UKC

I want to discuss the following response I got from another thread on education:

« 

Economically speaking it’s irrelevant for us. We have a huge comparative advantage in languages and in general we should (and do) use the time that frees up to learn other things. Learning languages for the British is generally for fun, not profit. If we want an education system with more fun in it then we have to pay for it, which we are unwilling to do. 

This is absolutely true, there are tons of bilingual families in the U.K. but it’s very much a private thing. I live in a bilingual household and in some areas of the country it’s clear that speaking not-English in public isn’t particularly welcome. 

I’m curious as to what you think we should actually do with our huge numbers of minority language speakers. I can speak basic Urdu/Hindi and it’s hard… there’s a reason the East India Company didn’t accept candidates after they were 16! You have to be fairly keen to be able to do more than ask for a couple of samosas. 
 

What we can really really learn from South Asians is a total go for it attitude with language. Every part of the subcontinent is so overwhelmingly polyglot that everyone just tries to use what they can to get by, people chop and change languages mid-sentence, there is much less fear of making a mistake, it’s just a more linguistically fluid place. Until language and politics overlaps, of course, and then the rioting and killing starts, but we can gloss over that for the purposes of this discussion… »

go to next reply

In reply to French Erick:

My initial reaction to this was utter incomprehension then anger then disbelief then despair then a sort of acceptance.

There is, in my opinion, a huge baggage of colonialism, cultural inertia and not an insignificant bit of obtuseness to this. Though the person is indeed better than most as they speak a fair bit of another language

In reply to French Erick:

How come there is no economic value into another language being awarded to being able to:

1) being a tradesman who can speak to elderly Asian customers and using appropriate polite forms and being seen as this incredibly “well mannered” gentleman or being able to converse or understand fellow tradesmen chatting in their language (just to make it simple and using stereotypes Polish, Or any other Eastern European language).

2) being a doctor/dentist/nurse/carer and be able to reassure and very young child who never speaks English at home (even though they may be fluent) or an elderly person at a time when being addressed in their own mother tongue could make a difference

3) being a salesperson or a shop assistant and an area well known for having a certain ethnic community and being able to have some chit chat or politeness following the foreign language or its pattern

How can anyone not see how this can economically benefit you directly?

In reply to French Erick:

I am not even talking about the health (brain) benefits or the fact that you become instantly more interesting as it is often impossible to learn a language without assimilating a lot of the culture.

In reply to French Erick:

So the topic of discussion is the following: have we wasted time and money (resources) into equipping some of population?
The fact that we have failed isn’t up for debate: we have. However, shouldn’t we try to paliate to this monoglotal approach of the world? Or should we indeed abandon ship and not try at all, and truly leave it all to the hobbyists amongst the British population?

It seems to me that other European nations aren’t doing languages (not just English btw) for fun. Indeed many people aren’t having fun doing it. The authorities don’t give a flying f£&k about individuals’ fun as they have decided that it was societally and economically imperative to not be monoglotal.

In reply to French Erick:

It seems like the original poster of that comment simply could have said: “other people bother to learn English so I can’t be bothered to learn anything else”

😕

In reply to French Erick:

Linguistics are of imperative importance, as are Math, Coding, Art, the full shebang! Any learning. As you astutely point out, we've become a smug, insular little country and learning languages is a damned good way to start to turn this around, I agree.

Sadly though, I'm monolingual 😞

In reply to ianstevens:

But that’s the snag, that person had a good smattering of Urdu! They just couldn’t recognise its value!

In reply to broken spectre:

Amen to that!

In reply to French Erick:

I say this by way of explanation rather than justification.

Most Asian people live in areas with lots of other Asians. They tend to use Asian tradesmen and visit Asian GPs and dentists and shop, locally at least, in Asian run shops.

The balance of effort v reward to most tradesmen, shop owners etc of learning a language which they will hardly ever use simply doesn't make it worthwhile.

Then there is the issue of which language do you learn anyway. there's no point learning Urdu only to find the one chance you thought you might get to use it ther person speaks Hindi.

This is the problem with all language learning in the UK. If you learn to speak French then that's great in France and a bit of Belgium and Switzerland but not much use anywhere else most people are likely to go. Likewise for Spanish, German etc etc.

I don't say this as someone who doesn't value foreign languages, my wife was a languages teacher for 25 years and I speak French and Italian reasonably, enough to do everything I need to whilst travelling anyway. I'd probably speak French better but whenever I try, the moment I hesitate the person I'm speaking to usually resorts to English (if they haven't already) instead of just slowing down or trying again. I can see why so many people say what's the point.

In reply to French Erick:

I'm sad that I wasn't brought up speaking Spanish as well as English - it was my Mum's first language but the opinion in the late 50s/early 60s apparently was that kids would get confused with two languages (at least that's what she always said when I asked her). But I did hear Spanish quite a bit when grandparents, aunts & uncles etc visited & still understand a fair bit even if I struggle to speak it. I did do Spanish in high school for a year or so but found it frustrating. School continually complained of my Andalusian/Gibraltarian accent while when I did try to speak Spanish to my relatives they were amussed by my 'posh' Madrileno accent.

I also took French to O level but stopped as soon as I could, never thinking that 15 years later I would move to France to work & that eventually I would end up calling France home & speaking French more than English.

I think part of the problem is that languages are  linked to literature at school & university so are dropped by those, like me, who study sciences. If they were seen as a skill, such as maybe statistics or computing, more kids would continue.

In reply to French Erick:

I'm massively into languages and find fun in language study for it's own sake but I genuinely think that learning a language is so immensely difficult that if you don't force students to for at least a few years, most probably never will.

It's a tough one isn't it. I have the privilege of teaching French and Spanish at secondary. Kids know that learning a foreign language is hard. They know that there are other GCSEs. They question the need to learn a language especially when the signals are mixed (languages are only compulsory until Y9 but they can get an EBac if they study language; a qualification that is pretty useless).

Personally I see a lot of reasons for them to study language.

They get experience of other cultures and quirks of the countries where the language they study are spoken. We share food, traditions and festivals, places, music, people, history and films. All of this massively expands their horizons.

