Dear Dr Joanna,

Large number of researchers and readers spread over the world follows English language and publish accordingly in English. Therefore, publication in English language may have wider reach. Also research work carried out may be followed and recommended by researchers worldwide.

However, research work especially about local issues may have more acceptance and followed locally. Such research papers may be in local language or get translated to have a larger reach as well as impact. Paper may be translated n English or local languages for wider reach worldwide.

Regards

Ashok Pundir

ENGLISH IS BETTER THAN URDU FOR SCIENCE SUBJECTS

Even as a student, I did always summarize a research work by abstracts in more international languages, for the reason of wider reception. One of the mains tools of science is to break through language barriers and to globally circulate new ideas, methods and practices for improving human life. At the moment, I observe a clear tendency to prefer national languages, which appeared with the rise of protectionist policies. Scientific English as a tool of international communication is a 'mixed multitude' of human language, and we all have to work very hard to arrive at better translational levels of mutual scientific communication, i.e. this is a field of great future importance. So, you have pointed to an important issue of career and professional progress.

national languages

Dear Joanna Gocłowska-Bolek,

your question is closely related to the discussion https://www.researchgate.net/post/Do_you_prefer_to_write_your_research_papers_in_English_or_in_your_first_languagewhy

where I posted my answer which I would like to duplicate here.

"I want to ask you: If would Grigory Perelman published his brilliant proofs not in English but in Russian, then they would not be recognized, would that be so? I think that the value of scientific work should not depend on the language on which it was written. If you want, you can always use Google Translator to understand any information. This is not a problem at this time. It is quite another matter when the journal has its own requirements, which must be observed, otherwise the article will not be published. However, if you would, for example, presented not an article but a development (some device) in your own language, then people will buy your development for the fact that it can solve your problems. Thus, language can not become an obstacle to the exchange of information, it is a myth. Another thing - live communication. Here, of course, English is irreplaceable. Although mathematicians, too, should not have any problem, because they can always understand each other in the language of formulas. It is well known that mathematics is not a science, but a universal language".

Agree with Ashok.

Dear Joanna,

is a common opinion that scientists who want to produce influential, globally recognized work most likely need to publish in English: the reason seems closely related to the natural efforts of scientists to be recognized as having internationally compatible quality and to gain the highest possible reputation.

By the the second half of the 20th century, only the English language remained dominant in science field as the U.S. strengthened its place in the world, and its influence in the global scientific community has continued to increase ever since. As a consequence, the scientific vocabularies of many languages have failed to keep pace with new developments and discoveries.

In many countries, college-level science education is now conducted in English—partially because studying science in English is good preparation for a future scientific career, and partially because the necessary words often don’t exist in any other language. A 2014 report from the University of Oxford (see attached) found that the use of English as the primary language of education in non-English speaking countries is on the rise, a phenomenon more prevalent in higher education but also increasingly present in primary and secondary schools.

But even with English-language science education around the world, non-native speakers are still often at a disadvantage (to processing the content of the papers in a different language, due the shy to communicate with researchers, for the fear of not understand quite well what they say and so on).

I believe this phenomenon deserves serious consideration from the international scientific community, and I thank you for asking the question.

Best regards,

Marco

Agree with Ashok and Marco, and Marco - thank you for interesting facts, best regards Petra

There are researches that try to solve a local problem. It is more useful to publish it in the local language, especially to the citizens of that country. If most of them do not know another language,but it is necessary to publish it in a universal language to ensure that it reaches a largest number of readers.

In my opinion the publication of scientific work in English language can reach a wider audience and also engage in work produced outside of their own language community. This facilitates international collaboration and, at least ideally, strengthens and validates research.

I think publications in English language would be easily accessible to all, while those in local or national language comes with language barrier to the international audience.

In my opinion, publishing a research paper in English language is much better than other languages, otherwise, each language has it's specific strategy for publishing that may be related to the publisher or the scientific journal.

