Archive for February, 2010

« Older Entries

Dangers of a Global Language

February 25th, 2010 by admin | No Comments | Filed in Languages


            Negative aspects of English as a Global Language

Even though there are many positive aspects of having a global language, there are     negative aspects as well. How would it be possible to carry through a global language? Are there any dangers with having a global language?

       A global language might cultivate an elite class with native speakers, who take advantage of the possibility to think and work quickly in their mother-tongue. If this was the case they might manipulate it to their advantage at the expense of those who has another language as their mother-tongue and in this way create a linguistic gap between people.

       English has a history, sometimes cruel and violent with colonialism and war, and introducing English as the global language might be seen as a threat of future dominance. Perhaps a global language will make people unwilling or unable to learn other languages and make other languages unnecessary.

One of the “risks” having only one language is that the chosen language may become very technical and “impoverished” for non-native speakers, e.g. the Eskimos, who have several words for snow, because they need it. They would probably not be able to express themselves properly if they only had one word for snow. And Swedish people would not be able to use the word “lagom”, a word which says a lot about the Swedish society and people.

Many of the people who answered my question about “English as a Global Language”, expressed a worry that if we only had one language, they would feel “poor” when it comes to expressing feelings and emotions in a language that is not their mother-tongue, that they would not know enough words to be able to really express how and what they feel.

 



Standards – which standard should be used? Strict or loose standards?



English is the mother-tongue of millions of people in different parts of the world.

If English were to become a global language, which standard of the language would be the global standard? Perhaps the standards would become looser.

      Standard English is the English that is usually used in print. It is also the English          

             which is normally taught in school and to non-native speakers learning English.

 This is also the standard that is spoken among educated people and used for news broadcasts.

Historically, the British Standard developed from the south-east part of England     (the area around London). These dialects were spoken in court, used in law and by the government.

       Standard English has a widely accepted grammar, and an accent that comes with this standard, the British English accent, also known as the “Oxford English”, is the accent that is taught is schools.  Furthermore this English has a major cultural influence, especially on the languages in the former Commonwealth countries, e.g. South Africa, Australia, and India as well as the European Union.

        We often hear about “American-English”, “South African-English” or other                 

 “Englishes”, but no such terms really exist. The different types of English are based on the British English but have developed grammatical and vocabulary differences because of influence and “loanwords” from other languages.

 



Minor Languages and cultures



What will happen to minor cultures and languages if we introduce a global language?

       An introduction of a global language might lead to discrimination of other languages. Losing a language equals losing identity. The language is much more than just a tool for communication. According to Trudgill there is an intimate relation between language and culture and a large homogenisation of culture might lead to a shift in language where native people adopt another language and eventually the old language may die out. There is a difference between “language death” and “language murder”. Language death is when a language disappears naturally; its speakers are leaving it voluntarily, but “language murder” means that the killer language actively discourages use of other languages. Minority languages may be removed from the media and educational systems.

       English is referred to as a “killer language”, which means that it is a dominant language learned subtractive, at the cost of the mother tongues, rather than additively.

       In the United States there have been a few “English Only” movements, the first one in 1803, when they banned the speaking of French among the population in Louisiana. After that, several attempts to remove Spanish and French have taken place. English is declared as the official language in several states in the US. The English-Only movements have been rejected by linguistics; they mean that a language does not create political unity, it takes more than that.

       The use of one single language in a community is no guarantee for social harmony or mutual understanding. This has been proven several times during the history, e.g. American Civil War, Spanish Civil War and former Yugoslavia.

 



Conclusion



This essay has shown that the creation of a global language has numerous advantages and disadvantages. Mutual intelligibility, great career opportunities and reduced administrative costs are some of the advantages a global language would give. The disadvantages are that English is closely linked to the British and the American cultures and history and is therefore not a “neutral” language. Perhaps a language with less historical and cultural connections would be a better option? We are in need of an international language for communication, politics, trade and security, but at the same time we are worried about language death, the advantages native speakers will have and all the disadvantages non-native speakers will face. English is growing, it is a strong language, and its future seems bright. My opinion is that if there will ever be an international language, English is the best option. It is a strong, well developed language with millions of speakers.