They learn literacy and language skills that aren't really taught elsewhere in the curriculum. Reading ages have fallen and many mead real coaching in how to read.

They gain memory skills in a world where all knowledge is at our fingertips and there is an ever greater reduction in reliance on memory. Commiting words, phrases and whole texts to memory improves their ability to retain information.

Problem solving skills are routinely required and become.imceeasingly important as they go up the years studying languages. Having to 'think their way out of situations.

Foreign trips are often run through the languages department. Many children we take have never left their County, let alone country. I've lost count of the number of students who have taken their first train / plane on a school trip. For families it can be cheaper for them to send a child on a trip than to take the whole family abroad.

Finally, many students who speak a language other than English at home cannot read, write, speak in formal situations, don't have any awareness of the grammar of that language. Many understand but don't speak it or lack confidence to. Many of them step up their study of these 'home languages' once they have studied French or Spanish at school as they gain the tools to do so. At our school we talk about home languages a lot and celebrate them. 

I have a German wife and we are bringing our kids up bilingually. From experience, this is tough and we have to put in a huge amount of effort to help them to succeed. Just because your parents speak a language doesn't mean your kids will. It doesn't just happen.

I'm not going to talk about how much value I get from learning languages (lots). I'm not going to talk about the qualities I notice in people who speak a second / third language (some of my favourite people). I'm not going to talk about how much use I get out of my languages every summer when we head to the Alps and are able to mix with pretty much anyone with our combination of languages (so much fun). 

When I lived in Indonesia for a year I taught myself Bahasa to a pretty decent level that is to high school language skills. All forgotten now but fun at the time. When I met my wife I taught myself German and I'm still learning. My school is massively diverse and I'm learning Arabic (basics) so that I can make links for the students I teach. My son is massively into Greeks and Romans so we are having fun looking at ancient Greek and Latin together. When you learn a language it switches you onto an entire realm of the world that is shut off from you if you don't. 

In reply to pec:

Urdu and Hindi are mutually inteligible (in the spoken form), so in this case it would be very useful indeed.

This thread has come at the perfect time for me. I'm right now in Granada meeting my girlfriend's parents for the first time (and get a few pitches in 😉). They don't speak English, so I've spent the last three months learning Spanish from scratch. I'm hardly fluent at this point but it's incredibly rewarding to be able to have a more than superficial conversation. Also, learning languages is just fun! It gives you a different way of looking at the world. It helps that I moved to Switzerland three years ago, so was forced to learn French. I guess the more languages you speak, the easier it is to learn another.

I had some French lessons at school but I remember hating them, I was very intimidated by the idea of oral exams and found conversations stressful, so I dropped the French lessons as soon as I was allowed (pre GCSE). I couldn't see any possible reason I would want to speak another language!

In reply to Suncream:

Ok, fair enough I didn't realise that but the general point remains that for English speakers the question of which languge to learn is an issue and how much use it will be given how widely English is spoken.

For most other people it's obvious, you learn English because it's the international language that open many doors. To most of us learning a second language is much less beneficial so we only do it if the need arises e.g. you move abroad, marry into a foreign family etc or because you just fancy doing it for pleasure. These are never going to apply to most people so persuading kids that learning French or Spanish at school will be good for them is always going to be tough, I know because my wife spent 25 years trying to do it!

I agree with you and everyone else about the benefits of learning another language, it's not me that needs persuading. But I can see why to most people it's of low priority, unless or until the need arises to learn a specific language, which may well not be the one you learnt at school anyway.

To most people it is a lot of effort for what in reality is little to no reward. I don't think it's simply a case of English people being 'bad' at languages or even lazy, it's just an inevitable consequence of speaking the international language as your first language.

I remember when I went to Iceland asking people politely if they spoke English for about a day before I stopped bothering because mostly they just laughed and said of course I speak English, I'm Icelandic. It's very impressive indeed, but you can be sure that if Icelandic were the international language and English was only spoken by the inhabitants of one small country hardly any Icelanders would speak English beacuse they wouldn't see the point.

In reply to French Erick:

As the poster whose words enraged you, let me say this. I have lived in a bilingual household for nearly twenty years. I speak some Urdu/Hindi and some Sinhala and I’ve worked across Asia and Africa, mostly with local staff whose experience and ability I’ve always deferred to. So.. if you think this is anything to do with the “baggage of colonialism” or “cultural inertia” in my case then you’re way off the mark! It’s also worth pointing out that colonialism and linguistic ability often went together, at least in some times and places. 
 

I’m not perhaps as angry as the above paragraph makes out - it’s the internet, whatever - but I’m not sure you can say my comments indicate I hold those attitudes.

In reply to ianstevens:

Except of course the actual post quoted above says the original poster has indeed bothered to learn another language. Perhaps the poster of this comment needs to work on reading in his native tongue a little? 

In reply to French Erick:

Hate to admit it, but I only speak English, I try to learn greetings and the please and thank yous etc but rarely get to use them, which is sad and amusing, as my job takes me all over the world, but never long in any one place. Rarely has the lack of a foreign language been a barrier, except the odd belligerent French man. 

English was one of my least liked subjects at school, fortunately my son doesn't follow in my shoes and does well in English and Spanish, but we've spent more time in Poland

In reply to French Erick:

Anyone who has put the effort in to learn a language with four different t’s, four different d’s and a totally foreign script surely must see some value in the activity, because otherwise they would just be a bit weird. I mean, no one tries a hard thing (speaking Urdu is quite hard, at least for me) without seeing a value in it, right? 

So why not give them the benefit of the doubt, and try to understand their view before writing silly things like this. 

In reply to French Erick:

I was sent to a Welsh language school from the age of 3 to 16 when I could leave, despite not coming from a Welsh language speaking family or community. The extent of my Welsh language skills now is pub / taxi Welsh, or understanding about 50% of the professional  Welsh some of my colleagues speak...

But, and much to my Mrs amusement when abroad, I'll always make the effort to have a go even if it's butchered with a valleys accent & just please, thank you, how much, hello & goodbye. The only place I've found my woeful attempts not appreciated is France, 'English, please'!! 