The publications of research findings should be in English to reach global researchers. But the popular scientific articles should be better to write in local languages to supply information to the common people.

In all the cases, the way of presentation is very important.

The research article may contain the scientific languages, but the popular articles should contain the least amount of such words which is not known by the target readers - the common people.

Still today, I have only 36 published research articles in English, but about 200 published popular scientific articles published in different magazines and newspapers and two books - all in Bengali language.

Publishing in English language is much better as it is a uniform international language so majority of world population can take the benefit while other languages are limited to single or only few countries so become limited to very narrow scope.

However i also recommend regional language publication on small scale for the local public not well in English as well as for the survival of the language and regional literature culture

You're welcome, Petra. :)

Best regards

Marco

today, most scientific research around the world is published in a single language, English.

English is now so prevalent that in some non-English speaking countries, like Germany, France, and Spain, English-language academic papers outnumber publications in the country’s own language several times over.

Even some local languages are difficult to read and write for the indigenous people compared to English language. And in small regions where there is multiplicity of dialect, English becomes the lingua franca. So, publishing in English language lessens the difficulty in disseminating research reports faster and easier in this circumstance.

Now the world is moving from nationalization to globalization...so particularly scientific articles should be in English and the zeast of the study can be published in local language to educate or aware the society....

Thank you all for your valuable comments. Your opinions are very important! Thanks a lot!

Following

In the world of science, where English-language journals are of the highest standing, linguists write their original manuscripts in English, then translate their work into their native languages for publication in smaller local journals or to participate in scientific conferences. Transitions between languages are not the result of careful selection of a particular creative effect. But it is necessary to obtain scientific recognition from colleagues and the scientific community as a whole.

The wider the number of languages, the higher the readership audience of a paper. English has a wider global coverage due to its broader language adaptability in global communities. If it's not possible to publish an article in multi-language, at least, the abstract should receive such treatment to draw many scholars

I think English will better

good question. I agree with Dr Ashok Pundir and Dr Anastas Ivanov Ivanov

regards

hope that language does not block a good research

For wider reception, English is better . The abstract may be bilingual. Research works on Mathematical sciences are convenient to produce in English than most of the other national languages !

Dear Joanna,

As always, you bring us a fascinating opportunity to discuss. Thank you!

Although I understand and respect the opinions of all our fellow scientists, I´d like complete with another question:

- How are we communicating here?

I speak Portuguese, you speak Polish, and others Russian, Urdu, Italian, French, and so on...

and another one:

- How many works have you read that was not in your language and or English?

I believe that we need an international language, English or not. But one that everybody can read and discuss others works. I´d love to speak Polish, Italian and Russian, but I could not know if the works written in these languages could be recommendable. I could not comment. I could not share with friends in that field... so, that jobs were ignored entirely by me, not because I don´t want to read, but because it´s impossible to me.

I know a GENIOUS that deserves to know a good job published here at RG in another language that I could not even identify. I could not offer this opportunity for this friend. I feel like "if Miller had not known Modigliani!" just because I was not able to bring them together.

I think I proved my point!

Best wishes.

Hess

Thank you so much for your valuable answers. Best wishes.

Joanna

Publishing in English gives you much wider audience.

I agree that publishing in English allow to get a wider audience. An exception is when a study is culture specific and many of potential readers do not speak English. For example, a work on Slavik philology may get more readers in Slavik languages than in English. The same may be true about some cultural studies that have more local than international interest. Then it is better to write in local language.

Dr. Jonna,

Publishing in the national languages can reduce of success of the publication. It will be limiting in the reading and the citation. However using the first languages in the world can earn the research to this work be known in easy ways.

Yes, English won. But what about professional terminology (language) in national languages? Will we cancel them?

English is not the best language but English is the language of publication. So English is beter than national languages.

