SavedAdd your journal

Journals / RumeliDE Dil ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi / 2026 / Sayı: 24

A Critical approach to the use of English in Turkey in light of linguistic imperialism

Türkiye’deki İngilizce kullanımına dil emperyalizmi ışığında eleştirel bir yaklaşım

Ali Yiğit(Kırklareli Üniversitesi, Batı Dilleri ve Edebiyatları, İngiliz Dili ve Edebiyatı ABD)0000-0002-3705-4913
Pages
1067–1080
Publication Date
2021-09-21
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Drawing on theoretical approach by Phillipson, this paper thus discusses and critiques the ways English is used in Turkey, in an attempt to draw attention to the attrition in Turkish language, inquination in linguistic landscape, and language discrimination among the young.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Starting to attain an important international language status in the world from the 19th century onwards thanks to many interrelated factors like British colonialism and later US-Britain cultural policies of expansion, English language has achieved an unprecedented prevalence in usage in different sectors ranging from education to tourism and art to literature and sports.
📊
Key Findings & Data:As mid-20th century onward, Turkey’s political convergence with the US has brought into the life and language of Turkish people irreversible changes whose critique, as this paper argues, can be made within the concept of linguistic imperialism.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Drawing on theoretical approach by Phillipson, this paper thus discusses and critiques the ways English is used in Turkey, in an attempt to draw attention to the attrition in Turkish language, inquination in linguistic landscape, and language discrimination among the young.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:İngilizce · dil emperyalizmi · Türkçedeki aşınma

Abstract

Starting to attain an important international language status in the world from the 19th century onwards thanks to many interrelated factors like British colonialism and later US-Britain cultural policies of expansion, English language has achieved an unprecedented prevalence in usage in different sectors ranging from education to tourism and art to literature and sports. Today, it keeps its reign as an international lingua franca, reinforcing its position by making use of very effective mechanisms of expansion such as globalization, academia, media, music, TV, and sports. This preponderance, or in Phillipson’s words, English linguistic imperialism, however connotes oblivion and even evanescence of vernacular and the inferiorization and hybridization of national languages. As mid-20th century onward, Turkey’s political convergence with the US has brought into the life and language of Turkish people irreversible changes whose critique, as this paper argues, can be made within the concept of linguistic imperialism. Drawing on theoretical approach by Phillipson, this paper thus discusses and critiques the ways English is used in Turkey, in an attempt to draw attention to the attrition in Turkish language, inquination in linguistic landscape, and language discrimination among the young.

Özet

19.yy’dan itibaren İngiliz sömürgeciliği ve ABD-Britanya kültürel yayılma politikaları gibi birbirleriyle alakalı birçok etmen sayesinde önemli bir uluslararası dil statüsü kazanan İngilizce, eğitimden turizme, sanattan edebiyata uzanan biçok farklı alanda muazzam bir kullanım sahası elde etmiştir. Günümüzde, küreselleşme, akademi, medya, müzik, TV ve spor gibi çok etkin yayılma mekanizmalarını kullanarak uluslararası geçerli dil konumunu devam ettirmektedir. Ancak, bu hakimiyet, ya da Robert Phillipson’un tabiriyle İngiliz dili emperyalizmi yerel dillerin unutulması hatta yok olması ve ulusal dillerin de ikinci dereceye düşürülmesi ve melezleşmesi anlamına gelmektedir. 20. yy. ortasından itibaren, Türkiye’nin ABD ile siyasal olarak yakınlaşması, Türk halkının hayatına ve diline geri dönüşü olmayan değişiklikler getirmiştir, ki bunun eleştirisi, bu çalışmanın iddia ettiği gibi, dil emperyalizmi kavramı çerçevesinde yapılabilir. Phillipson’un bu doğrultudaki teorik yaklaşımına dayanarak, bu çalışma, Türkiye’de İngilizce’nin kullanım şekillerini tartışmakta ve eleştirmektedir, böylece Türkçe’deki dil aşınmasına, dilsel alandaki kirliliğe, ve gençler arasındaki dil ayrımcılığına dikkat çekmeyi amaçlamaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Yiğit, A. (2021). A Critical approach to the use of English in Turkey in light of linguistic imperialism. RumeliDE Dil ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi, Sayı: 24, 1067–1080. https://doi.org/10.29000/rumelide.990739

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (57)