I've managed to get about to a decent degree and often on a shoe string budget. Also worked in a few multi-cultural urban environments in the UK where curiosity and a willingness to have a go is kinda essential. You could even that if working class and working in manufacturing, catering or hospitality in the UK over the last 30 years you'd certainly benefit from learning cuss words and slang in a few languages, and that's a good thing imo. 

There's a nastiness to UK exceptionalism and our attitude to languages is a blatant manifestation of that.

Obviously, untold economic benefits as a former colonial power and island nation to doing this shit properly but sadly that's not us, is it!?!

In reply to seankenny:

I'm surprised that no one has referenced academic studies about language acquisition, e.g. Chomsky and Pinker (more recent authorities are no doubt available.)

The key point is that we are hardwired to develop language skills up to the age of 8 or so; after that the ability tails off (except, of course, for the inevitable exceptions.) Up to that age becoming fluent in multiple languages is a no-cost option; if you grow up in a polyglot household, or learn multiple languages at infant school, you will be a polyglot, and it won't be at the expense of maths, social skills or anything else. Whether it carries over into an ability to learn additional languages after 8 is a moot point; of my two youngest, both of whom grew up bilingual English/Welsh, one added another 2 languages, the other is as ignorant outside his two languages as I am outside my one!

I suppose my main point is that we shouldn't beat ourselves up too much because learning languages is HARD; if you grow up in from an early age learning more than one you just do it, that's all, and lots of cultures do that automatically; even the French. If we really want to become generally more accomplished, then we really need to start teaching from the age of 2 or 3 on. Good luck with that.

In reply to French Erick:

I think that languages are incredibly valuable to unlock a lot of potential. As mentioned by others, it teaches structure and grammar, which I have found to have hugely improved my poor knowledge of English. Since learning a second and third language in my twenties and thirties I find it much easier to deconstruct English and find deeper meaning and a broader understanding of my native tongue. 

Unfortunately, none of this is of any importance to most British people. In most cases it doesn’t improve your job prospects and doesn’t increase future earning potential. I find it deeply depressing that in my professional life it appears that a lack of written or spoken English skills, let alone any other language, seem to be no barrier to promotion and success. In the UK those with the sharpest elbows and the loudest voice seem to advance further. Obviously there are exceptions to this, but in general this is my observation from the sectors I have worked in.

From a human point if view I think languages ( and the associated cultural and ideological learning that comes with them) should be top of our curriculum, but the UK education system doesn’t teach for the betterment of mankind. Instead it teaches kids how to pass exams, get into university then get a job. 

It’s time to throw in the towel and push the worldwide Esperanto!!

In reply to French Erick:

A big part of the way economists think is to always consider opportunity costs. If I buy more jam, I’ll have less money for marmalade, etc. No decision takes place in a vacuum, it’s always a choice between competing options, so the value of any decision can only be made in comparison to the next best thing you could be doing. It’s not that one would not gain benefits from the examples above (I can indeed convince elderly Asians I am well mannered, it’s very nice to do so), but - are these a benefit given the time one would have to put in to learning, given the other things one could be doing? If you’re an educated German or Dane or whatever, then that question is very very easy to answer: learning English is of paramount importance. This holds true nearly everywhere, right down to Rwanda, who changed from Francophone to Anglophone (ahhh, to be a dictatorship eh?). 
 

But in the English speaking world, we have a HUGE competitive advantage. We literally do not need to do that. The hegemon speaks our language! All the main forms of entertainment are predominantly in our language. So are the scientific papers, the airline industry, many of the largest private companies, etc etc. Learning languages for English speakers is mostly for fun, there are only a very small sliver of people who need decent language skills. For English speakers the economic costs of learning a foreign language are high, the benefits are mostly lower. 
 

It’s only compounded by the problem of choice. If the nurse at my doctors wants to talk to a patient in their home language, then in my area she’d have to choose between Arabic, Persian, Somali or Polish. Yet if she moves to another practice within the same London borough, she would be speaking Urdu, Punjabi, Tamil or Polish (again). I would rather my nurse studied something nursing-related in her spare time than conversational Tamil, because that simply seems a better use of her time. My partner was one of those kids who didn’t speak English at home, she’s never had the expectation that people outside speak to her in anything but English.

In case it’s not obvious, I think learning languages is really important. But it’s not economically important. Culturally, intellectually, emotionally, yes. Whether we want an education system with room for that sort of fun is a debate that takes in more than just language learning. 

In reply to seankenny:

Not meant to you personally but to the UK population at large hence not naming you in my initial post.

I have no idea how difficult Urdu is. 
What resonated with me in your post is that it summarised so many justifications given to me as a language teacher.

Interestingly, I never found learning another language satisfying, fun or easy as a youngster. I was literally made to by the system (kicking and screaming). 
The French government in a rare glimpse of wisdom has decided that learning 2 foreign languages would be enforced for as long as you were benefiting from its education.

For many, it is a seed seating there on sterile soil ( I was one of them) and then the day you get the motivation (age 17 chasing scandi skiing ladies) you have the basics to make that seed germinate and blossom.

Not giving that to youngsters because you speak the “international language” is BS.

The international language is no longer the Queen’s/king’s English. Indeed people of many nations often converse better with one another without natives speakers speaking fast with regional accents and no idea how to simplify their speech because they seized to study any other language age 14!

To reiterate, it was not you, the messenger, but the message that so incensed me.

In reply to French Erick:

I make a good portion of my money because I can speak to French tourists in their mother tongue. I am away with a group this week and they seem to be very happy with the service they are getting from me. 

So for me, it makes huge economic sense. And I am not sure that they would have paid to come here with an English speaking guide, so the money going to B&Bs, restaurants, the distillery today, calmac ferries etc is all because I speak French to them!

In reply to French Erick:

What impact has France's colonial history had on French language teaching? Do any French schools teach Arabic as many French people of North African heritage must speak it as their home language? Can kids do exams in Arabic at a level similar to GCSE (or other in languages spoken in France because of Colonialism, as is the case in the UK)? Is there any teaching of West African languages like Wolof? 

In reply to French Erick:

If you’re going to suggest that Brits learn an Asian language for politeness then it’s worth knowing that it’s not easy! 

That’s because they are good and sensible arguments. 
 

