Review of Economics and Development Studies Vol. 4, No 2, December2018 281 Volume and Issues Obtainable at Center for Sustainability Research and Consultancy Review of Economics and Development Studies ISSN:2519-9692 ISSN (E): 2519-9706 Volume 4: No.2,December 2018 Journal homepage: www.publishing.globalcsrc.org/reads An Overview of English Language as a Window of Economic Opportunity in Pakistan 1 Ayaz Ahmad, 2 Sana Hussan, 3 Muhammad Shoaib Malik 1 Department of English, Abdul Wali Khan University Mardan, Pakistan. ayazmardan@gmail.com 2 M. Phil. Scholar, Department of English, Abdul Wali Khan University Mardan, Pakistan. 3 Assistant Professor, Department of Pakistan Studies, National University of Modern Languages, Islamabad, Pakistan. ARTICLE DETAILS ABSTRACT History Revised format: November 2018 Available Online: December 2018 This paper overviews the worth of English language learning in Pakistan through the lens of economic cost and benefit comparison. The value is explored from theoretical perspective, using the theoretical construct of economic value of a language proposed by Francois Grin, which is applied in conducted interviews and reviewing the existing literature on language policy and planning of Pakistan. The paper finds that English language, due to the colonial legacy, enjoyed a privileged position in sociopolitical structure of the nascent Pakistani state. The historical entrenchment of English language created a system of values ensuring its domination in sociopolitical domains. Values in these domains determined differentiated earnings, costs and benefits for sociopolitical strata of Pakistan. The historical evolution structured these domains in such a way that the incumbency of English overcame challenges to its privileged position. The current growth of English language predicts continuation of its global and local domination in the foreseeable future. © 2018 The authors, under a Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial 4.0 Keywords English language teaching, English language economics, Value of English language, Pakistan and English language learning, ELT, TESOL JEL Classification: A10, A11, Z13 Corresponding author’s email address: ayazmardan@gmail.com Recommended citation: Ahmad, A., Hussan, S. and Malik, M. S. (2018). An Overview of English Language as a Window of Economic Opportunity in Pakistan. Review of Economics and Development Studies, 4 (2), 281-291 DOI: 10.26710/reads.v4i2.412 1. Introduction English language is mostly spoken as a second language in Pakistan. Its speakers’ population is not very high there. Based on the graduated students of English medium schools, the total number of its speakers may be around 8 percent of the total population (Mahboob, 2003a). English language is a dominant language as it enjoys official status in Pakistan. Various studies focusing on the domains of English use in Pakistan has found that English language dominates other languages (Mahboob, 2003b; Rahman, 1998; Rasool, 2004). English is touted as window of opportunity, but the reality on ground presents a different picture of failures, deprivations and marginalization. So, who benefits from the use of English language? And what are the benefits? What are the future directions? The instrumentalist perspective tells us that whether individual or the state intervenes in language attributes to attain some ends. Economic development is normally presented as the most important imperative for pursuing English language learning. The importance of English in different aspects of our collective life in Pakistan accrues some economic benefit which determines the willingness to pay the cost in labor and resources. All the concern can be reduced to a simple question. Is English worth learning? What is the cost and benefit, for who benefits exceed cost http://www.publishing.globalcsrc.org/reads Review of Economics and Development Studies Vol. 4, No 2, December 2018 282 and for whom costs remain higher than the benefits accrue from learning it. The promise of personal and collective wellbeing makes the analysis of language question from this perspective worth study. The presentation of the study begins with introducing the research problem in introduction, then the underpinning research framework and context is built with the help of literature review. Next the adopted methodology including sources and methods of data collection and analysis are established. Finally the discussion and analysis of the historical background of English language in Pakistan, the current scenario of the economics of English language and future prospects overviews the economics of English language in Pakistan. The study concludes with the key valuation of key findings. 2. Literature Review The study is based on theoretical and factual underpinning about language economics. This section explores economic implication from the perspective of a linguist. Such an approach complements the economics of language where the economist tackles language related issues from the economics perspective. This section first explores the beginning and general nature of economics of language that specifically relate to English language, then it focuses the theoretical positions pertinent to the understanding of theoretical underpinning of this study. Historically the study of language from political perspective was ignored in the modern linguistic enquiries of Western Europe in the twentieth century. The ideas of Saussure laid the path for later linguists when he considered the parole aspects of language as trivial and not worth the study by a linguist (de Saussure, 1915). While the Western writers in their attempt to purify the field of linguistics, the Marxist theorists took interest in the study of language from economic and political perspective (Lenin, 1964 [1913-1914]; Stalin, 1972[1950]; Voloshinov, 1973). Ahmad (2016) contends that economic and language relation was initially explored systematically in the Marxist writing where language is considered a superstructure and economics is considered the base on which this structure is established. The Marxist interpretation of this relation between language and economics is projected in politics through the class struggle between haves and have-nots. Other scholars also support this position (e.g. see (Lecercle, 2006; Lenin, 1964 [1913-1914]; Schiffman, 2002). The non-Marxist Western writer started taking interest in the relation of economics and language in the second half of the twentieth century. Grin (2006) gives the credit of beginning this investigation to the Canadian researchers. Economists in the United States also took interest in exploring the econometric relation between the earning of English and Spanish speaking segments of the US society. Study of the relation of language and socioeconomic context underwent three transformations as it evolved in Europe and America. First, the emphasis was laid on studying language as an ethnic and cultural component. These early studies focused discrimination on ethnolinguistic basis. Then the researches took a descriptive turn and started viewing language as “human capital”. Eventually the two earlier foci were combined and studied combined ethnolinguistic and human capital strands. Some studies also explored the role of language in international trade (Grin, 2006). So, the researches in the economics of language normally fall into these three categories. The work of Spencer, Clegg, and Rush (2017) conform to the second era of Francois Grin. While studying the effects of socio-economic background on the competence and vocabulary of GSCE students in English language they established that students belonging to the under privileged and poor socioeconomic background have weak language skills and vocabularies. The finding implies a higher cost for the students from backward segment of socioeconomic spectrum of society in reaping the benefits of language learning in their earnings from professional career where language skills and vocabulary is valued. The work of Phiilippe Van Parijs belongs to the third category as the writers in his edited book, “Cultural Diversity Versus Economic Solidarity” argues if it is possible to balance linguistic diversity and economic efficiency. The work find it desirable in the contemporary value system of modern democracy to preserve cultural and linguistic diversity and argue that the benefits of preserving diversity are greater than the costs such efforts incur(Van Parijs, 2013). The writers in Cossan and Godley (2000) edited work also agree with this approach. While they propose that culture playing a “residual” effect in promoting economic growth, they consider culture as “shared values and beliefs” (p.2). Language is included as expressive tool of the culture of a community through which the community participates in economic activity. They consider “value” as the pursuit of some material and selfish objectives using the tool of language. Language as tool of communication helps in formation of shared values and belief and thus promotes cooperation. Human-Capital models are often used in knowing the outcome of language learning in the form of increase/decrease in income. The capitalist entrepreneur attempt to maximize her profit and cuts down costs. So the Review of Economics and Development Studies Vol. 4, No 2, December2018 283 jobs which require less communication are assigned to those who cannot participate in the language of workplace. Usually the speakers of minority languages and immigrants fall in this category. Such people normally lack language skills in the standardized language adapted to the high end jobs in workplace. The income differential between the more proficient, less proficient and non-users of work place language arise from their language proficiency (Grin, 2006). Language is the essential characteristic of human beings. As humanity enters the era of “knowledge-based economy”, the economics of language becomes an important area of understanding the new directions of economy. Economy of the contemporary world is inextricably linked to language as it directly influences efficiency through communication. The recent direction of research in economics of language inevitably lead us to study the role of English in shaping global and local markets as they move to knowledge intensive transactions. An important question arises about the role of automatic translation technologies such as the one employed in Australia in the form of Telephone Interpretation Service, whether these technologies will replace the need for learning language as an economic capital or what will be the future form of communication in work place (Lamberton, 2002). Breton (1998)Combined the ethnic aspects and economic perspectives in his study of French and English language in Canada. This work, explores the relation of language and economics in the perspective of globalization and relates the local and global market effects on earnings of people with different language resources and competences. It finds that pluralism in Canadian language ecology produces salubrious effects. While Breton (1998) focused local effects of language and earnings relationship, Chiswick and Miller (1995) undertook a comparison of earnings of immigrants of Australia, United States, Canada and Israel. They found a consistent pattern of earning affected by the immigrant’s language skills. There from they conclude significance of the learning of the dominant language of the host country in deciding the income of the immigrants. They consider language proficiency a product of exposure to language, learning abilities (quality of learning experience) and relevance of the acquired language skills to the jobs the learner could undertake. The major portion of instrumental language planning happens without proper statements in official documents. This “unplanned” portion of language planning specifically happens in the use of language in education, which result from the interplay of economic, social and political forces at national or local level (Baldauf, 1994; Daoust, 1998). Rosool(2004) highlights the role language in education for the globalized world in general and Pakistan in particular, where English language education shapes the means of nation in participating the knowledge based economy. Supporting this stance, the minister of education. Language related values generated through policy and planning include pluralism, assimilation, vernacularization, internationalism and nation building (Cobarrubias & Fishman, 1983; Daoust, 1998). The policy of assimilation of minority and minoritized language speakers happens due to common notion that a plurilingual state