Here's why the statement is problematic:
* Language is a tool: All languages are tools for communication, expression, and thought. Each has its own strengths and weaknesses.
* Culture and History: A language reflects the culture and history of its speakers. English has a vast vocabulary due to its history of borrowing words from other languages, but that doesn't make it inherently more intellectual than others.
* Subjectivity: "Intellectual" is a subjective term. What one person considers intellectual another might not.
* Focus on Ideas: While English may be used in many academic and intellectual fields, it's also used for everyday conversation, literature, music, and countless other purposes.
Here are some factors that have contributed to English's widespread use in academia and global communication:
* Colonial history: English spread globally due to colonization, making it a dominant language in many areas.
* Scientific and technological advancement: English has become the language of science, technology, and international trade.
* Media and entertainment: English is dominant in global media, making it a lingua franca for many.
Instead of labeling languages as "intellectual," it's more accurate to consider:
* The specific domains where a language is used: English excels in scientific and technical fields, but other languages have their own strengths.
* The richness and complexity of a language: Languages like German or Japanese have highly complex grammatical structures and nuanced vocabulary, making them equally "intellectual" in their own ways.
Ultimately, every language is a valuable tool for communication and intellectual pursuit. Focusing on the strengths and richness of each language is more productive than ranking them by their supposed "intellectuality."