It wants an educated class that speaks English for very good reasons. This is entirely rational - for France. Britain is not France. 

Those quotation marks are pure pique, because English is the international language! There are many advantages to learning a language, simply for us they are not economic ones. 

No of course not, it’s American English. Which we all understand perfectly*; the success of British actors in the US shows it’s not impossible for us to speak it perfectly either. 

* Okay I needed subtitles for The Wire.

That’s just amongst people who don’t work in an international context. I can assure you I have different registers of English depending on who I’m taking to and I’m sure lots of native English speakers with similar work or social backgrounds do the same. It has nothing to do with foreign language skills. (It works the other way round too - one wouldn’t want to patronise one’s perfectly fluent Indian or Nigerian friends with some clunky basic English.)

If you’re going to throw around accusations of suffering a colonial hangover then perhaps be a bit more careful, as not all Brits are (or indeed were) imperialists.

In reply to French Erick:

Language teacher getting upset at lack of languages learnt in the UK, not really a surprise it's your job, and apparently your hobby

Many teachers want everyone to study their subject Maths, English etc etc and get frustrated at the lack of interest in their chosen subject

Personally I don't get frustrated at peoples lack of basic engineering knowledge, even if it is amusing at times. But I don't make my living teaching it.

The practical reality is the majority of the UK don't need a second language even on the occasional holiday abroad

In reply to seankenny:

Fair!

 I also needed subtitles for the Wire! It seems Baltimorian is harder than Glaswegian.

In reply to French Erick:

The problem isn't English speaking exceptionalism, colonial history etc.. but the education system. Kids have to narrow their options at 13 or 14, most didn't even start learning a second language until aged 11 anyway. Many other countries teach all subjects until aged 16, which in much of Europe will mean native language, English plus a third one, as well as all the science and art topics. It's failing kids cutting subjects aged 13 when if like ours they still have little idea what direction to go in. 

In reply to artif:

There are actual benefits to the brain in how it learns, be it young or old in learning multiple languages, which increases mental dexterity and improves learning in other subjects. There's no down side imho.

In reply to artif:

True,

Teachers want pupils to study their subjects not least because in the UK governance is so savage as to make cuts so deep as to eradicate a subject in a generation.

On a personal level, we’re fine as a bilingual and now fully binational family.

However I am mostly upset because professionally I think we are disadvantaging our kids. This lack of competence is showing,  and will show, and bite us. I cannot tell when but it will. It’s certain type of literacy and problem solving that one learns through being confronted to hard work. Relying on technology simply doesn’t teach you anything and makes you complacent.

English is the obvious number 1 MFL but from primary school there is more than a token effort to acquire basics in another. Often this will be another European one due to the expertise of teachers although there seem to be an increasing recognition of minority languages.

 I couldn’t care less if the compulsory language wasn’t French but I believe that the apprenticeship, even if painful and frustrating, of a language of any kind (BSL, Arabic, Russian and indeed Music, Art  and Maths-which I consider as languages as they convey meaning in a specific coded manner needing deciphering skills) as essential in education.

In reply to French Erick:

Funnily enough when I first watched The Wire on TV (19 years ago!) it had subtitles but they were Finnish. This wasn't any help but I never felt I needed them - all the characters were understandable. I've heard lots of people say they had a hard time understanding it but not sure why, I've never found any US accents particularly hard to follow, even the stronger ones like some Southern accents. 

In reply to French Erick:

The biggest reason why I would like to see foreign languages being taught in British schools to a level at which they are actually usable is to break down the them-and-us attitude which seems to apply to our direct neighbours on the continent.

The argument that "everyone speaks English, therefore we don't need to speak anything else" doesn't hold up in my eyes. If you speak French, German, Italian or what ever else, then you can go and work or study in one of those countries, enriching yourself culturally and getting to know its people in a way which you cannot as a tourist. Apart from anything else, you also get to see what the people of those countries really see in the EU and why they value it.

I realise that it is possible to go and work on the continent in some areas (science, engineering, academia) speaking only English, but even then you are at a disadvantage compared with those colleagues who take the trouble to learn the language of the country.

Frustratingly it's not even that hard if you just go and do it! I did an Erasmus year (remember them?) in France on the basis of Scottish Higher French, with a bunch of other British engineering students who I guess mostly had GCSE or AS level French, and, what do you know?, at the end of one year we could talk to French people in their own language! Buoyed by this successful experience I then tried the same thing in Germany a few years later, and it turned out that that worked too! The notion that Brits can't learn languages doesn't hold up - you have just got firstly to want it, and secondly to be given the opportunity by the educational system.

However, it shouldn't be necessary to do an exchange year to reach a useful level. Language teaching goals in Germany, where I live, are higher: the aim is to be able to converse usefully in the foreign language, not just to buy a baguette or ask the way to the station. More time is invested and more is expected of pupils. The other day, for example, I had a conversation in English with the friends of my fifteen year old son about the Bundesliga. I don't think that I could have had a discussion in French at that age about whether Hibs or St Mirren were going to go down.

After several recent trips to North Africa I have actually started to learn (very badly, and very slowly) French. At school it was something I never saw the point in, I didn't understand and couldn't wait to drop as soon as possible. 

I put that entirely down to the way it was taught to me. All I remember from high school French was constantly getting berated for using the wrong Le, La or Les. I was almost 'scared' to speak another language in case I got the wrong pronunciation or meaning. 

But for me now, that's not important, what is important is to be able to talk to other people about every day things. My French might not be perfect, and there English might not be perfect - but we both know enough of each others languages to converse and talk. 

I think knowing a little bit of any language, or at least a willingness to try goes a long way. I also really dislike myself for traveling to other countries and expecting them to make the effort for me, so its something I am trying to change. 

In reply to ExiledScot:

This is true - we selected the children's secondary schools partly based on the languages taught there. Anyway, education isn't wasted whether it is a language or history or religious education or whatever. All have cultural significance.

The difference is that, unless you are immersed in it, learning a language is hard. It's easier to be immersed when English is the language that you are learning, because you can just watch films / read the internet / listen to pop music / ask your parents.

I learnt Latin, German, French & Italian at different times of my life but only French and Italian have stuck, because these are the countries that I lived in for periods of time.