Even if a global language might be important, different languages are of importance for their culture and for the development of their native speakers. Languages make the world more interesting and more alive.

A lingua franca can be any language which is used for communication among people who have no native language in common. In many of the former European colonies in Africa, French or English are used as the language of communication in trade and business. In some parts of Africa, other African lingua francas, such as Swahili and Hausa, are used. These languages are indigenous in some countries and have become used because of political reasons.

             When a language is used as a lingua franca, it undergoes a certain amount of reduction and simplification. The simplification often refers to getting rid of irregularities and grammatical gender in the lingua franca. This happens because adults are, unlike children, generally not good language learners, and therefore need a simplified version of the language.

 


Tags: , ,

The Main Five Aspects Of Language Development

February 24th, 2010 by admin | No Comments | Filed in Languages


 

In this paper I will discuss the main aspects of language development for L2 classrooms. My paper will be divided into 5 sections; input, output, interaction, scaffolding and interlanguage. First, I will talk about input and output and their importance in language development process, furthermore, which is more important to the L2 students in their language development process. Second, I will discuss the interaction aspect relying mainly on Richard-Amato and Vygotskys’ studies. Third, I am going to explain the scaffolding technique and how it benefits the L2 learners in learning their second language. Finally, my talk will cover the interlanguage aspect in the second classroom.

 

First I would like to start my talk by discussing the input and the output and their importance in language development process. Behaviorists view input as an important factor in learning a second language, while others see it less important. Ellis (1994) argues that input is indeterminate, which means the information that it supplies is, by itself “insufficient to enable learners to arrive at the rules of the target language” (p. 243). However, Swain (1995) argues that the importance to learning of output could be that output forces the learner to process language more deeply “with more mental effort than does input” (p. 126), thus, with output the learner is in control. She also assumes that by focusing on output “we may be focusing on ways in which learners can play more active, responsible roles in their learning” (p.126). According to Swain (1995), output has to do with accuracy more than fluency, although practice may increase fluency but it does not necessarily improve accuracy. However, Swain sees focusing on output is better than focusing on input, because output may improve second language learner in much more ways than what input does. Thus, she argues that output has three functions which are:

 

1. Noticing

In this function Swain discusses that output increases noticing for the second language learner. Because when L2 learners speak, they notice their problems in the language, therefore, they try to do something about them. Furthermore, when learners encounter problems or difficulties in producing the L2 language, “they do engage in thought processes of a sort which may play a role in second language learning” (Swain, 1995: p. 130), therefore, noticing raises learner’s awareness of his or her gaps in the target language, it plays “a consciousness-raising role” (p. 130) and trigger cognitive processes that have drawn in second language learning.

2. Hypothesis-testing function

In Hypothesis-testing function, Swain (1995) argues that some errors appear in L2 students’ written and spoken production of the target language “reveal hypotheses held by them about how the target language works” (p. 131). Thus, in order the learner test a hypothesis, he or she needs to do something; otherwise, changes in the output would not be expected following feedback. Swain suggests in this function that second language learners may use their output to try out “new language forms and structures as they stretch their interlanguage to meet communicative needs; they may output just to see what works and what does not” (p. 132).

3. Conscious reflection

In this function, Swain illustrates that learners should communicate about language, in the circumstance of producing something they want to say in the L2 language. Swain argues that learners negotiate meaning, but the content of that negotiation is language form “and its relation to the meaning they are trying to express” (p. 133). As a result, learners produce language and after that they reflect upon it, by using the language to “negotiate about form” (p.133).

