the channels of communication open to foreign businesses. Relying purely on the benefit of business being conducted in our language, without being conscious of the communication problems connected with it, is a surefire way of making the task more difficult for ourselves. There should not be problems of communication and Europeans should not hate dealing with people from the UK.
Why is that? Are people from the UK particularly fearsome or intimidating?
No! But the problem is British people's way of communicating and they are having trouble making themselves understood. It's not because Europeans have particular problems with speaking English, many people speak excellent English, it's just that the type of English that is spoken internationally and the type of English spoken by natives is not the same. People from Latin countries, of course, have a similar base of language and will usually choose English vocabulary of a Latin root as it is more similar to the vocabulary of their own languages, so can communicate in English between themselves more comfortably that way. In fact, even between people in general in Europe, a standardized English has developed, primarily for business purposes, which has been influenced by the direct Americanized way of speaking; perfect for business and perfect for communicating clearly between people who are using a second language to varying degrees of proficiency.
The problem with a lot of people in Britain is that we think English is our language, we are from England of course, but we don't have an absolute right over that language especially if we want to communicate abroad using that language. We need to start thinking of English in the international context as a means of communication, not as our language. We need to communicate in the best and clearest way, thereby using the standardized international form of our language which other people us.
Part of the problem is how we learn our language: we start as young children learning phrases such as 'sit down', 'stand up' or even 'shut up', those who know your grammar will recognise these as phrasal verbs (the bane of any English-learner's life). We then progress to a more colloquial or standard English, mixing it freely with phrasal verbs and then if we continue up to higher education we are introduced to the more formal Latin-based vocabulary. However, nowadays, the more formal, educated way of speaking is becoming less and less common due to it either being considered posh or because of our more rapid and casual way of communicating via technology. On the other hand, non-native speakers of English, particularly those from Latin countries will first learn and use the more formal English, as mentioned before, as it is more similar to their own vocabulary. To a native English speaker, this will be perceived as if the person has a high level of education and therefore a good command of English, not realising that they could well not understand any other, more natural (to the British) form of English. This is where the problem lies, non-natives will understand formal English but often little else, especially if the native speaker has a complicated accent or does not speak clearly.
So, what can British people do to help communication?
Well, without over-complicating the argument and talking about how English is taught in schools, the general attitude of acceptance of 'bad' English and the necessity of learning another language, one way we can do that in International situations is by being aware of the type of English that is spoken by non-natives abroad, being aware of our colloquial use of our language and by trying to start using the standardized International form of English. Instead of littering our speech with phrasal verbs we should choose standard, easily understood vocabulary.
Notice the difference between these questions: 'What time shall we kick off the meeting?' and 'What time does the meeting start?' or 'Shall we call it a day?' and 'Shall we finish now?'
The latter of each of these would be easily understood whilst the former ones would only be understood by someone with a very high level of English.
So, why do we insist on using the the former style? Exactly because we are unaware of how difficult it is for non-native speakers. In our defence, there are a lot of non-native people living in the UK, these people have gotten used to the way we speak English, understand it and use it themselves. Most British people come in connect with these people and are used to the fact that non-natives speak 'natural' British English very well. The thing we forget is that not all non-native English speakers live in the UK and not all of them have had the type of first-hand intensive contact with our language that residents have. People learn English at school and from books, which is not always the best way to get a handling on our form of English. So, if we want to communicate abroad we need to adapt to how English is used there.
Simplify your English use, standardize your language and do not use phrasal verbs, specific UK cultural references or jokes. Awareness of the problems works wonders.
A manager from Ernst & Young was making a presentation at an International Conference in Madrid and had come over with a presentation which he had used often in the UK. During a conversation he mentioned that he did not enjoy giving presentations abroad as the reaction or lack of reaction to what he is saying was unsettling. So, I suggested that he ran through the presentation with me to see if I could give him any ideas about why this might be.
Well, where shall I start?
Not only was the presentation full of phrasal verbs and colloquial language, but there were also many cultural references and jokes - the excuse was that these would make the presentation more enjoyable and more light-hearted, especially with such a heavy subject-matter. This would be probably true in the UK where people understand the references and get the jokes, but not for non-British non-native speakers. The problem was obvious, he was used to the reactions of people back in the UK; they relaxed and laughed at his jokes, tension was released and a heavy meeting became far more laid-back. However, he was not expecting the complete lack of any reaction abroad due to the fact that they just did not understand what he was saying. We went through the presentation, changed the phrasal verbs to more standard verbs, cut the British cultural references and UK-specific jokes, worked a bit on ensuring that his delivery and pronunciation was clear and the improvement was astonishing. Never before had he received such a positive reaction to a presentation that he had given abroad. People responded to his ideas, participated, asked questions and gave very positive feedback. It was an outright success and not only was he pleased with the result but also his boss back home when he won a new contract with a Madrid-based company.
The point of this is to highlight that the essential message of his presentation was the same in both occasions, the difference was in the way he delivered the message and his way of communicating. One received blank stares and no feedback, the other received an enthusiastic response. One was successful and the other not.
Which one would you like to receive the next time you do business abroad?