  1. Akdeniz, S. (1997). Kültür Sömürgeciliği. İstanbul: Marmara Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi.
  2. Ateş, M. G. et al. (2017). Next Generation Türkiye: Gençlerin Sesini Dinlemek. Online Report.British Council.
  3. Aydoğan, B. (2012). Türkçeye Giren Yabancı Sözcükler ve Otel Adları. Çukurova Üniversitesi Türkoloji Araştırma Merkezi, 468, 21-25.
  4. Bardakçı, A. & Akıncı, M. (2014). Türkiye’de Ürün Markalamada Yabancı Dil Kullanımı: Sebepler ve Sonuçlar. Tüketici ve Tüketim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 6(1), 1-26.
  5. Campbell, J. (2018). English Language and an Inclusive Malaysia. 3L: The Southeast AsianJournal of English Language Studies, 24(3), 206 – 219. DOI: http://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2018-2403-15.
  6. Canagarajah, A. S. (1999). Resisting Linguistic Imperialism in EnglishTeaching. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press.
  7. Coluzzi. P. (2012). Modernity and globalisation: is the presence of English and of cultural products in English a sign of linguistic and cultural imperialism? Results of a study conducted in Brunei Darussalam and Malaysia. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 33(2), 117-131, DOI: 10.1080/01434632.2011.640401
  8. Crystal, D. (2012), English as a Global Language. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  9. Diker, Y. (2016, February 2). Türkilizce. http://www.bizimanadolu.com/turkilizce/
  10. Dor, D. (2004). From Englishization to Imposed Multilingualism: Globalization, the Internet, and the Political Economy of the Linguistic Code. Public Culture, 16.(1), 97-118.
  11. Efe, K. (2019). Beyaz Yakalılar Dünyasının Dili: Plaza Türkçesi. ZfWT. 11(3), 103-126
  12. El-qassaby, H. K. (2015). Linguistic Imperialism and Reshaping the World's New Identity: A RResearch Paper in Linguistics. International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 3(2), 61-68.
  13. Fanon, F. (2008). Black Skin, White Masks. Trans. by Richard Philcox. New York: Grove Press.
  14. Fishman, J. A. (1998/1999). The New Linguistic Order. Foreign Policy. 113, 26-32+34-40.
  15. Galloway, N. & Rose, H. (2015). Introducing Global Englishes. New York: Routledge.
  16. Gayton, A. M. (2016). Perceptions About the Dominance of English as a Global Language: Impact on Foreign-Language Teachers’ Professional Identity, Journal of Language, Identity & Education, 15 (4), 230-244, DOI: 10.1080/15348458.2016.1194209
  17. Gazete Karınca. (2020, October 12). İstihdam azalmasına ragmen işssizlik oranı değişmedi. Turkish Daily. https://gazetekarinca.com/2020/10/istihdam-azalmasina-ragmenissizlikoranidegismedi/#:~:text=Bu%20verilere%20g%C3%B6re%2C%20T%C3%BCrkiye%20genelinde,y%C3%BCzde%2013%2C4't%C3%BC.
  18. Harper, S. M. (2011). Counting the Costs of a Global Anglophonic Hegemony: Examining the Impact of U.S. Language Education Policy on Linguistic Minorities Worldwide, Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies. 18(1), 515-538.
  19. Hepçilingirler, F. (1997/2010). Türkçe “Off”. İstanbul: Everest Yayınları.
  20. Hepçilingirler, F. (2016). Türkilizce’ye Doğru. Esinti Digital Edebiyat ve Sanat Dergisi. https://www.kasabadanesinti.com/turkilizceye- dogru-feyza-hepcilingirler/2879/
  21. Kabaklı, A. (2009). Kültür Emperyalizmi. İstanbul: Türk Edebiyat Vakfı.
  22. Kachru, B. (1982/1992). Ed. The Other Tongue: English Across Cultures. USA: University of Illinois.
  23. Karaaslan, C. (2019, January 16). Öğrenciler İngilizce’ye 300 Milyon TL Harcadı. Sabah Daily. https://www.sabah.com.tr/egitim/2019/01/16/ogrenciler-ingilizceye-300-milyon-tl-harcadi
  24. Keşfetsek. (2020, August 17). Eğitim İçin En Çok Tercih Edilen 5 Ülke. https://kesfetsek.com/yurtdisi-egitim-gidilen-ulkeler/
  25. Kubota, R. & Ward, L. (2000). Exploring Linguistic Diversity through World Englishes, The English Journal 89(6), 80-86.
  26. Master, P. (1998). Positive and Negative Aspects of the Dominance of English, TESOL Quarterly, 32(4), 716-727. MEB. (2016/2017). İlkokul, Ortaokul, İmam Hatip Ortaokulu ve Ortaöğretim Arapça Öğretim Programları. A Report by Ministry of Education. Ankara: MEB.
  27. Mohanty, A. K. (2009). Multilingual Education: A Bridge Too Far? In Skutnabb- Kangas, Tove et al. (Eds) Social Justice Through Multilingual Education. Bristol, Buffalo & Toronto: Cromwell Press Group.
  28. Mühlhäusler, P. (2002). Linguistic Ecology: Language Change and Linguistic Imperialism in the Pacific Region. London & New York: Routledge.
