Louis van Gaal in the Context of World Englishes

Louis van Gaal is well-known for two things. First, he was a successful, Dutch soccer coach and second, he used to frequently confuse international journalists with his less than perfect English or “steenkolen Engels" (i.e. literally "coal English", i.e. broken English or Dunglish) as it is called here in the Netherlands. This article will analyse Louis van Gaal's use of English as a phenomenon of globalization.

World Englishes

In our rapidly globalizing world, English has become the primary language used for international communication. It is a high-mobility resource because of the large amount of people who speak it around the world, which makes it more valuable globally than for example Van Gaal's language Dutch, which is spoken by only a fraction of the world population. 

However, this does not mean that English is becoming the dominating language everywhere and in every context. Different languages or different mixes of multilingual repertoires are used in different contexts (Blommaert, 2010). Whereas Van Gaal will speak in Dutch in the context of his private life, when talking to international journalists in the context of the globalised sport soccer, which is widely accessible by viewers all over the globe, he is most likely to use the lingua franca of this context, which is English . 

In the context of the club a player or coach works for, different languages can be used to communicate. However, communicating in the language of the country that the club is situated in is the most common. To this end the superdiverse roster of international players (and coaches), who move to the highest bidder, often take language lessons and have interpreters to help them until they are fluent enough . This results in soccer players being multilingual. This also counts for Van Gaal himself. 

This article will focus on Van Gaal's last years as a soccer coach in the UK and his international interviews in the period, as it is here that we can connect Van Gaal’s English to Pennycook’s (2007) concept of World Englishes. When non-native speakers use English, different varieties and English-based creoles will start to occur. If tied to a specific region, these varieties are called World-Englishes (Pennycook 2007). The Dutch-English or Dunglish that Van Gaal speaks is an example of such a region-based variety.  

To explain Van Gaal’s use of English and his language “mistakes” I will lookat it from the perspective of B. B. Kachru’s three circles of English (Kachru, Kachru & Nelson, 2009) and A. Pennycook’s World Englishes (Pennycook, 2007).  After explaining Van Gaal’s language “mistakes”, I will tackle the potential consequences of people making fun of these “mistakes” and the problem of inequality when people do not have access to the same language resources that others may have.

What is so "wrong" with Van Gaal's English?

To show in which ways Van Gaal does not conform to the norms of English, in the following I will pick apart his first press conference as a manager of Manchester United back in 2014.

His “mistakes” fall into different categories:

• Incorrect use of tenses -  Around 12:55 in the press conference, Van Gaal responds to a question about what would be a success for him this year. When Van Gaal answers that he does not know this yet, he says in regard to the players: “but now I haven’t work with most of them.” Obviously, this should have been: “but now I haven’t worked with most of them (yet).”
• Incorrect application of syntax rules (including word order) - An example of an incorrect application of syntax rules is “It is the biggest club, because of world-known wide.” (2:48), which should have been “It is the biggest club, because it is known worldwide.”
• Using proverbs that do not exist in the English language - An example of this is “It is very important that there is a click between players and the manager” (13:02). In Dutch “having a click” (“een klik hebben”)  means to have an (often instant) connection or bond between people. So what Van Gaal  means here is that it is important to have a bond between him as a manager and his players.
• Incorrect use of prepositions - When talking about the members and fans of the club, he says: “[...] and they expect a lot of me.” This should have been: “and they expect a lot from me.”
• Mispronunciation - To say it lightly, Van Gaal’s pronunciation is a bit rough around the edges. He especially seems to have trouble pronouncing the “th”. Take for example “For me, the challenge is always first and not fourth” (13:23). This is pronounced by van Gaal as “For me, the challenge is always first, not force.” This can be explained by the fact that this th-sound does not exist in the Dutch language.
• Mixing up plurals and singulars - Van Gaal also often mixes up plurals and singulars, such as when he says: “The players we have bought now, […] was already on the list” (4:52).
• Leaving out words (especially adjectives) - When talking about whether or not he can fulfill the expectations of the players and fans, he says confidently: “I think I can do.” He completely forgets to add the adjective “that” to refer to his previous sentence.
• Using incorrect words or incorrect versions of a word  - For example, when answering a question about when he is going to choose a team captain, he says: “I use my time for it” (7:30). With this he means: “I take my time with it.”