In reply to seankenny:

I was interested to read that you say Urdu is difficult. I don't speak Urdu but did speak Nepali for a while back in the 90's (mostly forgotten now through lack of use) and found it quite easy to pick up. Nepalese is quite similar to Hindi and a Tibetan friend who spoke Hindi could make himself understood in Nepalese. I just wondered what the difference was between Hindi and Urdu? I am talking about speaking the language rther than deciphering the script

In reply to French Erick:

It's not that difficult. I learned in the 80s using Ralph Russel's phonetic script and methodology of conversation, repetition and no pressure. It's an Indo-European tongue mutually intelligible by Hindi speakers ( as a previous poster pointed out). Also it's related to Punjabi, Gujerati, Bangladeshi and Nepali; (I met some Nepalis in Glen Nevis last month and we managed a bit of Hindustani together.) (Lack of practice means it was only a bit.)

When I was at school in the 60s we did verbs marathons with the aim of dinning French into us. It worked to some extent, but it wasn't fun... We English have really got to get over ourselves with regard to language learning (and, come to think of it, any learning). What with that and Brexit etc we already have the reputation of the Thick Man of Europe. 

In reply to alex_th:

I don't think you are appreciating that not everybody likes learning languages. Some people really enjoy, others, including me, hate language lessons. English being no exception.

For me it's strange that people argue against learning maths up to the age of 18, and the only way I can make sense of it is to apply my hatred for learning languages to maths, a subject I really enjoy.

People are different and want different things. 

So I believe learning a second language to a high level in schools should be optional.

In reply to Pete Pozman:

You’re clearly a better linguist than I am! Tho I can read and write (bit rusty now alas) and that is quite time consuming. I think there’s perhaps a big difference between being able to chat a little and having a proper conversation as the vocab is more alien than in French or Spanish etc. 

I still think that Erik’s idea that you could easily learn enough to charm old ladies or understand shop gossip is a fantasy that has little to do with the reality of living in a very polyglot modern British city. 

These exhortations to learn a language don’t seem to deal with the issue of opportunity cost, preferring instead to simply assert that it’s a problem without even considering the advantages of speaking the dominant language. I’m fairly familiar with current analysis of the UK’s economic problems and nowhere amongst them is a suggestion that our lack of language learning is an issue.

Some posters have suggested that the spillover effects of language learning in terms of success in other academic subjects makes the time spent doing them worthwhile. I find this unconvincing. Japan always scores very highly in the PISA survey despite being notably  monoglot, the claim that they would be even better if they learned more English strikes me as a bit of a stretch. I think learning philosophy would have far more useful spillover effects with fewer opportunity costs, but that’s probably just my bias talking. 

The idea that British people aren’t interested in learning strikes me as reactionary bluster. The proportion of young people attending university is pretty high, data from the OECD here:

https://data.oecd.org/eduatt/population-with-tertiary-education.htm

I’m not anti-language learning in the slightest, I just find many of the arguments for it aren’t very good. 

In reply to French Erick:

I remember speaking to a British diplomat who was having intensive language training in preparation for their next posting,  apparently the UK are very good at trying to ensure local language proficiency - more so than other countries.

In reply to montyjohn:

It was a long time ago, but I do remember observing some KS4 MFL lessons when they were still compulsory (pre 2004), IME you were certainly in the majority. In fact I vividly recall a discussion with the head of languages at the time. Basically we were giving her the option of languages remaining compulsory, in or school, but she didn't want them to be. The thought of only having to teach those who wanted to be in a language lesson seemed to  outweigh a new  member of her department being made redundant.

Previously I was fairly happy with the current situation of it being compulsory until 14, but having read this thread I'm questioning the need for it to be compulsory at secondary school. I don't think anyone is questioning that learning a second language is a good thing, if somebody wants to, but is it any more worthwhile than History, Geography, Music, Art., Philosophy  etc.

It is concerning that although since 2004 the number of EAL students in school has roughly trebled (to around 20%) the number of students studying languages post 16 has fallen significantly. some of that could be attributed to it not being compulsory at GCSE level, but that doesn't explain the decline (30%) since 2014

In reply to French Erick:

The one thing that doesn't seem to have been touched on is how beneficial learning a second language is to understanding one's own native language. I learnt more about English and language in general by studying French at A-level than I did in the twelve years of education prior to that.

In reply to Jim Hamilton:

I think this is one of the things the govt has cut back on, along with diplomatic headcounts and specialist skills in embassies.  For example, fewer people getting the excellent Arabic and Chinese courses that used to be the norm.  (I may be wrong, this is from general news reading over the years, so please don't ask for a link!  Happy to be corrected.).

In reply to French Erick:

For me:

I'd love to be able to speak other languages fluently.  It clearly gives access to all sorts of social, cultural and business opportunities not available if the default is always English.

But....I've never been able to effectively learn languages.  I have tried reasonably hard on several occasions - at school, and evening classes since.  I went on school exchanges and have travelled pretty extensively.  Somehow language just doesn't stick.  I also don't enjoy the process of learning a language, unlike say learning some new maths.  This means trying is both frustrating and not enjoyable, so I now focus on other things.

In terms of economic benefit, I don't think its affected me personally much.  I can't work in other languages which limits opportunities somewhat but this has only once been an issue.  Maybe if I had had fluent French, say my career and life would have taken another path, but I can't see it would have been "better" rather than just different.  Also, as others have said, somehow it would be necessary to guess in advance which language would be most useful - if I learned French but then got and offer of business relying on Spanish, that wouldn't be much good.

In reply to seankenny:

We will have to agree to disagree then. Thank you for your contribution in both threads. It definitely made me think a lot (it took me 2 weeks to start and write down the chain of thought you started).

In reply to MG:

There is when I disagree. For a start French and Spanish share about 70% of grammar and vocabulary. Then the strategies to acquire and deal with a language are in place.

To go back to minority languages, if I lived in Broadford, I would find out what the biggest community is/ or the client group I would target and learn that language. That choice would probably also be affected by personal interest. As an example, I live in the highlands and learned conversational Gaelic in 3 years. I like maps and I believe it might enhance my opportunities. If I had lived in Wales I would have chosen Welsh. If I lived in Inverness I might have chosen Polish!

