Physical Distance and Language as Determinants of the International Telecommunications Network
| Author | Young Choi,George A. Barnett |
| Published date | 01 July 1995 |
| DOI | 10.1177/019251219501600305 |
| Date | 01 July 1995 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
249-
Physical
Distance
and
Language
as
Determinants
of
the
International
Telecommunications
Network
GEORGE
A.
BARNETT
AND
YOUNG
CHOI
ABSTRACT.
The
language
of
the
inhabitants
of
an
individual
country
and
its
physical
location
may
be
viewed
as
antecedent
conditions
which
predict
a
nation’s
position
in
the
international
telecommunications
network.
Survey
data
published
in
The
World’s
Telephones
are
used
to
describe
this
network
during
the
1980s.
The
results
of
a
network
analysis
suggest
that
the
world’s
communication
network
may
be
described
as
a
"star"
with
a
"hub"
and
three
"spokes,"
one
for
Latin
America,
one
for
Europe
and
a
third
for
Asia
and
the
Middle
East.
Language
occupied
an
important
position
on
each
spoke,
Spanish
in
Latin
America,
German
in
Europe
and
English
in
Asia.
They
further
suggest
that
language
has
a
major
impact
on
international
telecommunications
accounting
for
nearly
28
percent
of
the
network’s
structure;
physical
location
explained
over
17
percent
of
the
structure.
Together,
these
two
factors
accounted
for
36.2
percent
of
the
variance
in
the
network’s
structure.
’
Introduction
This
paper
investigates
the
relationship
between
physical
distance
and
language
and
international
telecommunication.
There
has
been
little
empirical
research
done
in
this
area.
DeStefano
( 1990)
indicates
that
she
is
unaware
of
any
literature
that
describes
the
role
language
plays
in
international
telecommunications.
Here
we
examine
the
role
of
language
and
physical
location
as
antecedent
conditions
which
may
act
to
organize
the
international
telecommunications
network.
Telecommunication
and
Physical
Location
Telecommunication
is
a
space-adjusting
technology.
It
permits
instantaneous
communication
between
people
at
a
distance,
thereby
making
geographical
space
250
fungible.
In
terms
of
communication,
all
points
on
the
earth
may
be
considered
equivalent
(Gottmann,
1977).
In
other
words,
electronic
communication
alters
the
geometry
of
space
in
which
interaction
is
taking
place
(Barnett,
1975;
1988b).
It
places
people
in
a
state
which
Korzenny
(1978)
labels
electronic
propinquity.
According
to
Abler
{1977,
pp.
318-319):
Telecommunications
(like
transportation)
can
change
the
proximity
of
places
by
improving
connections
between
them.
Other
things
being
equal,
an
individual
will
have
more
contacts
with
people
close
and
fewer
with
people
distant
from
him.
Thus,
any
technology
that
makes
it
easier
to
contact
people
at
a
distance
makes
it
possible
to
communicate
as
though
distance
has
been
shortened.
The
space-adjusting
technology
of
telephony
has
now
been
applied
on
such
a
massive
scale
that
for
some
purposes
the
nation
has
become
a
single,
highly
interde-
pendent
communications
network.
Much
the
same
can
be
said
of
the
entire
globe.
Thus,
it
is
expected
that
physical
distance
among
the
countries
of
the
world
would
have
little
impact
in
the
organization
of
international
telecommunications.
However,
telecommunications
is
a
young
network.
While
it
may
be
evolving
to
a
state
of
fungibility,
traditional
patterns
of
interaction
based
on
physical
proximity
still
persist.
Several
researchers
(Deutsch
and
Isard,
1961;
Merritt,
1964;
Brams,
1966;
Clark
and
Merritt,
1987)
have
studied
the
effect
of
spatial
distance
on
inter-
national
transaction
flows
and
found
that
geographical
proximity
appears
to
be
the
primary
ordering
principle,
with
regional
neighbors
appearing
together.
Their
tentative
conclusion
was
that
there
is
a
strong
negative
relationship
between
spatial
distance
and
the
strength
of
interactions.
Examining
the
Telecommunications-Language
Relationship
Differences
in
language
may
act
as
a
barrier
to
international
communication.
People
who
speak
the
same
language
might
be
expected
to
communicate
more
frequently
with
each
other
than
those
who
don’t.
Laponce
( 1987:
183)
notes
that,
(t)he
world’s
linguistic
structure-which
languages
play
what
roles-shapes
the
habits of
and
facilities
for
communication,
the
mobility
of
individual
citizens
and
their
ability
to
link
themselves
to
worldwide
information
systems....&dquo;
The
boundaries
between
languages
are
more
or
less
porous.
Laponce
(1985)
suggests
three
types
of
boundaries,
physical,
linguistic
and
social.
If
there
is
a
sharp
physical
discontinuity
between
two
linguistic
communities,
it
is
normally
easier
for
both
to
retain
their
distinct
languages.
Where
they
are
in
physical
proximity,
there
will
be
some
language
crossing.
The
degree
of
linguistic
border
crossing
varies
inversely
with
the
impermeability
of
the
physical
boundary.
Thus,
there
is
an
inter-
action
between
language
and
physical
distance.
The
second
type
of
boundary
is
linguistic.
Two
speech
communities
stemming
from
the
same
root
will
have
a
more
porous
boundary
than
two
derived
from
differ-
ent
roots.
The
third
type
of
boundary
is
social.
Some
languages
have
greater
status
than
others.
For
example,
English
is
considered
the
universal
language
of
science,
computing
and
business
while
French
is
the
language
of
diplomacy
(Stevenson,
1992).
The
language
of
the
elite
or
former
colonial
nation
may
provide
economic
incentives
for
individuals
to
cross
the
linguistic
boundaries.
Telecommunication
may
provide
the
means
for
cross-boundary
communication.
To continue reading
Request your trial