I want to understand one thing: very often we have to hear a phrase from the editorial staff of the magazine: "Your paper is rejected because the text is not written in the correct English. Please turn for help to a specialist as a native speaker of the English language in order to rewrite the text properly". In my understanding, such an answer is discrimination and humiliation of a person primarily because the scientific merits of the paper are not taken into account, but the syntax of the text is taken into account first. I want to ask: What is more important for you is - a qualitative and outstanding scientific result or a quality and impeccable English text ? Personally for me, this issue is resolved in favor of a scientific result than in favor of syntax. I do not care what language the article is written in. Why? I can always use Google Translator and translate from any language into my native Russian without any problem. Yes, when translating from one language to another language there may be errors, but this is not a problem to understand correctly the original text. If desired, everything will be understood correctly, especially if a scientific article from the field of Mathematics, which in turn is itself a universal language. I want to share my opinion on why good papers in the wrong English often rejected. Because publishing a paper for a journal is more business than science. Please explain to me that this is not so, I would be very grateful.

Dear Gennady, I also often find myself in a similar situation. In my case I do not have many errors, and sometimes ask my friends from English speaking country for revision. They typically find just few missing or wrong articles. Note that there are many proofreading companies charging high price ($200-500 per text). I can suspect even some tacit agreement between publishing companies and such firms, when they request native speaking editing even for a relatively good text in English.

But some scientists write in a very poor English and it is almost impossible to understand. In math it is more acceptable (because half of information is in formulae), but in sociological texts is not.

Thank you, Professor @ Gennady Fedulov for raising so important issue! I totally agree with Professor @ Yuri Yegorov. Many times I have been in some similar situation.

Dear Dr. Joanna Gocłowska-Bolek .

Thank you for sharing this important question.

I like the National language very good , but the English language is more cosmopolitan, so the scientific publication is more important and has a high level when it been in English language, while the publishing with National language is very limeted and not understandably by other people.

Best greetings..

Dear Dr. Fedulov,

My mother language is not English and upto 12 standard my medium was not English. So, I am not so strong in English.

But I am very strongly connected with editorial matters of one online journal, which is recognised by Thomson Reuters and nominated recently by SCOPUS.

It is a bio medical journal.

Due to practice, I can now write correct English and can perform necessary corrections in the articles coming from different countries.

But during publication of my own article in other journals, the reviewers sometimes add comment that "your English not good".

They actually want to mean that my selection of word is not like that of the people of English speaking countries.

But it can not be performed easily by the people of non English speaking countries.

In journal publication, as per my idea, the format is given much more importance than it actually deserve.

The quality of research must be given much more importance than the format or use of words, I agree with you.

Thanks.

Hi Joanna,

This link should have some food for thought for you:

http://www.readingmatrix.com/articles/sept_2010/bilal_genc.pdf

Have a great day!

--Adrian

Dear All,

Reading your answers, I come to the conclusion that the problem lies not only and not so much in the English language as in the policy of compulsion to write in literary English, for example like English-speaking native English speakers in Oxford or Cambridge write. Such a policy creates a good illusion that the maximum contribution to science is made by the United States and England, since their English is by definition perfect, but scientists in other countries are in a humiliating position and many can not demonstrate their scientific achievements because of problems with a qualitative representation of their scientific results in English. If this is true, then scientists from non-English-speaking countries must somehow create their own rules for presenting articles where the literary achievements of the English language are not a priority. I think it's possible to do this, because the US and England like to educate everyone else, which they do constantly everywhere and everywhere. I want to remind one saying: "They act with us exactly as we allow it to do". If we stop submitting to dictate and will introduce our own rules, then the situation will change dramatically, but for now we are just taught to follow the rules, which were not invented and approved by us. My short advice would be: to present the article in two versions: in English and in the native language in public and online access. Next let the scientists themselves assess the scientific merits of these articles by simple voting, the results of which will have significance for the purpose of publication in the journal. If the editorial board does not want to publish an article with a high rating of recommendations, then this journal should be simply boycotted. Then it will be in accordance with the rules of democracy and not the dictatorship of the editor-in-chief and reviewers from the magazine. Thus, in my understanding we can resolve this problem properly.