Second, I would like to discuss the interaction in language development which has a close relative to target language input. Richard-Amato (1988) discusses Piaget (1979) and Vygotskys’ (1978) view regarding interaction in the target language. Richard-Amato argues that Piaget’s view on how the L2 learners develop a language is that L2 learners must be exposed to input that adequate to their level of development. On the other hand, according to Richard-Amato, Vygotsky has different point of view. Vygotsky believes that the L2 learner has two levels of development “which have interacted with learning since the time of birth” (p. 88). Furthermore, Vygotsky illustrated that learning is a social process rather than an individual one which occurs in the interaction between individuals. Thus, Vygotsky asserted society as the determiner in universal stages of development. However, Vygotsky pointed out that each person has different opportunities of interaction. He explained that children always behave beyond their age. Thus, they do not do anything without having rules. This view leads him to create the Zone of Proximal Development theory, which I am not going to talk about it today. Furthermore, the L2 social interactions with speakers from the target language will strength the L2 language for learners. However, for the L2 learners according to Ellis (1994), the most important thing in managing discourse with native speakers is to ensure that the topic of the conversation is understood. Otherwise, the communication process will not be so helpful (for the L2 students). Moreover, the native speaker should make sure that the conversation (or the talking) is done by both, native and non-native speakers in an equal amount. Richard-Amato gives an interesting example from John-Steiner who mentioned that Finnish immigrant children entering Swedish schools and experienced severe difficulties in their language development process because “they were at first placed in very structured classrooms where there was little chance for meaning interaction” (p. 90), where the teacher did most the talking and the children where only receiving input without any interaction. However, Richard-Amato argues that interaction is an important to the learner’s language development process, because interaction increases the level of proficiency for learners in the target language.

Now I will move to the scaffolding technique in language development. This technique has been widely used in ESL classes. Hammond and Gibbons (2005) mention that Wood, Bruner and Ross (1976) were the first to introduce the term ‘scaffolding’ as a metaphor “to capture the nature of support and guidance in learning, where they used this term to describe how parents teach their young children the language. I have to mention here that Vygotsky did not use the term ‘scaffolding’, but “its theoretical basis lies very much within a Vygotskian framework” (p. 8). However, I think scaffolding is an important technique for L2 learners because its ability to make the student know “not only what to think and do, but how to think and do” (Hammond and Gibbons, 2005:p.5). Thus, Hammond and Gibbons (2005) described scaffolding as temporary help from a professional (the teacher) until the learner reaches the required level of knowledge, because what the teacher do is fostering the students to complete the task, first, by giving help and support, then leave them to complete it without his or her intervention. Furthermore, Mercer (1994) pointed out that when the teacher for example, gives a question and answer that question, then after that he or she gives a new question to the students to answer it by themselves without help, the teacher here attempts to bring the learners into a state of competence which enables them to accomplish the required task by their own, in order to “grasp a particular concept or achieve a particular level of understanding” (p.97). No doubt that this technique is good and popular in teaching second language, but it characterised by how the teacher “is able to judge the need and quality of assistance required by the learner” (Hammond and Gibbons, 2005:p. 5).

Finally, I will talk about interlanguage and error correction aspect of language development. Interlanguage refers to the separateness of a second language learner’s system, a system which is not the native language or the target language; but instead falls between the two. Thus, interlanguage is the type of language produced by L2 learners. In language learning, learner’s errors are caused by several different processes, according to Richards et al (1992: p.186), which they are:

– Borrowing patterns from the target language. – Extending patterns form the target language. – Expressing meanings using the words and grammar which already known.

Furthermore, Brown (1994) in his paper about interlanguage and error analysis mentioned some theories regard error correction pattern, which I think they are really helpful for ESL teacher in L2 learners teaching process. One of them, (which I found it as the most important) is the Vigil and Oller’s model which depends on using green, red, and yellow lights as signals for the L2 learner (or the sender); where the green light allows the sender to “continue attempting to get a message across”(Brown, 1994:p. 119); a red light means that the sender most abort such attempts; and yellow light means the learner falls somewhere in between a complete green light and a red light. Thus, this theory concludes that “cognitive feedback must be optimal in order to be affective” (Brown, 1994:p. 220). Moreover, Brown (1994) illustrated an article by Hendrickson (1980), where the writer in his article advised teachers to try to distinguish between global and local errors. The local errors do not need correction “since the message is clear and correction might interrupt the learner in the flow of productive communication” (Brown, 1994:p. 221). On the other hand, the global errors need to be corrected somehow because the message might be corrupted, thus, the learner does not produce a productive output.