In reply to French Erick:

My pleasure. Thinking on what you wrote, I get the feeling that your negative response is actually part of the “learning a language opens you up to other cultures” effect - which is not always pleasant. Seeing the world from an Anglophone perspective is probably harder and more uncomfortable than we realise. 

In reply to tehmarks:

What haven’t the Tories cut back except their own profit.

In reply to French Erick:

I speak German but have never found much of a use for it in work or life.  English is so widely spoken across the world, largely because of US influence.

I do encourage the idea as personal development, but it really isn't that useful.  You can do things just for their own sake!

In reply to Neil Williams:

Sums it up for me.

In reply to MG:

Whilst other languages fascinate me, and the inter-relatedness of them, I find actually learning and remembering them very difficult and certainly not the 'fun' that other posters have told us that they are.

I did try to learn a smattering of Moldovan/Romanian some years ago when planning a trip there, but barely had enough to get by and even then everyone was so keen to use their English on me they weren't interested in my painful attempts to ask for an ice cream in their language! The only time it came in vaguely handy was when an elderly gentleman came into my work with what I assume was his young grand-daughter who was translating for him. After talking with him through the girl for a while I determined they were speaking Romanian and so was able to give the price of the item directly to him on his own language. The look on the girl's face was priceless as she realised I spoke some of her language. The look of confusion on the gentleman's face as he failed to understand my broken Romanian, less so!

In reply to French Erick:

I’m not someone who finds languages easy. I’d like to be better and a few few times I’ve felt slightly embarrassed by my poor language skills, partly I think because I am conscious that it can be perceived as arrogance. Of course, I could dedicate more time (even just some time) to improving my language skills, so maybe there is a bit of arrogance.

My brother is fairly fluent in French, he has lived in the country a couple of times, the second time working a ski season, where his language skills got him a junior management position rather than cooking and cleaning. It also helped substantially with starting his professional career, he a a buyer, originally with a major supermarket. In his sector, most of the suppliers are French, and lots of them don’t speak English.

In reply to Neil Williams:

I think in business there is a motive to switch to the easiest common language, an indirect financial incentive, which doesn't usually apply to travel, tourism and socialising. German is arguably the biggest waste of uk school time ever (no offence), it is spoken in one country whose education system is well enough developed anyone born after 1950 speaks some level of English. French, Spanish or Portuguese would be more useful. 

In reply to French Erick:

My wife and I are learning Italian - 5 months in, one lesson a week.  Given up on Duo-lingo - utterly fed up with apples and endless repetition of the same useless phrases.

Alora, it's become apparent to us that our brains have a foreign language section, that is generating German (my wife's school-learnt language) and French (mine).  Annoying, probably good for my French, and not particularly helpful.

We always try and pick up some of the language wherever we go.  I'm like Croydon defeats me though, innit.

In reply to ExiledScot:

Er, it's spoken in three countries (plus a few odd little enclaves).  It's also close enough to Dutch to be able to read that fairly well but not speak it, though to be fair the Dutch all speak better English than anyone in the UK does.

Chinese is probably the one to go for now...

In reply to ExiledScot:

I'd have gone for British Values

In reply to ExiledScot:

I think that you are missing the point which a lot of people have made in this thread. Just because the citizens of some country or other can speak English, it doesn't mean that you shouldn't learn their language.

I work in Germany. All of my colleagues can speak English. They could, if need be, all switch when I walk into a meeting room. I don't want them to have to do so, however. It's the same when they go to the pub afterwards. If I didn't speak German, then either they would have to speak English on my account all evening, or just speak German anyway and I would be left out.

If you work abroad and don't speak the language, then your social circle is limited to a combination of other expats and those few locals who can actually bothered to conduct a relationship in English. In this case you are more like a sort of long-term tourist. There are a lot of them too, but I don't think that it's the best way either to get along in work or to get the most out of your time where ever you are.

In reply to owlart:

The 'fun' only comes after a lot of hard work which is just that. In my experience it comes once you reach the point at which you no longer have much need of the grammar book or the dictionary and can learn just from talking and reading.

In reply to alex_th:

That's a really interesting point, but quite different from my experience. I never mastered Finnish, despite living there a long time. I have a few regrets at not learning more, but not actually many. I suspect in part because levels of English competency are even higher in Finland than they are in Germany, making it an easy place to live without speaking Finnish (or Swedish - the second official language. Indeed most Finnish-speaking Finns, 95%-ish, speak better English than Swedish which they all have to learn at school and until recently at university). When most people, including all my friends, all my work colleagues, most of my neighbours and almost of all of my partner's family, spoke English, I could see it became waring on them at time to bother with my limited attempts to speak Finnish. It's actually a bit of an ask for people to take the time to help you learn. Many are only to happy to, to some extent - but my mates went to the pub with me to gossip about politics and our work and all that normal stuff which they do as easily in English as in the mother tongues, not give a beginner Finnish lesson to me! At my work, the office language was English as well as there were lots of other people from other countries there besides me. That obviously is a huge advantage.

The "long term tourist" thing I understand and know what you mean, but that's also a reflection of the privilege that I know I had as white European in Finland, and suspect would be similar to you in Germany. There are many other immigrants who don't have the language skills, but for whom that's a really marginalising thing, they aren't and were never treated in the way that a tourist, short or long term is.

In reply to alex_th:

Moving and working somewhere, living there, is very different to flying over for business meeting etc.. clearly if you intend to be part of a country's work force, reside, socialise and integrate there then an effort should be made to at least learn the basics which allow everyday life to tick along. 

In reply to French Erick:

I really struggled with foreign languages at school, but what was an utter revelation was traveling abroad as an adult and realising that language is about communication not perfection. Nobody minds if your grammar is wonky or you walk into a petrol station and say "hello, four please" rather than "hello, please can I pay for the diesel I just put into my van at pump number four please?".

If living abroad refusing to embrace the local language is a real failing, as others have said it really limits social and work connections. But even if you're only visiting, learning a tiny bit of vocabulary, numbers and basic greetings is basic courtesy.