English clearly continues to be the preferred language of scientific communication. (click on the picture, please. )

Also there are still plenty of disciplines within which researchers continue to publish in their native language as well. (click on the picture, please. )

To have more citations, to have more views for your work, and to introduce yourself as a researcher for others, you should choose to publish your work in English language.

Taking english like an international language for publishing scientific article is a sort of an intelligent way to monopolize science for the interest of Anglophone developed countries.

@Dhiaa, you give interesting information in pictures. For me it is not surprising, that Dutch scientists used a lot of English long ago. A small country (about 15 mln.) with own language not too far from English (easy to learn). For larger countries (Germany, France, Russia, Spain) the fraction was close to 5:1 in 1990s. This means that they have a substantial fraction of articles in local languages. For China this fraction is even higher. Again 2 reasons; large domestic market and not easy to learn English. But Brazil is surprising me: the only country for which % of articles in local language is growing.

And this information is still biased, because only SCOPUS articles are taken into account. Perhaps, a higher fraction of English language journals belong to SCOPUS group comparing with native. A large increase of articles in English in Russia in the recent years can be also explained by motivation to have them in SCOPUS journals for promotion; and they are mostly in English, not in Russian.

As for the 2nd graph, for me it is also not surprising that 45% of articles in Russian are about physics. This science has been much more developed in Russia since Soviet time. Given that smart people are doing physics, not everybody has learned how to write well in English. Besides, the local market was large enough. It is also a problem for English-reading physicists that a lot of information is still kept unknown for them in Russian journals of not top category (not translated). For example, I had a publication about tsunami waves in Russian in 1990 and when I translated and put it in English language journal in 2007, it got already more than 10 citations.

Due to colonization and other aspects from history, English has somehow remained the universal language, whether one likes it or not. In some countries where there are multiple languages, both written and spoken, English has become the "link" language that has to some extent unified the country. Therefore, the dominance of English as a medium of communication of various topics is going to remain. This is not to take away the nuances and depth of meaning one can express using a non-English native language. The local language will continue to flourish in those areas as a medium of communication.

Hi everyone

Firstly: Science and economics are tow dependants poles. The language of science is language of economics.

Secondly: I think when we do some research generally our main goal is to find the solution of the problem from which people in the world wide suffer. Or, there are different languages in world wide it is then necessary to find an international language which used as a tool of communication between people from different languges. Actually English is an international language.

Thirdly: Monopolize of scientific language is very important, that allows science to develop quickly.

Best wishes

Dear Joanna, I thank you for asking the question, for this interesting opportunity to discuss.

Dear all, following the discussion, I can understand many arguments, also opposing views.

Using one universal language (English or Esperanto or another one) has pros and cons.

Using all local languages has also pros and cons.

Using one universal language can connect scientists and people around the world. But using one universal language divides the people of the world in all those, who are able to speak and understand this universal language and all those, who fail to do. Here I`ll take up the argument of Said: “when we do some research generally our main goal is to find the solution of the problem from which people in the world wide suffer”. Yes, that’s our main job as scientist!