is considered pathological needing measures to eliminate this anomaly (Mansour, 1993). Administrative and economic efficiency is normally realized through “standardization” of a language and the efforts of promotion or proscription of a language (Ferguson, 2006; Fishman, Ferguson, & Dasgupta, 1968; Haugen, 1966). Nationalism is a process whereby, “history, myth, ritual and symbol are invented to promote a spurious identity. The construction of a narrative of the past allows a group to imagine that it belongs together” (Wright, 2000, p. 13). Language plays a central role in construction of this identity on which nationalism hinges. Marschak’s(1965) deserves the credit of pioneering language economics. His approach to language economics redefines economics terminology so it can be applied to the study of language. He generalizes the definition of economics –considering efficiency as the key aspect of linguistics— is inherent to studying language as communication. For him economics of language views language as “an optimal communication system”. Success in communication is enhanced by certain features of language. The increase in success may incur cost. The Best approach to finding the most economic way of achieving communication goal or the optimal level where the minimum linguistic features are balanced against maximizing chances of successful communication. He considers “normative” and “explanatory” angles as a set of perspectives that can sufficiently explain economics of language based communications. He explains “efficiency and viability” essential features of language when it is viewed from economics perspective. These features can be viewed from a “normative” angle which advocates for increasing the efficiency of language based communication. An economic view of language searches for “communication system best suited to a given goal; or, more generally, best suited to a given scale of values”. So, suitability of language to an “average achieved value” is “weighted by the probabilities of the various contingencies”. In a simple case of assigning value two states are possible, in one the set objective of communication is achieved and in the second failure to attain the set objective happens. This approach is adopted in the normative sense of economy of communication. In the “explanatory” aspect of communication “survival” of a trait of communication through Review of Economics and Development Studies Vol. 4, No 2, December 2018 284 language is sought. “Viability” or feasibility is an important trait in the explanatory aspect. Further, Marschak (1965) considers the study language policy as a reliable means for understanding economics of language. He considers policy as a process of assigning values to linguistic features. There might be more than one value that is associated with language question. In such a case the values are prioritized (again based on some other value). National unity’s promotion being such a value that determines the cost and benefits. Morality and aesthetics are other values, normally used in determining language (in normative or explanatory sense). The policy itself becomes in the end a matter of making choices, “to govern is to choose”, and to make choices, a scale of values is necessary. Concept of “evolution” justifies the survival of the fittest. So, a language feature that is suitable to a context will survive and those unmatched to the needs of context will disappear. While explaining the formation of a policy about language he recounts that the socially dominant group can assign values to a language or features of a language. The aristocrats of society control the process of assigning values as they lead in setting example for the rest of society to follow. “The Principle of least effort” may be a value that explains why some languages or their forms survive and are more frequent than others. Effort acts like cost, therefore, the survival and flourishing of certain traits in language explain that these are the conditions of economics of language. Further, a language survives when the society where it is spoken survives. Francois Grin takes the credit to make economics a mature field of scholarship. For him, , “… economics of language refers to the paradigm of theoretical economics and uses the concepts and tools of economics in the study of relationships featuring linguistic variables; it focuses principally, but not exclusively, on those relationships in which economics variables also play a part” (Grin, 1996, p. 6). Further, Grin(2006) identified the following points playing crucial role in understanding the economics of language 1. How linguistic features influence economic features, e.g. proficiency’s effects income 2. How economic features influence linguistic features, e.g. price of English language learning effects on over/under use of certain forms in a given domain 3. How linguistic and economic processes/dynamics relate to each other and influence each other Building on the concept of his predecessors especially Jacob Marschak, Grin (2006) details how to effectively analyze language policy for economic considerations. While exploring the relation of language with earning the capitalist dominant group’s role in allowing their group members a lion’s share of income, resulting in unequal earning. Lang (1986)echoes this theory in his explanation of the linguistic context of the United States, from whence he speculates that those people who speak the same language work together in better way, therefore, the economic forces in workplace compels the minorities to learn the language of majority and also to bear the cost of such learning. Church and King (1993) argue that the learners make such decision on the basis of weighing cost against benefits. However, Grin (2006) argues that the nature of language as commodity of public use is unique as it increases when used by masses unlike other goods that decrease when consumed and therefore the supply of standard commodities normally decrease. Grin argues that the public policy is a process of making decision about available choices and a policy can be evaluated on the bases of comparing benefits and cost. A language policy normally has some overt or covert goals which are taken into account to compare available options for cost and benefits. A state must intervene when the market of