I find it fascinating when in Wales that shop staff can swap from fluent English with myself to Welsh with locals (not in the stereotypical anti English way), and for those in multicultural areas I commend the ability to use Urdu, Polish or whatever other language according to the needs of their customer base alongside English. 

In reply to Jenny C:

No matter where we are, we live in a multi-cultural society. You can choose to deny that and hide away in a monoculture. If so, fill your boots.

Life is so much more fun if people have different backgrounds and languages. Why would you not want to make that part of your life?

For example, if you do two things at once you can say “I got two pigeons with one broad bean”, or you can annoy a Frenchman with a gallic raising of the arms when their driving is less than perfect.

A Polish bilingual lady friend was on the bus when two teenagers got on and were making rude comments about her dress in Polish unaware that they were being monitored. Before they got off one said what’s the time and my friend seized her opportunity and told them the time very politely. They learnt their lesson.

When I speak to French people they invariably say your French is very good (a lie) and I invariably reply you are very kind. You learn so much more about people by making a connection.

In reply to freeflyer:

I live in one of the more multicultural parts of London, one of the relatively small number of boroughs where white people (never mind white British people) are a minority. Obviously it's a total linguistic mish-mash and because of this, no one really bothers learning others' languages. There are just so many of them. People's non-English language tends to be for home life and community events, English is for outer life - it's the linguistic middle where everyone meets. For example, one of the temples my family likes is frequented by both Sri Lankans and Thais, both of whom often marry out, and the monks themselves comes from Asia, Europe and America, so naturally nearly everything is done in English.

I think that in a truly multicultural society having a common language is incredibly important and English fulfils that role, no one expects outsiders to speak anything else, not least because it's just too time-consuming and gets in the way. In cities which are really two adjacent monocultures then the linguistic situation is obviously very different, and probably more amenable to well-meaning attempts at crossing over.

In reply to French Erick:

Slightly of topic. 

I took French and German to O level at school 50 years ago. After finishing my O levels I went to Germany for 3 weeks to stay with my penfriend. I felt completely tongue tied when I arrived by after a few days I was able to hold a reasonable conversation, that has stayed with me although I need a couple of days in Germany to get my ear back in. I love being able to converse with Germans in their own language. 

My French isn’t as good, but I can get by having taken a few classes since leaving school and having French speaking friends. 

My main language interest now is learning Welsh(Duolingo), but I hope to be able to hold a conversation next time I’m in Eryri. 

In reply to seankenny:

I'd agree with that in general, but don't know Asia well enough to comment on whether English fulfils that role say in India for example.

In Switzerland, most people speak their mother dialect, eg Swiss German, and make an attempt at one other of the national languages eg French. Anyone in tourism or with commercial needs speaks English. Generally you need to have a go at the language of the area you are in. They get along pretty well, although things would be improved if everyone was taught Swiss German; typically the French speakers tend to resist that In the Romansch areas most other people gravitate to Italian or English.

Making connections through a language can break down cultural barriers and shows a willingness to accept and embrace the culture of the group who speak it. It seems that happens pretty naturally in your situation. The monolingual English person misses out on all of that.

In reply to freeflyer:

I worked on a project several years ago with the Swiss Federal Office for the Environment (name might not be quite correct). Seems that the office language for the section I worked with was English despite all of them being Swiss. English was a 2nd language for everybody so nobody had an advantage. Can't remember any Italian/Romansch speakers being involved.

In reply to Doug:

I worked at ETH for a few years in the 90s and found everything to be in English, until I wanted to have something made in the workshops. The technicians did not speak English very well so I found  it very helpful indeed that I could speak German well enough to sort out problems with them as they came up. Later, at the University on the other side of town I was asked to deliver exercise classes in German to medicine students on Friday afternoon. That was a tough gig but I managed it. 

In all, my experiences of working in Switzerland and then afterwards in France were much richer than they otherwise would have been had I not been able to speak the local language. It took a lot effort to do that, but I saw the benefit and didn't mind, just as in the past I haven't minded doing repetitive training in order to achieve some physical goal. I found it most useful to get as large a vocabulary as I could as soon as I could. That made it possible to read and follow along, and thus be able to see how the grammar I was learning in the mornings before work was being used. I also didn't mind having a go and making mistakes. None of this is difficult to do, but it does take time and effort. I had been in Switzerland for about four years before I could really 'hear' that I what I was saying was correct, endings and all.

Since then it has been useful to me to still be able to speak French since my mother has lived in France ever since I left it, and most recently I have needed it to be able to deal with the solicitors, pharmacists, doctors, health-care workers and so on that are now a major part of her elderly life.

In reply to mbh:

Had a similar experience as a Postdoc in a French ecology lab, the researchers could speak English & most of them had worked in the USA or Australia  but very few of the technicians or field assistants could manage much more than a few words of English. Likewise the office staff.

When my boss noticed I was struggling with numbers when speaking French he organised a day of field work - so I ended up measuring the circumference of several hundred trees & having to give the sizes to one of the technicians who wrote them down. A brutal but effectivement way of learning.

In reply to Doug:

There seem a number of posters making the point that, in Europe,  English is the language of academia, business and professions whilst the national language /local dialect is the language of the artisan and community. I can see why this would affect parental and student attitudes towards the importance of learning a second language in school 

In reply to seankenny:

Learning languages like learning anything is hard, but I think making it purely an economic argument about opportunity cost is something that could be applied to any subject that a learner doesn't like and then never uses.  I had no real interest in most of the sciences and find them difficult.  Was it a waste of time doing those subjects? Probably not, as it contributed overall to my education and that breadth is important.  Also I think increasingly there is divide opening up where state schools not offering languages and that is depriving kids of that breadth of learning. None of us know what subjects a kid gets interested in, so  lets give them opportunity to find out

I did French and German at GCSE and went on to do A level German and then a joint honours degree with German.  I went to germany for a year and ended up staying for two as I loved it. I came back fluent,  with German starting to become my dominant language and thick Bavarian accent to boot. That was 30 years ago and I still dream occasionally in German. Who could have predicted that for a geeky 9 year old learning French as his first foreign language.

Its a bit early, but I'd love to be in a beer garden  in my second home in Regensburg, drinking a wheat beer.. Prost!