An important example: Climate change – how we all can adapt on climate change? I´m working in the field of agricultural science. On the one hand a near-term, broad range of information concerning new scientific knowledge as well as new developments is mandatory to respond properly to changing demands caused climate change impacts. On the other hand literature related to climate change is being published at prolific rates, research provides us with an almost infinite amount of partly very specific scientific literature, even for the area agriculture and forests. All the new scientific information easily accessible for scientists through specific scientific search engines like Web of Science and other scientific data bases. Scientists have the access to a broad range of mainly English specialist literature. For the German public, that includes farmers, gardeners and consultants, however it is fairly difficult to gain understandable information that matches their demands from these sources. They don’t have the time to read into the usually English written work of specific work groups and keep up with their results, but want to know about climate change and agriculture respectively plant protection. As usual in science, there are contradicting hypothesis in scientific literature. These people want to know how to value them as laymen - without doing too much research themselves. These are all questions they want to have answered quickly and comprehensively – and preferably in their own language. For the German public, all the farmers, gardeners, consumers and consultants, the most preferred language is unsurprisingly German. Thus we created free online database offering recent research knowledge edited to answer the public’s questions regarding climate change and agriculture? All information from climate change research are offered in German. However this means a lot of work for us – daily. It would be easier, all information, all knowledge of the world would be written in German… or in one universal language, and the whole mankind would speak only one language by birth. We know it isn’t so. A solution of the problem might well be the proposal of Gennady: “My short advice would be: to present the article in two versions: in English and in the native language in public and online access.

Best regards, Petra

A worth million question it is. Publications in English gives a global acknowledgement for research work but it should be/translated in national/local languages so that it contribute in enrichment of local languages and should be shared among local people so that they should get benefit from it. Question arises that if majority of people in that state or region don't know English than how it will be useful for the people of that region.

Firstly, for use in science language should have the full terminology of a specific field of research. Secondly, the language should be understandable to most of researchers. In the last decade, only one language meets these requirements. And this is English. The reasons for this situation can be discussed for a long time, but it will not change the reality. As well as attempts by some national schools to create a scientific language for their own country. Earlier it was Latin, then French, German, and now English. According to the government's request it will not change. There must be a critical mass of scientists who speak the same language.

Dear Vadim S. Gorshkov,

No one argues that English is bad in the dissemination of scientific information for exchange between scientists around the world. The question is different and I want to stress this again: Most scientists can not write in English at the level to represent their publications in high-quality English and this is the whole problem. I want to remind this problem from my previous answer:

" ... very often we have to hear a phrase from the editorial staff of the magazine: "Your paper is rejected because the text is not written in the correct English. Please turn for help to a specialist as a native speaker of the English language in order to rewrite the text properly". In my understanding, such an answer is discrimination and humiliation of a person primarily because the scientific merits of the paper are not taken into account, but the syntax of the text is taken into account first. I want to ask: What is more important for you is - a qualitative and outstanding scientific result or a quality and impeccable English text ? ".

Now I want to ask you personally: How would you solve this difficult problem? What do you propose to do? As for the English language, for God's sake, let him always triumph for the benefit of science, only without any discrimination of non-English-speaking scientists.

Dear Gennady Fedulov.

Nevertheless, I have to write in English, as well as try to edit the texts of my co-authors. Sometimes we give prepared articles to the English editor for correction. However, there is no other way. Similarly, I have to read the clumsy texts of non-English authors, but I understand them, that are enough. Sometimes it's not English at all (I heard at school: "the scientist researches, but the policeman investigates..."; but now most of researchers investigate ...). Unfortunately, even in Russian, where the chemical, physical etc. terminologies exist for a long time, very few articles are interest to me. Especially since, I am not ready to learn Chinese, Japanese, Arabic, etc., although many authors with these native languages are very interesting. As Ockham wrote, do not multiply entities. Let we will not multiply languages either.

Language knowledge is always individual. There are people who know 15 languages, but I am not one of them. I know little bit Russian, English, have a tiny Italian and French...

Let us try to speak the same language. Let it not be the language of Shakespeare, but international scientific slang. At least we will understand each other.

Хотя мы с Вами могли бы поговорить на русском, но кто бы нас здесь понял?

