Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa

Diversity of attitudes to English in non-professional public discourse: A focus on Lithuania: An analysis of the narratives people tell about English as a global language in the local context of Lithuania


This paper stems from the ongoing debate on the changing role and status of English in different parts of the world, with a special interest in the socio-historical background of a post-Soviet country. The international status of English has given rise to different reactions among speakers, ranging from attraction to resentment (cf. Onysko, 2009: 34). These reactions are expressed in public online discourse, which provides a rich resource of empirical evidence to study public attitudes and language ideologies. Digital media offers an especially important strategic site to disseminate ideologies and shape public opinions. This paper analyses the spectrum of discourses operating within Lithuanian digital media to perpetuate attitudes towards English and the values associated with it.

Corresponding author
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

M. A. Ashraf & S. M. Tsegay 2016. ‘Analysis of globalization and “Englishization” in Pakistan.’ International Journal of Research Studies in Language Learning, 5(1), 7988.

R. Baločkaitė 2014. ‘On ideology, language, and identity: Language politics in the Soviet and Post-Soviet Lithuania.’ Language Policy, 13, 4161.

B. Danet & S. C. Herring (eds.) 2007. The Multilingual Internet: Language, Culture, and Communication Online. New York NY: Oxford University Press.

J. Fishman 1998. ‘The new linguistic order.’ Foreign Policy, Winter, 2640.

M. Krauss 1992. ‘The world's languages in crisis.’ Language, 68, 410.

A. R. Linn 2010a. ‘Can Parallelingualism save Norwegian from extinction?Multilingua, 29(3/4), 289305.

A. R. Linn 2010b. ‘Voices from above – voices from below. Who is talking and who is listening in Norwegian language politics?Current Issues in Language Planning, 11(2), 114129.

S. McAllister–Spooner 2009. ‘Fulfilling the dialogic promise: a ten-year reflective survey on dialogic internet principles.’ Public Relations Review, 35(3), 320–22.

A. Onysko 2009. ‘Exploring discourse on globalizing English.’ English Today, 25, 2536.

R. Phillipson 1998. ‘Globalizing English: Are linguistic human rights an alternative to linguistic imperialism?Language Sciences, 20(1), 101112.

R. Phillipson 2008. ‘Lingua franca or lingua frankensteinia? English in European integration and globalization.’ World Englishes, 27(2), 250267.

J. Soler–Carbonell & L. Gallego–Balsà 2016. ‘The internationalisation of higher education in two different contexts: Catalan and Estonian sociolinguistic perspectives.’ Language, Culture and Curriculum, 29(1), 4055.

I. Taavitsainen & P. Pahta 2008. ‘From global language use to local meanings: English in Finnish public discourse.’ English Today, 24, 2538.

J. Thøgersen 2010. ‘Coming to terms with English in Denmark: discursive constructions of a language contact situation.’ International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 20(3), 291326.

C. Y. Wei & B. E. Kolko 2005. ‘Language and Internet diffusion patterns in Uzbekistan.’ New Review of Hypermedia and Multimedia, 11(2), 205220.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

English Today
  • ISSN: 0266-0784
  • EISSN: 1474-0567
  • URL: /core/journals/english-today
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *


Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 26
Total number of PDF views: 58 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 269 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 11th May 2017 - 25th September 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.