In today’s class, I have discussed the main 5 aspects in language development, input, output, interaction, scaffolding, and interlanguage. It is sensible to point out here that the teacher should first know his or her students in order to be able to evaluate them and give them the assessment that goes with their needs as L2 students, whether by a short quiz or by doing a brief interview if the number of your class is not big. By doing so, you facilitate the teaching and learning process in your classroom.


Tags: , ,

Mother “Language And Land” Are Precious

February 23rd, 2010 by admin | No Comments | Filed in Linguistics


Once I asked a wise man what makes us distinguished from other nations, he said “Language and Land” if these two things were taken away, annihilation of that nation is assured. Today, approximately 6000 languages are spoken around the world and Balochi is one of them.  UNESCO proclaimed 21st February as International Mother Language Day in its General Conference in November 1999. The first Mother Language Day ceremony was held at the Headquarters of UNESCO, and its Director-General Koïchiro Matsuura, in his opening speech said, “languages are not only an essential part of humanity’s cultural heritage, but the irreducible expression of human creativity and of its great diversity.” he added “Favouring the promotion of linguistic diversity and the development of multilingual education from an early age helps preserve cultural diversity and the conditions for international understanding, tolerance and mutual respect.” Vigdis Finnbogadottir, UNESCO Goodwill Ambassador for Languages and former President of Iceland, took part in the first celebration of International Mother Language Day. She highlighted the value of languages both as means of communication and as expressions of culture and identity. Ms Finnbogadottir qualified languages as “humanity’s most precious and fragile treasures.” 

The inspiration to commemorate International Mother Language Day comes from the struggle of the Bengal nation to get their Mother tongue recognized as their national language. Language movement was strong in East Pakistan- now Bangladesh- since the birth of Pakistan in 1947. Pakistan’s education minister Fazlur Rahman called a Pakistan Educational Conference in Karachi in November 1947 and the representative of East Pakistan at the conference, opposed Urdu as the only national language. Pakistani leadership never understood the aspersion of the people for their Mother Language and continued to pursue its policy to force Urdu upon all as the only national language of Pakistan. On January 26, 1952, The Basic Principles Committee of the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan announced its recommendation that Urdu should be the only state language. In a public meeting at Paltan Maidan, Dhaka, Prime Minister Nazimuddin declared Urdu alone to be the state language of Pakistan. Both the developments sparked off the second language agitation in East Bengal. 

The situation got worse on 21st February 1952 when police fired upon the students of Dhaka University who wanted to protest against the decision in front of the Provincial Assembly, which was in its budget session. Students defying a ban took out a procession from Dhaka University and marched towards the Provincial Assembly. The police opened fire on the students in front of the Medical College hostel; five students Mohammad Salauddin, Abdul Jabbar, Abul Barkat, Rafiquddin Ahmed and Abdus Salam were martyred. The next day the area around the Dhaka University, Medical College and Engineering College were crowded with thousands of men and women who came to offer prayers for the victims of the police firing. After the prayer, they took out a procession, which was again fired upon, killing four people. On 23rd February despite the resolution passed unanimously by the Provincial Assembly, recommending to the Constituent Assembly that Bengali should be one of the state languages of Pakistan, a complete general strike was observed that paralyzed Dhaka. On the same day the students from Medical collage raised a Shaheed Minar (Martyr’s Memorial) overnight on the spot where Barkat lay down his life, to commemorate the ultimate sacrifices of the students and general population for their mother language. Shaheed Minar later became the rallying symbol for the Bengalis. Mr. Rafiqul Islam commenting on the events of 1952 in his book “A Tale of Millions” said, “The language movement added a new dimension to politics in Pakistan. It left deep impression on the minds of the younger generation of Bengalis and imbued them with the spirit of Bengali nationalism. The passion of Bengali nationalism which was aroused by the language movement shall kindle in the hearts of the Bengalis forever … Perhaps very few people realised then that with the bloodshed in 1952 the new-born state of Pakistan had in fact started to bleed to death.” Nearly after 20 years from the day, these brave sons of Bengali nation scarified their life for their mother language their motherland broke free from the tyranny of Pakistan. Today they are a proud nation having their mother language as their national language. 