language fails to adjust and it happens when, (a) actors make wrong decision due to little information, (b) high cost of transaction discourage actors, (c) goods without proper market, (d) externalities where actions of one affect the interest of others, (e) defects in market such as monopoly and (f) “hyper collective public good”. The environment of language normally shows the features of a failed market, thereby the intervention of state becomes necessary to adjust its defects. The private cost and benefits are easier to evaluate as compared to public cost and benefits. As a society comprises individuals, therefore, the public cost or benefit can be inferred from the private. The social and individual cost can be “market” or “non-market” based. The evaluation of language policy pose a unique problem as the investment that state makes does not yield immediate effects, therefore, exact cost never remains precise, however, normally it remains within reasonable limits so that the misgivings about the maintenance of records in multilingual context being very high, normally is inflated. For example in European Union it is less than one percent of the total budget. Francois Grin basis this position on his earlier works e.g. (Grin, 1994, 1999, 2000; Grin, Jensdottir, & O' Reiagain, 2003) and the work he has published recently echoes this approach to economics in language planning e.g. (Grin, 2010). All issues that confront humanity have linguistic, economic and political aspects, and no issue can be confined purely to any particular discipline. Review of Economics and Development Studies Vol. 4, No 2, December2018 285 3. Research Approach This study is essentially a theoretical and qualitative exploration of the English language economics in Pakistan. Economics of language of Francois Grin as discussed in literature review constitute the theoretical framework for the collection and analysis of data. The leading objective of this study is to find if English language is worth learning in the context of Pakistan. This lead objective yields other subsidiary concerns. Of these the most pertinent being finding:  The value of English language learning in terms of cost and benefits in Pakistan.  The segments of society that reap the most and the least of the benefits accruing from learning English language in Pakistan.  The future prospects of English language learning in Pakistan. Based on these objective, the study answers the following research questions:  What features of English language in Pakistan contribute to its value in terms of cost and benefits that result in its value?  How the value of English language learning is established?  What segments of Pakistani society reap the most of benefits accruing from English language learning in Pakistan?  What segments of Pakistani society is marginalized in the distribution of benefits accruing form English language learning in Pakistan?  How English language learning results in different dividends for different segments of Pakistan?  Based on the current trends, what are the future prospects of the value of English language learning in Pakistan?  While answering these questions, the study also answers the fundamental question, “Is it worth to learn English language in Pakistan?”. While there are many confounding factors which make the drawn inferences about the worth of a language unreliable, the study attempted to account for some of these factors such as education, skills, experience, intelligence, existing class division and system of privileges because such elements are intricately woven into the language use and linguistic context. The scope of this paper confines the researcher to gloss over these important factors. The researchers hope that future studies with a narrower focus would be able to account for the individual confounding elements more effectively. However, the general overview such as this one would be constrained to economize on details and tend to generalize where nuances of individual and smaller niche groups would be overlooked. 3.1 Data Collection The exploratory and theoretical demands review of a number of secondary sources, however the study includes some primary data which was collected through unstructured exploratory interviews with4 experts of English language teaching and education belonging to Abdul Wali Khan University Mardan and University of Peshawar. 3.2 Data Analysis The study overviews various reports and studies and analyzes them with the help of Francois Grin’s concept of finding worth of a language feature by estimating the cost and benefits accruing from the process or product of learning a language. The study compares the costs and benefits qualitatively and thereby attempts to provide direction for future research where on large scale the quantitative data would be used to get numerical outcomes. The study, therefore, focuses on arguments and qualitative estimation of value. 4. Discussion and Analysis This section finds answer to the questions raised in research approach of the paper. Discussion and analysis begins with summarizing the relation of sociopolitical, economic and language policy and planning enunciated in literature review. A brief historical overview then provide a diachronic evolution of economics of English language in Pakistan. The current context of English language is then explored to determine its worth. Eventually, the prospects of English language in Pakistan are highlighted last. Review of Economics and Development Studies Vol. 4, No 2, December 2018 286 The reviewed literature points that English language in Pakistan exist in the multilingual and multiethnic context where sociopolitical and economic division intermingle and result in a complex language planning and a two- layered language policy. The sociopolitical divisions and contest maintain an economic dimension which helps in understanding the nature and dynamics of such division, as economic value inevitably provides practicability to the strategies of contestant groups. One dimension of strategizing the sociopolitical contest for economic value motivates language policy and planning. So, language policy and planning become an instrument of realizing economic gains of sociopolitical contests. If language policy and planning can become an instrument, it also can become an effect of the economic valuation