Dear Vadim S. Gorshkov,

when I'm reading a story of our classic Anton Chekhov in an English translation, I cease to understand Chekhov in the original in Russian. This is no longer Chekhov's story, but a free interpretation of Chekhov's story. All the charms of Chekhov's are lost. Why am I talking about this? Because we Russians do not make any claims to the translators who translate Chekhov from Russian into English. You have wrote "Nevertheless, I have to write in English, as well as try to edit the texts of my co-authors. Sometimes we give prepared articles to the English editor for correction. However, there is no other way". In my understanding, there must always be another way - this is the way directly to the reader through the Internet resource, and not through a magazine that has the power to reject the article at its discretion because of the shortcomings of English. As I said before, it would be possible to present the article in two versions: in English and in the native language, both of which would complement each other very good. Why is this not so yet? Because otherwise the Anglo-Saxons would not boast of an abundance of their scientific works.

"Хотя мы с Вами могли бы поговорить на русском, но кто бы нас здесь понял?"

Прекрасно бы поняли, даже если бы это был бы не русский язык, а любой другой. У меня уже был опыт общения с гражданами из других стран. И ничего, прекрасно общались без проблем. Я в случае необходимости всегда смогу вести диалог на любом языке с помощью Google Translator.

We must admit that English language has become a common language in the world and Publishing in English language has many known benefits although, I Prefer to publish in the national language.

Я думаю, что публикация на самых распространенных языках в мире, как английский язык и русский язык, гарантирует, что поиск достигает как можно большего числа исследователей

Scientific Publication in English language is better than other language and easy to spread.

То Gennagy Fedulov.

Unfortunately, in Russian for the last 15 years there have not been any articles that interest for me (I mean my sphere of interests). This is not about me, but about national science. There are only two or three people in Russia, to whom I "look in the mouth," but they are published only in English (and even presentations for reports at conferences they have in English!). So in my native language I reading fiction only. This is not my choice, it is a necessity. Smart children appears as well, but already at student conferences they make reports in English. So the choice is simple - to write in Russian (and wait the publication for more than a year and, as result, not receive any reaction or responce), or to cooperate with foreign researchers using quasi-English. And the last - even this pidgin-English is better than the one that is made by machine translation. In any case, I criticize my students for it - it can be seen right away in their texts. But honestly, I think in Russian, write articles in Russian, and then translate it. But my young colleagues write the texts right in English! Maybe they also think English ... In any case, many terms in the discussions they anglicize . Is it globalization, or effective management?

Applied Scientific research is generally carried out to solve local issues.Therefore,scientific publications in National language will be relevant for end users.

To Prof. Anastas Ivanov Ivanov.

Вы опубликуйте это стихотворение на языке оригинала. Я думаю, что с переводами всё не так плохо и Ваше стихотворение можно будет перевести. Но художественный перевод - это искусство. Я помню Апдайк как-то сказал: "В России Фолкнер - великий писатель, потому что его переводила на русский Рита Райт-Ковалёва". Но мы не о художественном переводе, а о научных текстах. Я иногда читаю французские статьи, не зная французского языка. Но понимаю... Или мне кажется?

The long-term answer is "accessibility" to the scientific content of the article, its correctness in terms of contents, and how fast new science can be developed from the article assuming it can be determined to be correct.

Dennis

Dennis Mazur

thanks for recommending my answer@

• Gennady Fedulov
• Anastas Ivanov Ivanov

Дорогой Анастас,

я вообще не вижу здесь никакой проблемы. Если кто-то опубликует свою работу на своем родном языке, я при желании всегда смогу понять эту работу используя Google Translator. Если при этом автор статьи представит английскую версию статьи, этот текст позволит лучше понять неясности, полученные при компьютерном переводе. Таким образом, я считаю, что могли бы получить результат с высоким процентом понимания смысла работы. Можно конечно провести эксперименты, чтобы подтвердить этот результат. Чтобы плодотворно общаться с учеными, можно использовать эту схему. Что касается публикаций, здесь моя позиция другая. Я считаю, что наука должна трансформироваться в разработку как конечный продукт для пользователей. А продукт - он и в Африке продукт, и на Северном полюсе продукт, и мы как пользователи будем любить этот продукт за его свойства как товара, а не за лингвистику языка, на котором написана инструкция для его использования. Цель международной публикации - это получить признание, чтобы быть узнанным и это правильно. Однако если вы создадите хорошую разработку как товар, тогда его будут любить не за то, что он будет написан на хорошем английском. Люди всегда поймут и просто будут использовать.

