A matter of reception: ELF and LaRa compared
Abstract This article addresses the conceptual differences and commonalities between two modes of intercultural communication: English as a lingua franca (ELF) and Lingua Receptiva (LaRa). While the former is more frequent and wide- spread but disputed for reasons of monolingual dominance, the latter is lesser known und contextually restricted but praised for preserving linguistic diversity. The article takes such common presumptions as a starting point for a detailed comparative investigation of the concepts ELF and LaRa. The first section is dedicated to the overall language frameworks of the two modes. It thus points to their constellational specificities and the notions of locality and context involved in them. The second part takes a closer look at the speaker/hearer perspectives assumed in ELF and LaRa as well as at the different manifestations of linguistic variability and accommodation emerging from them. The third part is then concerned with the assumedly most prominent dividing points between lingua franca and lingua receptiva, namely issues of range, linguistic diversity and eventually the relative degree of plurilinguality exhibited in the two modes. In a final comparative summary of the points raised, the article ultimately comes to the conclusion that ELF and LaRa are not at all mutually exclusive but overlapping communicative modes. It thus argues that intercultural speakers could profit from using them in a complementary fashion.
Receptive multilingualism and awareness
Receptive multilingualism is a mode of interaction in which speakers with different linguistic backgrounds use their respective preferred languages while understanding the language of their interlocutor. The mechanisms and competences contributing to mutual understanding in this constellation are described by the concept of lingua receptiva (LaRa). Both concepts can refer to interactions in typologically close as well as distant languages (inherent or acquired LaRa) and to interactions where speakers use any language sufficiently understood by their interlocutor. This chapter argues that successful use of lingua receptiva (LaRa) in multilingual contexts both requires and contributes to language awareness. For individual LaRa users, the awareness needed consists of knowledge of the option to use this mode, basic receptive knowledge of the interlocutor’s language, conscious activation of receptive competencies, and sensitivity to the interlocutor’s level of comprehension and problems of reception during interaction. Using LaRa will conversely contribute to the language awareness of individuals, as LaRa forces speakers to consciously and often explicitly apply the required linguistic and interactive skills in practice. To promote successful use of the receptive multilingual mode in society, institutions need to develop explicit language and education policies incorporating LaRa as an independent language mode next to other multilingual modes of communication.
Euthanasia — again: “Letting die” is not in the patient's best interests: a case for active euthanasia
Recent discussions in the Journal on the subject of euthanasia have relied on intuitive appeals to distinctions traditionally considered to be morally relevant, such as the distinction between acts and omissions (or killing and letting die), or ordinary and extraordinary means of treatment. These discussions remained inconclusive. However, the question of euthanasia no longer remains inconclusive if one adopts the perspective suggested by the United States President's Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine and Biomedical and Behavioral Research and by the World Medical Assembly – that a doctor should act in his or her patient's best interests. From this vantage point, it is argued, there will be instances when active euthanasia is the proper cause of action.