Because national identity is not a permanent or static possession, it has to be continually reinvented. Although Grillo (1989: 44) has argued that there was an almost total lack of attention to any relationship between language and national identity in England, I believe he is mistaken. The role played by language in England's changing conceptions of itself can be seen in both the construction of a glorious past for the language as well as in ever increasing prognostications of a bright future as world language. English, like England, was to have its conquests. As Dean Trench wrote (1855):

What can more clearly point out our ancestors' native land and ours as having fulfilled a glorious past, as being destined for a glorious future, than that they should have acquired for themselves and for those who came after a clear, a strong, a harmonious, a noble language?

The energetic activities of intellectuals such as James Murray, Joseph Wright, author of the English Dialect Dictionary, and others were central to the shaping of European nationalism in the nineteenth century, a time when, as Pedersen (1931-43) puts it, 'national wakening and the beginnings of linguistic science go hand in hand'. Historians such as Seton-Watson (1977) and Anderson (1991) have observed how nineteenth-century Europe was a golden age of vernacularising lexicographers, grammarians, philologists and dialectologists. Their projects too were conceived as children of empires.

Willinsky (1994) singles out the OED, in particular, as the 'last great gasp of British imperialism'. It captured a history of words that fit well with the ideological needs of the emerging nation-state. As Willinsky observes (1994: 194), the OED speaks to a 'particular history of national self-definition during a remarkable period in the expansion and collapse of the British empire'. Murray's tenure as editor of the OED coincided roughly with the period which historian Eric Hobsbawm (1987) has called the Age of Empire, 1875-1914. With the OED, Murray and other editors were engaged in establishing England and Oxford University Press's claim on the English language and the word trade more generally.

Britain's expansionist policy brought with it increasing exposure to other languages. The British presence in India awakened the attention of scholars to Sanskrit. In 1786 Sir William Jones gave a speech to the Philological Society which was to provide a firm basis for the comparative-historical study of language. In 1839 De Quincey called for a monument of learning and patriotism to be erected to the English language in the form of a history of English from its earliest rudiments. The Early English Text Society subsequently founded by F. J. Furnivall was to produce a canon of texts. Such works would help solidify the unity of nation and language and their continuity from the earliest times. Sentiments such as these were at least partly responsible for the replacement of the term Anglo-Saxon by Old English.

While colonial expansion was underway, there was also a need for more civil servants in the service of empire. The opening of the Civil Service to competitive examinations in English language and literature, as recommended by the Trevelyan and Northcote report of 1853 (The Organisation of the Permanent Civil Service), gave impetus to the institutionalisation of English studies. The History of the English Language was treated as distinct from its literature.

Such notions were instrumental in the establishment of what today we might call 'English studies', i. e. the study of English language and literature. It had taken some centuries before people were confident enough about English to deem it worthy of study as a subject for teaching and research. Now that English is so well established as a discipline, we tend to forget that even as late as the nineteenth century it was not recognised as a legitimate subject.

The increasing enlargement of the state education system made the classics-based curriculum increasingly unsuitable for the many new pupils to be encompassed within it. Women and the working classes of both sexes would find the classics too intellectually demanding and needed an easier subject. James Murray actually credited the women's movement direcdy for the appearance of English studies at Oxford in the nineteenth century. 'But for the movement to let women share in the advantages of a university education', he said (Murray 1900: 31), 'it is doubtful whether the nineteenth century would have witnessed the establishment of a School of English Language and Literature at Oxford.'

The English Dialect Society founded in 1873 (and its American counterpart, the American Dialect Society in 1889) were spin-offs of the increasing interest focused on the standard literary language in the curriculum. These projects were motivated by the fear that if work were not begun to record what was non-standard, it would soon disappear. Wyld argued strongly in favour of making the study of the English language a central component in secondary schools. There he believed it would be 'beyond controversy' (1906: 34). Wyld could not, of course, have foreseen just how controversial it would indeed become towards the end of the twentieth century as questions about the canon and standards became a major preoccupation when the Conservative government launched its National Curriculum.