Dear Dr, Joanna

I agree with Dr, Anastas Ivanov.

Best regards

Dear Prof. Ivanov.

What about the publication on Russian, it is necessary to contact with publishers directly. Some of them publish scientific books. Namely publishers, not universities or academic institutions. The publisher's interest is simple they need a profit. If they see that it is possible receive a profit on this publication, they will take this willingly. Under the standard contract, the author receives something money only after compensating the publisher's expenses. If we talk about publishing at own expenses - there are no problems at all...

Interest is known. Since ancient times, books have been translated in favor of the language that dominates the ground, but the biggest winner is the companies that run scientific affairs from universities and centers to publish scientific journals to companies selling products and promoting science industries.

Дорогой Вадим, я понялa. Мы должны были изучать русский язык в школе в бывшей ГДР. Мы должны были процитировать российские публикации в публикациях и диссертациях и написать российское резюме ... Английский язык для меня намного легче, чем немецкий, чем русский.

Dear Vadim, I understand what you mean. But I agree with Gennadi, Therefore, I support the proposal of Gennady: “My short advice would be: to present the article in two versions: in English and in the native language in public and online access.” It might well be a solution of the problem.

Dear Prof. Ivanov!

Language of Brussles is critical for EC. But in science literature since mid XX age English is principal. May be next generarions of scientists will use Mandarin, who knows?

That's a very, very good question, dear Anastas Ivanov Ivanov. Let us surprise. Live is change! Regards, Petra

To Petra Seidel.

It is very pleasant, if someone can read in Russian. Yes, Russian language has full scientific terminology (one necessary condition is satisfied). In the 50-70's, Russian was the main language for mathematics and physics (as well as German in the 30's and 40's for chemistry and physics). But this is a history yet. Nevertheless, I can not count on the fact that my Russian text will be read at least by someone (the condition of presence a large number of language carriers does not work now ... ). The reason for this is a small number of Russian-speaking scientists as well as the crisis of science in Russia. Therefore - English for science, national - for life and art. We have, anyway, such situation.

National language publications are good if the intention is limited to directly solving local issues. English publication is good to reach out to a wider group of people

Dear Vadim S. Gorshkov,

Your phrase "In the 50-70's, Russian was the main language for mathematics and physics (as well as German in the 30's and 40's for chemistry and physics). But this is a history yet" hints at the following explanation of the questions posed:

1. Why in the period "... the 50-70's, Russian was the main language for mathematics and physics"

2. Why in the period "... German in the 30's and 40's for chemistry and physics"

The answer would be the following: because during these periods the Soviet Union and Germany were at the peak of their power until their affairs worsened. That is, I just want to note that English has become international not because this language is most convenient for international communication, but because the United States forced the whole world to play by its rules of the game and they achieved it. As an international language, there could be any other language with a high probability. It depends on who in the world is the master, that's all. Currently, the owner is the United States.

Your phrase "The reason for this is a small number of Russian-speaking scientists as well as the crisis of science in Russia. Therefore - English for science, national - for life and art. We have, anyway, such situation" very pessimistic, I do not think so. We now see outstanding and even ingenious developments in the sphere of the military-industrial complex, which Putin announced on March 1, 2018. These military developments remind to the whole world of the great scientific and technical potential of Russia. In short, here I am a great optimist. Russia will be fine. Why? Putin answered this question very briefly: "Either Russia will be sovereign, or Russia will not be on the political map at all." I very much hope that as soon as economic affairs in Russia go up, Russia will again take its place in science as in the 50-70's.

Sometimes, national language publication serves well if the purpose is to hide some vital information from the rest of the world

To Gennady Fedulov.

