Evaluating a global English case study in Paper 4
Priya is writing a Paper 4 essay on the question 'English as a global lingua franca makes international business communication fairer.' She wants to use a case study of a Japanese pharmaceutical company that made English its official internal language. In her notes: meetings moved from Japanese to English; 70% of staff reported increased anxiety about speaking; employees with overseas experience were promoted faster; the company introduced a 'plain English' style guide; some teams continued using Japanese in informal decisions. Priya's draft claims that 'English is neutral because it belongs to everyone' and uses the company as proof that English 'breaks down barriers'. Her teacher says she is 'asserting rather than evaluating' and that her example could support the opposite thesis.
1. How can Priya turn the Japanese company example into evidence for a more nuanced thesis? Write the revised thesis and explain the reasoning.
Read the worked answer
Revised thesis: 'English as a corporate lingua franca can widen cross-border participation while simultaneously redistributing power towards employees with English capital; fairness therefore depends on how the language is managed, not on the language itself.'
Reasoning: the Japanese company example cuts both ways. Moving meetings to English may include non-Japanese colleagues, but the 70% anxiety figure and the faster promotion of employees with overseas experience show that access is uneven. The plain English style guide may reduce some barriers, but it also creates a new norm against which employees are judged. The retention of Japanese in informal decisions suggests that formal English does not automatically change informal power networks. Priya should therefore use the example as evidence of a tension, not as proof that English breaks down barriers. She should also avoid the word neutral: a language can be shared without being neutral, because institutions still decide whose usage is standard.
2. Identify one hidden assumption in Priya's claim that 'English is neutral because it belongs to everyone' and explain how to test it against the case.
Read the worked answer
Hidden assumption: that shared use implies equal ownership and equal access. Belongs to everyone conflates the number of speakers with the distribution of power. Test it against the case by asking: who wrote the plain English style guide? Whose English is treated as the model? Who is promoted? The case gives evidence that employees with overseas experience are promoted faster, which suggests that English capital is unevenly distributed. A second assumption is that neutrality is desirable or possible; Priya should ask whether neutral means not associated with a native-speaker nation or free from power. The first may be arguable; the second is not supported by the anxiety and promotion data. She should replace the claim with a more precise one about institutional language policy.
3. What counter-argument should Priya include, and where in the essay?
Read the worked answer
Counter-argument: English as a lingua franca can reduce translation costs, allow subsidiaries to communicate with headquarters, and include employees who do not speak Japanese. This is the strongest case for the company's policy, and Priya should place it after her main evidence and before her conclusion, so that she can qualify rather than ignore it. Rebuttal: cost-saving and inclusion are real benefits, but they do not cancel the anxiety or the promotion gap. A fair policy might combine English with plain-language training, time for drafting, and recognition of non-native norms. Including this counter-argument strengthens the essay because it shows Priya is evaluating the policy, not just attacking it. It also prevents the essay from becoming a one-sided list of disadvantages.