The base for the struggle of Baloch national movement is different than the Bengali liberation movement was, instead of mother language, its inspiration comes from motherland. Even though both are essential part of a nation’s identity, but there are two reasons why motherland became the rallying symbol for Baloch nationalism. 

Unlike Bengalis, Baloch did not vote to become a part of Pakistan, and were forcefully annexed by a military occupation in March 1948. Fight against occupation, and to liberate the motherland became the cry of the Baloch national movement.   Balochi language is not developed as Bangla that is why Balochi could not become the commercial or the academic language of Balochistan. The agony of suppression of the Balochi language by the regime was felt in a small quarter of the educated Baloch and could not become a mass movement.

For invaders to occupy a land and impose their domination on it peoples is easy, but to maintain that domination permanently, the occupying force has to unleash an organized repression of the cultural life of the people concerned, in other words cultural genocide is the only way for a occupier to maintain domination on native people. Language is the base of all cultures and that is the reason why it is always the first casualty of cultural genocide. To set out a long term strategy, the occupier engages in uprooting the national culture and language from the occupied people to deny the future generations any chance of knowing their heritage. Thus, permanently integrating the people into the dominant colonial hegemon.

After occupying Balochistan, the Pakistani regimes pursued the same phenomena of the colonist.  In its 61 year of rule over Balochistan, Pakistani rulers dashed all attempts by Baloch intellectuals to develop Balochi into the academic language of Baloch nation. The Chief Minister of Balochistan, Shaheed Nawab Akbar Khan Bugti’s Balochistan National Alliance government (04.02.1989 to 06.08.1990) introduced Balochi language in schools by starting from grade one but soon as Bugti Government was dissolved by Islamabad, the Balochi education project started by him, was discontinued.

The situation in the western (Iranian) Balochistan is grave and can be considered as ethnic cleansing and cultural genocide. Clergy regime of Iran is not only over populating the Baloch cities in Balochistan with settlers but after Bander Abbas they are now trying to change the demography of the port city of Chahbahar as well. Persian is being imposed on all the other nationalities living in Iran. Promotion of Balochi culture and language is considered a crime by the rulers of Iran. Martyrdom of Yaghub Mehrnehad is a proof of and Iran’s barbaric repression of Balochi culture and language. Culture is a powerful weapon of resistance against occupation and Shaheed Yaghub Meharnehad knew that well, so did the enemies of Baloch nation. When he started to organize Balochi folk music shows and language classes to promote Balochi culture, the Iranian occupying forces could not tolerate it and they arrested him, tortured him and then sentenced him to death.  

Baloch nation has endured occupation and breakup of Baloch land by the British, the barbaric genocide at the hands of Iran, five brutal military operations by the Pakistani army. In today’s Balochistan; human rights violation is a common every day practice, where, killing of thousands of civilians, abduction and torture of more than 6000 Baloch youth, sexual abuse of Baloch women including Zareena Marri , and forced internal displacement of 250,000 tribemen from their ancestral tribal lands through brutal military operations, falls on deaf ears internationally. Despite the brutal atrocities, Baloch people never gave up and the reason for this endurance is the strong sense of belonging to the land and its cultural heritage. Pakistani and Iranian state repression of Baloch culture and language, and systematic marginalization from their historic lands have forced the Baloch nation to realize that the only hope in future lies in the resistance to their collective annihilation; otherwise, they will only be remembered in history books as an indigenous people of once a free country called Balochistan.    

The author can be contacted on juma_baloch@yahoo.com

     


Tags: , ,

Can Learning Languages Help You Better Understand Science and Technology?