that is rooted in the contest of sociopolitical classes, and language policy and planning also can become raison d’etre, the primal cause of sociopolitical divisions effected through economic measures. Therefore, language policy and planning operates in the form, visualized in Figure1. Figure 1: Cycle of Economic Values, Sociopolitical Class Values and Language Policy Planning Contest English language due to the colonial legacy enjoyed a privileged position in sociopolitical structure of the nascent Pakistani state. The historical entrenchment of English language created a system of values ensuring its domination in sociopolitical domains. Values in these domains determined differentiated earnings, costs and benefits for sociopolitical strata of Pakistan. The historical evolution structured these domains making the incumbency of English overcome challenges to its privileged position. Historical process coupled with strategizing of sociopolitical elite control access to the learning of English language through stratified educational system. The urban citizens, the salaried class, entrepreneurs etc. form an elite who limit access to their class through restricting access to a selective spectrum of English language L2speakers. The learners of ordinary English medium educational institutes (such as schools, colleges, Universities, and institutes for technical and professional education) face substantial barriers in horizontal and vertical movement in the domains of English language. The benefits of elite are reflected in their higher earning and presence of more opportunities to advance their careers. The cost of marginalized segments make their efforts less fruitful and thus they do not get enough freedom of economic choices in job market. The political slogan of abolishing the stratified education along improving quality of education is necessary to make English an equitable asset in international job market for learners of English language. There is exist extensive literature on the origin of English in South Asia and its continuation in Pakistan after partition of South Asia(See for example Baumgardner, 1996; Mahboob, 2003b; Rahman, 1996; Rahman, 1998, 2004a, 2004b, 2005), however, the analysis restrict themselves to sociopolitical consideration in domain of education. The economic consideration would make such narration more understandable. The nascent state of Pakistan was forced to use English language despite the desire of its social and political elite to replace it completely by Urdu that had played historical role in forming Muslim identity in the anticolonial struggle and in shaping the two nation concept for Indian Muslims. A major constraint was the cost of doing this in the financially impoverished early years. Later, the rate of development was low and spending on education remained a low priority in the face of security related challenges, which required immediate attention. Language policy in post- World War II states, who attained their freedom from colonial rule, remained a tool of shaping “nation-state” in the hand of governments imbued with the spirit of nationalism (Liddicoat & Baldauf, 2008, p. 3).The scarcity of trained teachers, books, building and other related requirements resulted in the poor quality of teaching in Urdu government schools while the English medium private schools did well as they had better resources available to them. Two opposing views emerged regarding the economic worth of English language in Pakistan. One view considered English as an essential component of quality education that was considered vital of economic development and prosperity of the country. The second view took nation-building as a higher aim than economic development and focused transition to Urdu language. This second view considered provision of better governance Economic Values Sociopolitical class values Language policy and planning Review of Economics and Development Studies Vol. 4, No 2, December2018 287 in Urdu language that was better understood by the bureaucracy and population as compared to English and was taken as a means of realizing economic development without depending on English language. In practice, neither of these two views completely prevailed, therefore, both view saw accommodation, while Urdu was acclaimed to be the legitimate representation of Pakistan identity, English language was not made illegitimate and was proclaimed to be a temporary fixture till time and resources become suitable for the desired shift. The earlier history of education in Pakistan saw a large number of Urdu medium education and small number of English medium education. While the education in English medium was high and return on investing in such education was high, the high cost of this education allowed only elite to afford such education. Urdu medium education imparted in state run schools was failing in delivering its purpose of ensuring better earning of the majority of its graduates. Therefore, the low earnings of its graduates was taken as proof of its low quality. The official commissions, the stories in newspapers and anecdotal stories all undermined the credibility of the government Urdu medium education. The demand of English medium private schools steadily grew and in urban areas English medium schools gradually started to open. The era of 1980s saw initially a trickling of such schools, but later in 1990s these schools started to pour of nowhere. This growth lowered the fee in many of the newly opened school to such degree that they could be afforded by the middle and lower middle class families. In 1990 the democratic government started to accept the superiority of English medium private schools and they allowed introduction of English as a medium of instruction in government schools as well. Initially some schools were chosen to impart such schools, in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa for example such schools were called Centennial Schools. Later in the era of General Musharraf English language’s importance was recognize and it was made compulsory from first grade onward. Zobaida Jalal Khan (2004), unveiled the policy of Musharraf’s government where English language was assigned the role of modernization and development in Pakistan through improvement of education. The transformation of education in and after 1990s was due to the fact that government accepted English language learning as a means of increasing better paid jobs for the learner, therefore, the decision to introduce English in government schools was driven by making access to English language learning open to all citizens who could not afford private schooling. Rahman (1998, pp.228-248) points to the following features of English language in Pakistan which adds to value. Comments based on focus group discussion are added in square brackets by the researcher.  