In reply to Paul72C:

May I quote myself? Upthread I wrote:

I think learning languages is really important. But it’s not economically important. Culturally, intellectually, emotionally, yes.

Unfortunately when it comes to spending public money there is always going an economic aspect to decision making…

 

In reply to seankenny:

the perils of coming to a thread late in the day means I may have missed what you wrote upthread, I think policy-making  on education is looking at things the wrong way in terms of economic value but get that you aren't necessarily defending the current approach.

But in terms of public spending on education I think there are a whole raft of subjects that support STEM subjects. Essay writing and languages learning for English, scientific and statistical elements of geography for science and maths and languages 

So where does that leave Art subjects? One of the things UK is really good at and forms a decent sized chunk of GDP is cultural exports but Art teaching is in even worse decline than languages.

In reply to alex_th:

Would you say that everyone can achieve that point in a sensible period? I honestly can't see myself ever being able to achieve that, languages do not come anything like naturally to me.

My trip to Moldova was likely a one-off and I really just wanted to get a few basics under my belt. That took me the best part of a year.

In reply to seankenny:

Or a trade off for kids if they aren't planning to go on a more arts direction, 3 sciences, IT, English, Maths doesn't leave much room left with around 10-12 subjects to choose from at school option age. Unless there's a strong desire many drop the subject they've only just started and are barely getting to grips with. 

In reply to ExiledScot:

I'm not quite sure what you mean, but one of the effects of league tables being based in P8 has been most students doing fewer subjects at GCSE level than previous, as only 8 results count. Although in my experience the focus on Ebaac percentages has led some schools to promote/apply pressure to more able kids in particular to study a language. 

That doesn't seem to get any better as they get older, the percentage of GCSE language students opting to continue to A level are amongst the lowest of any subject, around half of most. 

In reply to RobAJones:

Using my eldest as an example, he dropped languages at the first opportunity because he's going in the stem direction with individual sciences, enjoy sports, geography, history and building stuff... no room left for language and often school seemed to bank on those going the individual science direction not choosing a language, as they are taught at the same time in the schedule. 

In reply to ExiledScot:

That sounds reasonably typical. After the compulsory Maths, English, Science, Core PE and RE/PSE (or whatever it is called now) that normally leaves about 9/10 hours a week for optional subjects at ks4. I can see an arguement for 5 subjects but they only having two hours a week rather than the typical 3 subjects having three hours each , but there would need to be a reduction in the specifications. You could also argue for a reduction in the time allocated to compulsory subjects, but as we've previously discussed the proposal to make maths to be compulsory until 18 it unlikely to come from those 4 hours. 

That sounds unusual, I've heard of triple science being in an option block, but not for it to clash with all language options. 

In reply to owlart:

Hmm, difficult question. My short answer would be yes, but most enjoyably by full immersion, i.e. by going and living in the country for a while.

The fact that you are forced to practice a lot is of course the most important benefit of living in a foreign country, but another is that you get a reward for almost every bit of progress which you make. For example, you can take part in a meet of your university climbing club (assuming you managed to get yourself onto an exchange somewhere where there is climbing - very important!) and every time understand a little more, so you get a payback which you can really feel for all that time spent learning the tables of irregular verbs. Learning those irregular verbs at home in the UK after work can't compete.

In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

I think you are wrong there, myself (and all my fellow pupils) started English age 10 and I would - without blowing my own trumpet ) say that I am fluent at English. Ok, I have lived here for 25 years, but I was fluent when I arrived to do my Masters. My niece came to stay with us age 14 to go to the local High School and was fluent, having started English age 10. My husband only started to learn proper German once we had a child and he is fluent - he doesn't even have much of an accent, none that people can detect. So, you can learn at any age. Obviously it is easier if you are young.! 

In reply to French Erick:

Hi Erick. I can speak a bit of French and German (you never had the joie de mon Franglais  (Rodders) when you were still resident in Glasgow). Diversity and willingness to embrace other cultures has become important to me in a way that would not have seemed so important 7 years ago. I enjoyed languages at school. Probably a lot of that was to do with me enjoying my French and German teacher. She was fit.

I hope at some point the UK can stop it's ever- faster race to the fascist bottom of the pile and become a global force again. You and others are part of this battle and I congratulate you for that. 

In reply to French Erick:

I'm not sure I was very clear with that - I don't mean I learnt more about English studying French because English language teaching in the UK is awful. I mean I learnt more about English and about language in general because suddenly there were technical terms for all of the things I'd never thought about in English because I learnt them when I was three, that I imagine don't come into teaching English to native speakers (certainly not at GCSE). I know the original argument was along economic lines, but I think that's a significant benefit in itself.

I wouldn't be able to use the subjunctive in English if I hadn't struggled through trying to understand it in French. I didn't even know it existed; I just assumed people were being grammatically incorrect by saying "if I were..."

In reply to tehmarks:

So you didn’t get that when Beyoncé sings “If I were a boy…” she is expressing a hypothetical wish? It’s… literally the whole point of the song. 

In reply to seankenny:

I didn't listen to the song, to be quite honest

In reply to Heike:

Don't tell me, tell Stephen Pinker, who spent the first  20 years of his academic career studying language acquisition. In his book 'The Language Instinct' he makes a compelling case why in evolutionary terms this makes sense. (And also, incidentally, emphatically refutes the idea that some languages reflect more sophisticated or complex cultures. Bit of a blow to my Welsh speaking children!)

Obviously people differ with cognitive development, just as they do with muscular development. I was never going to be a Ron Fawcett, and Henry Kissinger was never going to lose his German accent!

In reply to Wee Davie:

Indeed I didn’t! Quel dommage!! Is it the children who made you reopen your language love affair?

I am afraid being a 4 eyed pale and bald middle aged man is unlikely to inspire anyone…

We accept your thanks gracefully. However, be aware we are thinning on the ground by literally not being replaced. Supposedly because the demand is not there, regardless to the fact that demand suffered from policies which come from elected people who only want to be re-elected by populist decisions. And there we go back to culture: if people, in my view wrongly, assume that languages are not useful, then languages won’t be acquired!

In reply to French Erick:

It is actually unsurprising that a Strathyre deity would have linguistic abilities!