  29. Ngugi wa Thiong'o. (2009). Something Torn and New: An African Renaissance. New York: BasicCivitas Books.
  30. Oral, Y. (2010). Türkiye’de Yabancı Dil Eğitimi Politikaları Bağlamında İngilizce: Eleştirel Bir Çalışma. Alternatif Eğitim e-Dergisi, 1, 59-68.
  31. Özdemir, E. A. (2006). Türkiye’de İngilizce Öğreniminin Yaygınlaşmasının Nedenleri. Mersin Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 2(1), 28-35.
  32. Özen, E. N. et al. (2014). Türkiye’deki Devlet Okullarında İngilizce Dilinin Öğretimine İlişkin Ulusal İhtiyaç Analizi. British Council TEPAV.
  33. Phillipson, R. (1992). Linguistic Imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  34. ________ (2009). Linguistic Imperialism Continued. New York & London: Routledge.
  35. ________ (2007). Linguistic Imperialism: A Conspiracy, or a Conspiracy of Silence?, Language Policy, 6, 377–383.
  36. ________ (2003). English-Only Europe? Challenging Language Policy. London & New York:Routledge.
  37. ________ (2009). The Tension Between Linguistic Diversity and Dominant English, In Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove et al. (Eds) Social Justice Through Multilingual Education.Bristol,Buffalo & Toronto: Cromwell Press Group.
  38. ________ (2015). English as Threat or Opportunity in European Higher Education. In Dimova, Slobodanka et al. (Eds.) English-Medium Instruction in European Higher Education 3, Germany: Walter de Gruyter Inc.
  39. _______. (2019). Language Challenges in Global and Regional Integration. Sustainable Multilingualism 12. pp. 14-35. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/sm-2018-0001
  40. ________. (2008). The Linguistic Imperialism of Neoliberal Empire, Critical Inquiry in Language Studies, 5(1), 1-43, DOI: 10.1080/15427580701696886
  41. Qiang, N. & Wolff, M. (2005). Is EFL a Modern Trojan Horse?, English Today 84, 21(4), 55-60.
  42. Şahin, U. (2005). Identifying the Words Entered Turkish From English. MA Thesis, Atatürk Üniversitesi, Erzurum.
  43. Sapir, E. (1970). Language: An Introduction to the Study of Speech. London: Rupert Hart-Davis.
  44. Sarı, M. (2008). Türkçenin Batı Dilleriyle İlişkisi. Ankara: TDK.
  45. Scott, L. M. & Venegas, E. M. (2017). Linguistic hegemony today: recommendations for eradicating language discrimination.” Journal for Multicultural Education, 11.1, 19-30. DOI 10.1108/JME-09-2015-0028
  46. Sinanoğlu, O. (2000). Bye Bye Türkçe. Türkiye: Bilim + Gönül.
  47. Skutnabb-Kangas. (2001). The Globalisation of (Educational) Language Rights, International Review of Education/Internationale Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft/Revue Internationale de l'Education, 47.3-4, 201-219.
  48. Tripathi, K. (2014). Ma Patrie, C'Est la Langue Francaise'- LinguisticImperialism and Minority Language Rights in International Law. NUJS Law Rev. 7, 293.
  49. Tsuda, Y. (1998). Critical Studies on the Dominance of English and the Implications for InternationalCommunication. Japan Review, 10, 219-236.
  50. Tosun, C. (2005). Dil Zenginliği, Yozlaşma ve Türkçe”, Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies,1(2), 136-154.
  51. Vuolab, K. (2000). Such a Treasure of Knowledge for Human Survival, in R. Phillipson (Ed.), Rights to Language: Equity, Power, and Education (pp. 13-17). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  52. Waseema, F. & Asadullah, S. (2013). Linguistic domination and critical language awareness. Procedia -Social and Behavioral Sciences, 70, 799 -820.
  53. Yaman, İ. (2016). Türkçenin İngilizce Yoluyla Melezleşmesi: Samsun’daki İş Yeri ve Mekân Adları Örneği. Karadeniz Araştırmaları, 50, 217-229.
  54. Yüzgenç, S. (2016). Yabancı Dille Eğitime Hayır, Yabancı Dil Eğitimine Evet. Genç, Online Interview. 114, https://gencdergisi.com/9705-yabanci-dille-egitime-hayir-yabanci-dil-egitimine-evet.html.
  55. _______. (2019). Language Challenges in Global and Regional Integration. Sustainable Multilingualism 12. pp. 14-35. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/sm-2018-0001
  56. ________. (2008). The Linguistic Imperialism of Neoliberal Empire, Critical Inquiry in Language Studies, 5(1), 1-43, DOI: 10.1080/15427580701696886
  57. Vuolab, K. (2000). Such a Treasure of Knowledge for Human Survival, in R. Phillipson (Ed.), Rights to Language: Equity, Power, and Education (pp. 13-17). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.