English as an international language. [It is now universally agreed that English is an international language therefore it provides access to international job market, especially the higher paying multinational companies in Pakistan.]  Historically employed in domains of power. [The colonial legacy has allowed English domination in domains where distribution of power-which professor Rahman explain in terms of economic gains- take place such as industry, job market, government, education etc. The historical factor has resulted in a network of production and consumption of language based items and services. The sudden change of a language in domain of power is traditionally rejected by most of the commissions and report, as such a change may disrupt the sociopolitical and economic machinery in Pakistan.]  Modernization, efficiency and retention of privileged status. [Modernization is considered as improvement in domains of power, which like developed states would result in prosperity. As quality education and technology can be cheaply accessed through English language, therefore, learning of English would help in faster modernization. Efficiency refers to avoidance of wastage. Modernization and efficiency through English language are normally promoted as positive arguments which uses economic value as its premises. It is argued that due to the efforts of Anglophone developed states (and also in non-Anglophone states where sizeable L2 population exists) English language stores a great source of information. Modern technology like internet has most of its resources (websites/pages) in English language. So, investing in local/national language and transferring knowledge through translation will demand resources and time which are not economically viable, therefore, the fastest route to partaking in the race of development is to adopt English language. The privileged position of English is historical and social, adding to its value as for private market and non-market gains it is supposed to offer best returns.]  Fear of intensification of existing rivalries in multilingual former colony. [In some of multilingual former colonies of Britain such as Nigeria, Tanzania, Kenya and India , English language is presented as the neutral language that promotes unity and lessens language based tensions. However, in other former colonies like Malaysia and Pakistan (and India too), local languages have acquired a symbolic status of anticolonial resistance and English language is attacked as a colonial legacy and continuation of servility. In Pakistan the fluctuation in the economic value of English language is greatly determined by this controversy between Urdu and English language]. Review of Economics and Development Studies Vol. 4, No 2, December 2018 288  LWC (Language of Wider Communication) function of English in Pakistan. [English is not only understood (though to a limited degree) in most of Pakistan and it is also known to people in South Asia, therefore, its learning facilitates regional communication and would help in economic activities, and its learning would help learners to gain more from learning it as compared to the cost in the form learning it. However, Urdu/Hind which resemble closely also has a competitive function as LWC.]  Urdu the substituting language is only symbolically supported. [Despite the constitutional status, historical importance, presence of a National Language Development Department and a number of court decisions and reports favoring the conversion from English to Urdu use in offices, courts and public spaces, the continued domination is often construed as conspiracy of powerful elite who reduce all these policy documents to rhetoric. The lack of resources, will, sincerity and malicious intention offers a spectrum of interpretation of this contradiction between the de jure and de facto situation of English language. From the economics of English language, the interpretation becomes straightforward as due to presence of dominant position of English in globalized economy and high cost of investment that will incur from the conversion, the constitution protection and official policy statements do not succeed. Though significant gains have been made in this direction.]  Government invests in cadet colleges and English medium schools where the future leadership is formed.[The cadet colleges were only few institutions in 1990s when Professor Rahman was writing the book, now the high fee English medium schools, colleges and other institutions especially universities (both general and those focused on medicine, engineering, science and technology) have mushroomed to the extent that every district has them in dozens. Such English medium institutions, schools and colleges largely cater to need of middle class students, so the former elitist education is now available to majority or urban population. However, the skills and variety of English that is learnt in most of these institution does not guarantee economic benefits to all learners. Still many parents prefer these English medium schools etc. which make establishing them a profitable business and hence proves that demand for English language learning exist among the middle and lower middle class especially in urban areas.]  The Hamoodur Rahman Report, regrets the accelerated pace of conversion from English to Urdu, which compromised the quality of education. [As discussed in the analysis of point no. 6, this report is given as example, where the enormity of undertaking a complete transformation is forewarned and a cautious course is suggested. The economic cost is implied].  Urdu medium school graduates are marginalized in higher education and prestigious jobs.