February 13th, 2010 by admin | No Comments | Filed in Languages


by Philip Yaffe

“I was 24 years old when I first began thinking and speaking in a foreign language. It was like being released from prison. I saw my cell door swinging open and my mind flying free. That was over 40 years ago, but the picture is as fresh now as if it had just happened.”

I am a linguistic iconoclast. Throughout my life (I am now in my seventh decade), I have heard the mantra that learning a foreign language gives you invaluable insights into the cultures of the people who speak it. I don’t believe it.

In addition to my native English (I grew up in Southern California), I have become fluent in two other languages and have a good working knowledge of three more. I doubt that all this effort has given me any insights into the cultures of the people who speak these languages. At least no insights that I couldn’t have acquired more easily in 30 – 60 minutes by reading a well-written essay or in a few hours by attending well-crafted social-cultural lectures.

By contrast, I have acquired a deeper understanding of science.

What does science have to do with language? Actually, very little. But it has a lot to do with flexible thinking. And this is where science and language learning converge.

Contrary to the common belief, science is not about certainty but rather uncertainty. Good scientists are always looking for what has been overlooked, i.e. they are always searching for surprises and welcome them when they happen. They know that moment we believe a phenomenon is “natural” and must be that way, or that it is “unnatural” and cannot be that way, we are either heading for trouble or missing out on something important.

For example, Albert Einstein investigated the “unnatural” belief that a beam of light in space must always have the same velocity; other scientists had spent decades trying to disprove this. He wanted to see where this “unnatural” might lead. In fact, it lead to e = mc², the formula for atomic energy, and transformed the world.

It is not necessary to be a genius like Einstein (who spoke German, French, Italian and English), or even a scientist at all, in order to profit from the mind-stretching benefits of learning foreign languages. In our daily lives we all make assumptions about how the world works; often we are not even aware that we are making them. And that’s the danger. If we are insensitive to our assumptions, we are almost certain to end up believing things that aren’t true and refusing to believe things that are true.

Learning languages can help correct this parlous state of affairs. How? Quite simply, because nowhere else are our assumptions more rapidly and forcefully challenged by other assumptions about what is or isn’t natural that are equally valid.

Here are some simple examples.

1; Trailing Adjectives

It is “natural” to put adjectives before a noun, e.g. “an unidentified flying object”. Well not really. Many languages put adjectives after the noun, e.g. “un objet volant non-identifie”. You could argue the “naturalness” of these conflicting practices both ways. In English, we prefer to describe something before identifying what it is, as if to build up the suspense. In French, they prefer to identify what it is first and describe it afterwards. Who is right?

2. Optional Pronouns

English speakers take it for granted that constructing a sentence requires a subject and a verb. The subject can be either a proper noun (John talks) or a pronoun (He talks). If you have any acquaintance with Spanish, you know that in this language the pronoun is usually not necessary. You would still say “Juan habla” (John talks); however, in most cases you would simply say “Habla” for “He talks”. In fact, if you use a pronoun where it isn’t required (“El habla”), you would be committing a serious error.

3. No Distinction between Male and Female

English speakers learning French are often puzzled by the language’s apparent inability to distinguish between male and female. For example, “This is his book” and “This is her book” in French are both “C’est son livre”. The possessive adjective “son” means both “his” and “her”. If it is absolutely necessary to distinguish between “his” book and “her” book, there is a way of doing so. However, it is employed only when absolutely necessary.

But isn’t it always absolutely necessary? It seems so unnatural not to specify whether the book’s owner is male or female. Isn’t this fundamental information?

It may seem so, but it isn’t. By the same logic, it should be fundamental information to distinguish between male and female when saying “This is their book”, but we don’t. “This is your book” can be either male, female, or both, but we never specify. Even “This is my book” can be either male or female, but again we don’t specify.

Having grown up speaking only English, you probably have never noticed this inconsistency in the language. Neither had I. I simply knew that is was “natural” to distinguish between his and her book, until a Frenchman asked me why. I couldn’t tell him.