Cameron & Bourne (1988) see the Kingman report (1988), which emerged from the Committee of Inquiry into the Teaching of the English Language set up by the UK Secretary of State for Education as a key ideological text about the state of the English language and its relation to the state of the nation. This proposal to make the teaching of English the cornerstone of a national curriculum whose aim is to produce a common culture has to be understood in historical context as a continuation of the spirit of the earlier Newbolt Report (1921). It too had advocated mass education in English language and literature as the basis for a common national culture so that (cited in Crowley 1991: 201):

The English people might learn as a whole to regard their own language, first with respect and then with a genuine feeling of pride and affection. More than any mere symbol it is actually a part of England; to maltreat it or deliberately debase it would be seen to be an outrage. . . Such a feeling for our native language would be a bind of union between classes and beget the right kind of national pride.

Yet the National Curriculum was also a reaction to the liberal ideas of the 1960s and 1970s as well. Kenneth Baker, Secretary for Education at the time the Kingman committee was set up, commented that while few schools taught traditional grammar, little had been put in its place. A central task for Kingman's committee was to equip teachers with a proper model of grammar. Earlier, The Swann Report (1985: 385) had challenged the ethnocentrism of common culture in order to replace it with cultural pluralism, but it made clear at the same time that this conception of culture was to be transmitted through English as the 'central unifying factor in being British'. In its concern with grammar, Kingman harked back to earlier ideology about the connection between language and nation. 'Language above all else is the denning characteristic of an individual, a community, a nation' (Kingman 1988: 43). As Cameron and Bourne point out (1988:159), part of the meaning of Kingman is nostalgia for the good old days of imperial majesty now faded, and part of what a Conservative Party Campaign slogan called 'Making Britain Great Again'.

Thus, on numerous occasions in the past century right down to the present day, the English language would be offered as evidence of the underlying unity that held all together despite superficial differences, particularly when political and cultural crisis threatened. In an interview with Margaret Thatcher when she was Prime Minister (Newsweek 8 October 1990) and stood much to gain from aligning herself with then President Ronald Reagan, she very generously conceded that Shakespeare belonged as much to Americans as to Britons in characterising the 'special relationship' that exists between the United States and Britain. Speaking to an American interviewer, she observed:

The Magna Carta belongs as much to you as it does to us; the writ of habeas corpus belongs as much to you as it does to us. . . There is such a common heritage as well as the language. Shakespeare belongs as much to you as he does to us. . . That is what unites us and has united us - rather more than a philosophy, but history as well, and language and mode of thought.

Indeed, Gramsci (1985: 183-4) observes that:

Pages: 1 2

• Shifting centres of gravity and the notion of a common core

In their popular account of the history of the English language, McCrum, Cran & MacNeil (1986) mark symbolically their shift of focus by announcing their adoption of American spelling in chapter 7, which deals with American English. They (1986: 235n) predict that their decision will be greeted with 'pain or

• The site of the vocabulary

The English vocabulary has grown much in size since 1776. Exactly how much is difficult to say even approximately because there are no accurate counts of the number of words used in English either in 1776 or today. Estimates of the size of the vocabulary based upon dictionaries are ffawed

• EBONICS

EBONICS This paper discusses the use of Ebonics or "Black English". 2012, 350 words, 0 source(s). More Free Term Papers: Ebonics A discussion of the English spoken by African Americans and how the education system relates to it. Ebonics This paper debates the use and preservation of Ebonics - the

• While the English vocabulary has grown much in size since 1776

While the English vocabulary has grown much in size since 1776, it is difficult to say precisely how large it is today for reasons explained by Algeo in his chapter. Borrowing has recently become less important as a source for new English words than it was previously. The formation of

• 1776 and after: an age of revolutions and empires – 7

Standardisation and literacy go hand in hand since the acquisition of literacy presupposes the existence of a codified written standard, and standardization depends on the existence of a written form of language. The continuing expansion of Standard English is reflected in the new text types which begin to appear in