As I'm optimist too. I think, that situation can be even worse. A little clarification. and in 30 and 70 the US was economically stronger than Russia and Germany. However, science in the US did not match their potential. For example, Japan, being much weaker than the United States in the 1960s, looked at them on an equal footing. It's not about the economy or military power. The problem is for the purposes of society.

Dear Vadim, dear Gennady, I think that it's a problem of both - the purposes of society and the economy power. If you have no money, you can’t implement noble goals. Using money without a goal is useless.

Dear Vadim S. Gorshkov,

please explain a little more in more detail your key phrase "It's not about the economy or military power. The problem is for the purposes of society". What is in your personal understanding "The problem for the purposes of society". I want to understand: We exchange scientific information for ourselves personally as a thing in ourselves or for the good of the country, so that this exchange would benefit to country. If a country can not temporarily pay scientists a decent salary, does this mean that it is necessary to leave the country for a better life? For example, during Stalin's time, scientists were very well rewarded and were honored https://www.e-reading.club/chapter.php/1003659/47/Mironin_Sigizmund_-_Stalinskiy_poryadok.html - The flourishing of science under Stalin:

"The post-war decade was characterized by an increase in the prestige of scientific and teaching work.The salary of the rector grew from 2,5 thousand to 8 thousand rubles, the professor of doctor of sciences from 2 thousand to 5 thousand rubles., Associate professor, candidate of science with 10 years experience with 1200 to 3200 rubles ... In these years, the salary ratio of the associate professor, candidate of science and skilled worker was approximately 4 to 1, and professors, doctors of sciences 7 to 1. This level of wages domestic of scientists and university teachers was not in the following years".

"Послевоенное десятилетие характеризовалось ростом престижа научно-преподавательской работы. Зарплата ректора выросла с 2,5 тыс. до 8 тыс. руб., профессора доктора наук с 2 тыс. до 5 тыс. руб., доцента, кандидата наук с 10 летним стажем с 1200 до 3200 руб… В эти годы соотношение зарплаты доцента, кандидата наук и квалифицированного рабочего составляло примерно 4 к 1, а профессора, доктора наук 7 к 1. Такого уровня оплаты труда отечественные ученые и вузовские преподаватели не имели в последующие годы".

To Gennady Fedulov.

You distort my words. I did not mean anything like that. I said that the current society has no goals. Now I will add - except the money. But it will pass - I am an optimist also. But not because of the empty words of politicians of all existing species. Just because everything passes.

Dear Vadim S. Gorshkov,

I did not distort anything, I just quoted your phrases and only. Then I wanted to understand the meaning of the phrase "The problem for the purposes of society" and tried to interpret this phrase in my understanding, because this phrase showed itself to me important. Here is your explanation - "I say that the current society has no goals. Just I will add - except the money. But it will pass - I am an optimist also. because everything passes". Here the main question arises: Why? That is, why "the current society has no goals except the money?". For example, the situation in Armenia showed that sometimes people are worth more than "empty words of politicians of all existing species". The people in Armenia took and removed these politicians. It is truth one can interpret this fact differently as a Color Revolution, but this is in any case a precedent for others. If you mean Russia, then the whole problem is the lack of sovereignty, however, as in most other countries of the world. The fact that in most countries works the phrase "the current society has no goals except the money" speaks only of one thing - without sovereignty the country is doomed to degradation. If people likes this kind of life, for God's sake, let it be so.

English publications are accessible worldwide and it should be preferred over local languages.

@ priyanka

Then local language will never prosper and science will not reach local people.

English is the best. For local people, make the technical sheets in local languages for the popularization of your results.

Abstract in English is a must. The full length paper may be published in language of authors' choice.

Si vous rédigez avec votre langue locale, vous allez risquer une visibilité internationale.

Vous avez utilisé votre langue locale, mais vous êtes veu ici vu, cher Nabil. Bien que le français ne soit pas ma langue maternelle. Lire d'autres langues est plus facile que parler.

You can get more readers through English publications.