4. Inclusive and Explicit Forms of “You”

In English, we have only one way of saying “you”, which covers all situations. Many languages have several ways of saying it, notably the “formal you” and the “familiar you”. English used to have a familiar “you” (thou), but it has essentially disappeared. But in French and Spanish, for example, it is still widely used, making speakers of these languages feel that English is somehow “incomplete”.

Spanish speakers are particularly poorly served. In their language, not only do they have a formal and familiar “you”, they have them both in the singular and plural. In other words, in Spanish there are four ways of saying “you”: formal singular (one person), familiar singular (one person), formal plural (several persons), familiar plural (several persons). For Spanish speakers, having these four options is natural and necessary; not having them in English is unnatural and constricting.

5. Exclusive and Explicit Verb Forms

English has very few verb forms. For example, in the present tense we say “I cook”, “You cook”, “He cooks”, “She cooks”, “We cook”, “They cook”. In other words, there are only two forms of the verb, “cook” and “cooks”, depending on whom we are talking about. In the past tense English has only one verb form, e.g. “I cooked”, “You cooked”, “He cooked”, “She cooked”, “We cooked”, “They cooked”. Likewise in the future tense; everyone “will cook”.

In other languages this is quite unnatural, because they use distinct forms for each different person being talked about. For example, in French and Spanish “I” is associated with one verb form, “you” with a distinctly different verb form, “we” with yet another form, etc. And of course there are distinct verb forms for the “familiar you” and “formal you” (singular in French, and both singular and plural in Spanish).

But doesn’t all these differences make other languages significantly more complex than English? Yes, indeed. However, they also make them significantly more precise. For speakers of these languages, it is crucially important to make these distinctions, because this is how their minds have been trained to work. Just as it is crucially important for English speakers to distinguish between “his” and “hers”, because this is how our minds have been trained to work.

Examples of these different ways of doing things from one language to another are endless. Each time we encounter them our mind opens up a little bit more, because the unexpressed assumptions we all carry around with us are continually being challenged.

Growing up in California, I used to be strongly opposed to language learning because it seemed so difficult and pointless. I have since changed my mind. I now strongly advocate language learning. Not because knowing a foreign language teaches us very much about others, but because it teaches us so much about ourselves.

Accepting that language learning is more about mind expansion than culture implies that language teaching must be fundamentally reformed.

I live in Belgium, where speaking two or three languages is the norm rather than the exception. This is generally true throughout Europe. In these countries, teaching languages in the belief that people will actually use them makes sense. The mind-expanding aspects of the effort come along as a welcomed bonus.

However for English speakers in general, and Americans in particular, it is almost impossible to learn to speak foreign languages because it is so difficult to practice them outside of the classroom. Here, the mind-expanding aspects of language learning should be the primary objective, and courses designed and taught in consequence.

If this were done, I believe that the American fear – and dare I say loathing – of other languages could be reversed. The schools would lay down the foundations of a language without trying to force students into the hopeless and demoralizing task of trying to speak it.

With this foundation firmly in place, when a person traveled to an area where that language is spoken, he would be able to rapidly turn his passive knowledge into active use. Even better, even if he traveled to an area with a totally different language, he would understand how languages work and therefore be ready to learn the new language rapidly and without fear.

Finally, the general aversion – and again dare I say loathing – many monolingual English speakers have of science and technology might also moderate. A mind made flexible by language learning would find it much easier to grasp and appreciate scientific principles than one still imprisoned in single-language rigidity.

In an age dominated by science and technology, surely this would be a benefit of ineffable importance.

Philip Yaffe is a former reporter/feature writer with The Wall Street Journal and a marketing communication consultant. He currently teaches a course in good writing and good speaking in Brussels, Belgium. His recently published book In the “I” of the Storm: the Simple Secrets of Writing & Speaking (Almost) like a Professional is available from Story Publishers in Ghent, Belgium (storypublishers.be) and Amazon (amazon.com).

For further information, contact:

Philip Yaffe

Brussels, Belgium

Tel: +32 (0)2 660 0405

Email: phil.yaffe@yahoo.com


Tags: , ,

« Older Entries