Two perspectives on Van Gaal's English in a globalized context

Van Gaal does not follow the norms that the UK or the US English dictates, which is why his linguistic form is considered wrong from an imperialistic paradigm. One of the most influential models of this paradigm is Kachru’s three circles of English . (Kachru, Kachru & Nelson, 2009). In this model, as shown below, there are three concentric circles: the Inner Circle, the Outer Circle and the Expanding Circle.

The Inner Circle consists of countries where English is natively spoken. This is the norm providing circle. The Outer Circle consists of countries that use English as their second language.It is often not natively spoken, but is used to ease communication between groups within a nation where different languages are spoken. This circle is norm-developing’. Lastly, the Expanding Circle contains all countries where English is not an official language; it is not natively spoken and has no historical or colonial role. This circle is norm-dependent, which means these countries have hardly any influence on the norms of the English language. The Netherlands,  Van Gaal's country of origin, falls into this latter category.  

However, postmodern academics have rejected this model, instead opting for a model of World Englishes. Due to the spread of English as a global language used in international trade, entertainment, tourism, etc., multiple, localized varieties of English have come into being. Postmodern academics deem these varieties equal to what Kachru would call Inner Circle English. This model seems to follow Van Gaal’s actual career and background more closely. 

First of all, Van Gaal’s birth country does not follow Kachru’s model. The Netherlands is one of the best English speaking countries in Europe, yet English has no administrative function or historical role here. This high level of proficiency is again due to globalization, which has caused Europe’s multiculturalism, global economic integration and a rise in tourism and mobility.   

Because globalization has become more and more accelerated over the past few decades, it is no surprise that during his years as a soccer player in the 1970s and 1980s, Van Gaal only ever played for Dutch football clubs (Ajax, Sparta, Telstar and AZ), as well as one Belgian club (Royal Antwerp). He started his management career at Ajax, a Dutch soccer club as well. This means that he only had to take up a language other than Dutch in 1997 when he became a manager for F.C. Barcelona in Spain.  Keep in mind that he was already 45 when he starting working for Barcelona, and studies have generally shown that learning a language becomes harder the older you get.

Van Gaal does not follow the norms that the UK or the US English dictates, which is why his linguistic form is considered wrong from an imperialistic paradigm

Since the start of Van Gaal’s career at Ajax in 1971, countries have become increasingly interwoven by means of translocal and transcultural flows (Appadurai, 1996). This soft, cultural globalization also extends to soccer, which has seen a dramatic increase in international viewership. For example, a SportsPro article says:

“English soccer’s Premier League has revealed that it reached a cumulative global audience of 3.2 billion for all programming watched during the 2018/19 season, a six per cent increase on the previous campaign.”

This also touches upon the hard globalization aspect of world soccer, i.e. the economic side. Clubs are anxious to buy popular, skilled players and attract successful coaches to increase their own success and popularity, which in turn helps them increase their viewership and gives them opportunities for sponsorships. It hardly matters what country a player or coach comes from as long as they have proven their worth. This has increased the mobility of players and coaches, who are now able to be transferred from club to club on a transnational scale.

If we look at Van Gaal’s early career as a soccer player and compare it to soccer players now we can clearly observe this change from national to international transfers. While Van Gaal spent his entire career as a soccer player in Dutch speaking countries (the Netherlands and Belgium), Wesley Sneijder, another younger famous Dutch soccer player who ended his career in August of 2019, for example, has played for many different, international clubs during his career, such as Real Madrid in Spain, Galatasaray in Turkey and OGC Nice in France. 

