Archive for England (& Wales) as Britain

Chinese in Scotland

Chinese-science-exams-more-interesting-and-demanding-than-GCSEs

(from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/ 22 June, 2009.)

Maths and science exams taken by students in China are more “interesting and demanding” than their British GCSE counterparts

This sub-heading is confused. The writer used the word ‘British’ either to avoid the wordy ‘English and Welsh counterparts’ or to blanket the whole of the Britain with a system only found in some parts. If ‘GCSE’ had been left out, an astute reader would have questioned if all UK education systems had been compared to the Chinese one. Including ‘GCSE’ limits the comparison to the English (& Welsh) system. Hardly all-encompassing British.

The Royal Society of Chemistry’s stated purpose was to help gather data “to ensure the country has the right skills for the future”. Which ‘country’ is being referred to here, I wonder? My question is answered soon:

The Chinese exam papers in chemistry and maths were taken last year by pupils studying at the same level as England’s GCSE students
(Italics mine)

If there should be any doubt of the existence of the ‘England-as-Britain’ trope, the Telegraph’s use of the terms should put that to bed immediately. Altogether, there are three iterations of ‘English/ England’ and two of ‘Britain’ all used synonymously. The sub-text of this Telegraph article is that the English education system IS the British one.

Education in the United Kingdom is a devolved matter with each of the countries of the United Kingdom having separate systems under separate governments: the UK Government is responsible for education in England, the Scottish Government is responsible for education in Scotland,[1] the Welsh Assembly Government is responsible for education in Wales[2] and the Northern Ireland Executive is responsible for education in Northern Ireland.

Wikipedia does not even begin to address the issue in a single page and immediately refers readers to the relevant separate encyclopedia entries.

As a Scot who worked hard enough to gain four Scottish Highers back in the day, it’s quite galling to (continually) have that system ignored. As a Scot hoping for full independence, the continued separation is a useful seed to plant in preparation for the day that articles like the Telegraph’s one actually has lexical accuracy.

Leave a Comment

Wimbledon media coverage

Federer hoping to cry tears of Wimbledon joy

(from The Japan Times Online 22 June, 2009.)

As Wimbledon approaches next week, it’ll be interesting as always to follow the linguistic assaults of Britishness as ‘we’ follow ‘our’ athletes progress. For now though, I’ll put these two issues in memory as a placeholder.

The Japan Times starts the article with “WIMBLEDON, England (AP)”. Later on the host organisation’s name is printed – The All England Club. This article will no doubt be reproduced in countless other newspapers worldwide as and AP syndicated article. The open question wonders how much the world understands the meta-message that the AP article refers only to England and not Britain.

To show that more concretely, another major Japanese news organisation, Asahi Newspaper prefixes their Wimbledon articles with ‘ウィンブルドン(英)’ / ‘winburudon (ei)’. This little ‘英語’/'ei’ character stands for ‘英国’/ ‘eikoku’ ‘Britain’ (and colloquially for ‘England’.) The more common name for England is also the same Britain in Japanese – ‘イギリス’ / ‘Igirisu’, which comes from the Portuguese for, you guessed it, ‘England’. There is no doubt that the Japanese are confused by references to England/ Britain. I suspect that the double whammy with the All ENGLAND Club will hammer the ‘England as Britain’ message home to most worldwide readers.

Leave a Comment

A Beginner’s Guide to Acting English

A Beginner’s Guide to Acting English

(from The Scotsman Magazine 18 June, 2009.)

Shappi Khorsandi’s upcoming memoirs should be a thoroughly rewarding read. The Scotsman’s review is combined with an interview with the author and outlines a work that appears deeply interesting.

For Scottish watchers, the title and subtitle, (“A Family on the Run in a Foreign Country… England”) are an alert. The Scotsman describes the book as a “memoir of moving to Great Britain”. Other reviews repeat the trope of ‘England = Britain’. Amnesty International neglects further mention of England, “If adapting to Britain wasn’t enough. . . “. Amnesty further confuse the issue.

Shappi Khorsandi has now written a book about her experience of growing up in England.

Amazon’s blurb repeats this notion.

But rather than landed gentry or bohemian travellers, it’s a mad extended Iran clan who flee Tehran to 1980s Britain after the fall the Shah.

If all references in the Scotsman’s review were about England, there might be some justification for using ‘England’. But the addition that Khorsandi met her husband in Edinburgh places the conversation in ‘England as Britain’. Even if the book’s scope is beyond that meeting, the review writers need to qualify location or they fall into the trap of implying ‘England as Britain’. And this from a Scottish publication is more worrying.

I haven’t read the book, and perhaps there will be a reason that the term ‘England’ was used for the title when outside references replace that with ‘Britain’. Otherwise, the book starts its potentially valuable public life as an insult to Scots. This is ironic, coming from one who fled oppression, to repeat another oppression in their new-home land.

Leave a Comment

Terrorism in England and Wales

Police terror searches ‘just for statistics’

(from The Independent 18 June, 2009.)

The context of the publication (website of Independent.co.UK & no mention of locality limiting) leads readers to expect British news. The sixth paragraph mentions terrorism in Britain. Yet “[o]fficers in England and Wales used the powers to search 124,687 people in 2007/8, up from 41,924 in 2006/7″. No link to the report is given so readers cannot immediately verify either the accuracy of the numbers or the scope of the investigation.

The trope of England (& Wales) as Britain will, undoubtedly, be a common one in these pages. The implications are equally complex. Any English (& Welsh) news is British. Is it imperative for English (& Welsh) news to define its scope, or should Scotland and N. Ireland be assumed? As the ratio of non-whites to whites is different in Scotland from that in England, in this case I would argue that a separation is essential on the basis that a similar report from Scotland would certainly be limited to Scotland and not imply an English involvement.

The Welsh question adds further levels of complexity which lie beyond the scope here.

Leave a Comment

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.