[This issues highlight the dominant belief of those parents who can not afford high tuition fees of private English medium schools. The consider, English being a major factor which added to the economic success of English medium going children and failure of their Urdu medium going children, the current Education Policy also points to this fact and in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province, the government has therefore made English as medium of instruction from grade 1 onwards].  The small affluent class wield great power in lobbying for English and the less affluent support it as it (English) is considered as a means to enter the elite club. [As discussed in point no. 6, the frustration with non-implementation is rationalized in the form of blaming an affluent elite who lobby for the promotion of English language. The demand for English language among the parents especially the poor is normally ignored in making this assumption. The promise of economic benefit accruing from learning English language does not simply arise from local and national influence, in the age internet and smartphones the global domination and demand for English is also affecting the choice of learning English locally in Pakistan. Though, the elite can not be absolve completely, their role in continuing the domination of English language would not have been effective if English had been seeing a waning influence in the global economy.]  People trust status quo and believe in its continuation. [People learn English language because they believe this domination is not going to end soon, therefore, the invest in learning English language so they would partake in the larger global market. The growing demand of English medium schools indicates that English language is expected to yield more benefits than the cost incurred by investing in learning it.]  International interaction (English as lingua franca) through English. [ The current global reach of English is phenomenal as great number of people estimated to be more than a billion speakers including L1 and L2 speakers (Jenkins, 2015) makes it an attractive resource where investment in it by learning it enable speakers to participate in the global market]. Review of Economics and Development Studies Vol. 4, No 2, December2018 289 The question to improve English appears rhetorical as the very people who raise concerns about the abysmal quality of English language learning/teaching, themselves as a class support separate elitist education. Network effect of Grin propose that if more people learn English language the available opportunities to speakers are to be divided among all, so a competition would take place where competence is to be determined on the basis of what variety of English is mastered. The spread of a language therefore does not result in maximization of value for all. Depending on the language market, the majority of learners invest in learning the language only to bear the cost of the services available. In most cases the language based services they receive would have an non-market utility for them and they would remain mostly consumers bound to a specific type of market due to their loyalty based on their historical attachment and the investment they have already made, keep them psychologically satisfied even when they are not earning anything or rather remain consumers of a language based market where advertisement/propaganda keep them loyal buyer of language based commodity. English language instead of losing economic significance for learners of English is constantly expanding globally. However, a debate has emerged whether the localization of English in different parts especially the former colonies is good or bad. While some like Braj Kachru consider it a good sign, while others like Randolph Quirk consider it ominous for efficient communication. So, the future of English depend on whether a single global form (such international English) would ultimately emerge or whether the localized form would diverge to such a degree that they would become mutually unintelligible (Jenkins, 2015). Both of the extreme positions are unlikely to happen and English would grow as would its newly emerging varieties, especially in the newly emerging markets like Pakistan, India etc. Those who learn it would have to compete especially in the case of English language teacher, where the native English language teacher make good earnings, the non-native teacher despite the higher cost they pay in terms of formal training and expenses normally do not make as much as the untrained native speaker can make. However, in other places where communication is supplemental to other technical skills the non-native speakers have fair prospects. 5. Conclusion Due to expansive nature of the topic, the researcher is content with providing an overview, which obviates the need for further researches to focus on each questions raised in this paper and thereby further improve the field. The paper explored English language economics in Pakistan and found this language has a strong economic presence in Pakistan. This economic trait is sustained by the historical cause of colonial rule and contemporary elements of globalized markets. The paper finds that economic dividend is greater for the existing sociopolitical elite while for the poor earning to investment ratio remains weak, therefore, the economic aspect of English language in Pakistan causes disparity and widens the gap between the rich and the poor. English language is expected to remain dominant in foreseeable future, therefore, it offers as a good source of personal investment for private gains. The social/collective gains from English language are doubtful, as the new learners have to compete for limited job market, or they need to innovate and create new opportunities of earning. The non-native learners who aspire to become English language teacher would face unfair domination of native-English teachers. References Ahmad, A. (2016). Role of English in Afghan Language Policy Planning with its Imapact on National Integration (2001-2010). (Ph.D.), University of Peshawar, Peshawar. Baldauf, R. B., Jr. (1994). "Unplanned" Language Policy and Planning. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 14, 82-89. Baumgardner, R. J. (Ed.). (1996). South Asian English: Structure, Use, and Users. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. Breton, A. (1998). Economic Approaches to Languages and Bilingualism. New Canadian Perspective. Ottawa, Canada: Department of Canadian Heritage. Chiswick, B. R., & Miller, P. W. (1995). The Endogeneity between Language and Earnings: International Analysis. Journal of Labor Economics, 13(2), 246-288. Church, J., & King, I. (1993). Bilingualism and Network Externalities. Wiley/Canadian Economics Association, 26(2), 337-345. Cobarrubias, J., & Fishman, J. A. (1983). Progress in Language Planning: International Perspectives: Mouton Publishers. Cossan, M., & Godley, A. (Eds.). (2000). Cultural Factors in Ecnomic Growth. Reading, UK: Springer. Daoust, D. (1998). Language Planning and Language Reforms. In F. Coulmas (Ed.), The Handbook of Sociolinguistics (pp. 436-453). Oxford: Blackwell Review of Economics and Development Studies Vol. 4, No 2, December 2018 290 de Saussure, F. (1915). Course de Linguistic Generale (W. Baskin, Trans.). Ferguson, G. (2006). Language Planning and Education. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Fishman, J. A., Ferguson, C. A., & Dasgupta, J. (1968). Language problems of developing nations. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Grin, F. (1994). The Economics of Language: Match or Mismatch? International Political Science Review, 15(1), 25-42. Grin, F. (1996). Economic Approaches to langauge and langauge planning. International Journal of Sociology of Language, 121(1), 1-16. doi: https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl.1996.121.1 Grin, F. (1999). Economics. In J. A. Fishman (Ed.), Handbook of Language and Ethnic Identity (pp. 9-24). New York . Oxford: Oxford University Press. Grin, F. (2000). Language Planning, Public Policy and the Role of Minority Language Media. Paper presented at the 2nd Multimdia and Minority Languages International Congress, Donstia / San Sebstian. Grin, F. (2006). Economic Consideration in Language Policy. In T. Ricento (Ed.), An Introduction to Language Policy (pp. 77-99). Maiden/Oxford: Blackwell. Grin, F. (2010). Language Planning and Economics. Current Issues in Language Planning, 4(1), 1-66. doi: 10.1080/14664200308668048 Grin, F., Jensdottir, R., & O' Reiagain, D. (2003). Language Policy Evaluation and the European Charter for Regional or Minority languages. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Haugen, E. (1966). Language Conflicts and Language Planning: The Case of Modern Norwegian: Harvard University Press. Jenkins, J. (2015). Global Englishes: A resource book for students. London, UK: Routledge. Khan, Z. J. (2004). Language Policy in Pakistan. In S. Mansoor, S. Meraj & A. Tahir (Eds.), Language Policy Planning & Practice: A Southasian Perspective (pp. 23-26). Karachi: Aga Khan University/ Oxford University Press. Lamberton, D. M. (Ed.). (2002). The Economics of Language. Northampton, MA: Edware Elgar Publishing, Inc. Lang, K. (1986). A Language Theory of Discrimination. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 101(2), 363-382. Lecercle, J.-J. (2006). A Marxist Philosophy of Language (G. Elliott, Trans. Vol. 12). Leiden and Boston: Brill. Lenin, V. I. (1964 [1913-1914]). Critical Remarks on the National Question V. I. Lenin Collected Works Volume 20, December 1913-August 1914 (Vol. 20, pp. 17-52). Moscow: Progress Publishers. (Reprinted from: 1977). Liddicoat, A. J., & Baldauf, R., B. Jr. (2008). Language Planning in Local Contexts: Agents, Contexts and Interactions. In A. J. Liddicoat & R. Baldauf, B. Jr. (Eds.), Lanuage Planning & Policy: Language Planning in Local Contexts. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd. Mahboob, A. (2003a). The English Language in Pakistan: A Brief Overview of its History and Linguistics. Journal of Language, 4(1), 1-48. Mahboob, A. (2003b). Language in Education Policy in Pakistan. Paper presented at the 37th Annual TESOL Convention, Baltimore, Maryland. Mansour, G. (Ed.). (1993). Multilingualism and Nation Building. Celvedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd. Marschak, J. (1965). Economics of Language Behavioral Sciences, 10(2), 135-140. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/bs.3830100203 Rahman, T. (1996) The History of the Urdu-English Controversy. Vol. 311. Islamabad: National Language Authority (Government of Pakistan). Rahman, T. (1998). Language and Politics in Pakistan. Karachi: Oxford University Press. Rahman, T. (2004a). Denizens of Alien Worlds: A Study of Education, Inequality and Polarization in Pakistan. Oxford and Karachi: Oxford University Press. Rahman, T. (2004b). Language and Education: Selected Documents (1780-2003). Islamabad, Pakistan: National Institute of Pakistan Studies. Rahman, T. (2005). The impact of European languages in former colonial territories: the case of English in Pakistan. . Paper presented at the The Impact of European Languages in Former Colonial Territories Conference, U.C. Berkeley Rasool, N. (2004). Language and Communicative Competence in the Twenty-first Century: Examining the Role of Education. In S. Mansoor, S. Meraj & A. Tahir (Eds.), Language Policy Planning & Practice: A Southasian Perspective (pp. 3-22). Karachi: Aga Khan University/ Oxford University Press. Schiffman, H. F. (2002). Language Policy in the former Soviet Union. Retrieved September 6, 2015, from http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~haroldfs/540/handouts/ussr/soviet2.html#_ftnref2 http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~haroldfs/540/handouts/ussr/soviet2.html#_ftnref2 Review of Economics and Development Studies Vol. 4, No 2, December2018 291 Spencer, S., Clegg, J., & Rush, R. (2017). Contribution of Spoken Language and socio-economic background to Adolescent's educational achievement at age 16 years. International Journal of Language Communication Disorders, 52(2), 184-196. Stalin, J. V. (1972[1950]). Marxism and Problems of Linguistics. In People's Republic of China (Ed.), From Marx to Mao (pp. 3-55). Peking Foreign Language Press. Van Parijs, P. (Ed.). (2013). Cultural Diversity versus Economic Solidarity: Proceedings of the Seventh Francqui Colloqium, Brussels 28 February - 1 March 2013. Brussels, Belgium: Franqui Scientific Library. Voloshinov, V. N. (1973). Marxism and the Philosophy of Language. New York London: Seminar Press. Wright, S. (2000). Community and Communication : The Role of Language in Nation State Building and European Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.