Although postmodern academics want to democratise English varieties, the general Dutch public seems to lean more towards Kachru’s perspective. As Alison Edwards says, who wrote her PhD thesis (2014) about English in the Netherlands:

“If you ask Dutch people, do you prefer to aim for British English or Dutch English? They will always say British English and they are really critical of anything that sounds Dutch-English or has a strong Dutch accent.” (Nicholls-Lee, 2018))

It is here that being critical of Dunglish or making fun of it can have consequences. 

Consequences of seeing mistakes as just funny

Although humor is subjective, most people seem to think that Van Gaal’s language mistakes are funny. There are tons of video compilations, as well as blogposts in Dutch dedicated to sharing Van Gaal’s most hilarious quotes. But what are the consequences of making fun of language mistakes?

There is nothing wrong with giving a ludic meaning to language mistakes, but to see the language mistakes of other people as funny only is to ignore the development of World Englishes and their rising prominence as equals to native varieties of English. 

For example, non-native varieties are often less complex than native English, which has benefits in international, English-speaking environments. An article by Nicholls-Lee in DutchNews.nl from 2018 says:

“In the European parliament, for example, where simple, imperfect language is the default, the complex, idiomatic English of the native speaker can, some claim, lead to a breakdown in communication. Apparently, once the native speaker has left the room, business often runs more smoothly.”

Dismissing World Englishes also excludes those who live in places where they do not have equal access to language resources from benefitting from a world where English is the most important international language. This leads to an even bigger gap of inequality. An education in English is often tied to middle- and upper-class opportunities (Pennycook 2007). Those from an impoverished background have less education opportunities and consequently only learn the English that they need to use in their day to day life. 

There is nothing wrong with giving a ludic meaning to language mistakes, but to see the language mistakes of other people as funny only is to ignore the development of World Englishes and their rising prominence as equals to native varieties of English. 

While Van Gaal has the resources to improve his English, we can still draw some parallels with people who do not have equal access to language resources. His English is sufficient to communicate in the context of international soccer, just like the English varieties of people who are not fullyeducated in English are sufficient to communicate in the context of their everyday lives. 

Furthermore, both Van Gaal and these people can count on others to help them out. Take for example Van Gaal’s struggle with finding the word "empathy" during the press conference analyzed in the above video around 11:45. After a brief back and forth with a journalist, he manages to find the word he was looking for. This also has parallels with the mentoring pratices in international soccer. It is not uncommon for soccer players who are proficient in the main language of communication to mentor players who are new to the language. Language involves collaborative work, as Blommaert describes it when talking about multi-diverse neighbourhoods:

“This, importantly, points towards another feature of language in such neighbourhoods: the fact that they often involve collaborative work. People would call on others, or others would volunteer, to translate or assist in communication.” (Blommaert, 2010)

Blommaert's point can also be applied to the collaborative language work that takes place in the soccer world, where the parties involved help each other out. 

“That is not very smart, that I can say” 

To summarize, many varieties of English have come into being due to globalization. The Dutch-English that Van Gaal uses is an example of such a World English. In the context of international soccer, Van Gaal’s English is sufficient, but many people still make fun of it, because they are critical of English that is not used according to offical normative standards. However, if these mistakes are seen as just funny, it will contribute to the exclusion of people who use a variety of English, because they do not have access to an education in English. And as Van Gaal has said: “That is not very smart, that I can say.” 

References

Appadurai, A. (1996). Modernity at large: cultural dimensions of globalization. Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press.

Blommaert, J. (2010). The Sociolinguistics of Globalization. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. 

Edwards, A. (2014). English in the Netherlands – Functions, Forms and Attitudes. PhD thesis Cambridge University.

Kachru, B.B., & Kachru, Y. & Nelson, C.L. (2009). The Handbook of World Englishes. Malden, Blackwell publishers.

Nicholls-Lee (2018, January 17). English is no longer a foreign language in NL, but it has a unique character here. Dutch News. https://www.dutchnews.nl/2018/01/english-is-no-longer-a-foreign-languag….

Pennycook, A. (2007). Global Englishes and Transcultural flows. London, Routledge