|
 |
EU & Languages: Policies and your view? | ||
Tags: Europe | Multilingual | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : General discussion |  | |
| johntm93 Senior Member United States Joined 5329 days ago 587 posts - 746 votes  2 sounds Speaks: English* Studies: German, Spanish | Message 33 of 66 05 July 2010 at 5:31am | IP Logged | ||||||||
3 persons have voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Sennin Senior Member Bulgaria Joined 6036 days ago 1457 posts - 1759 votes 5 sounds | Message 34 of 66 05 July 2010 at 2:27pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
This is precisely why the EU does not promote any particular language, nor does it try to "discredit" English. It promotes multilingualism. People on this thread make the case for this linga franca or that - so who's silly? ;-). Edited by Sennin on 05 July 2010 at 2:29pm 2 persons have voted this message useful | |||||||||
| John Smith Bilingual Triglot Senior Member Australia Joined 6044 days ago 396 posts - 542 votes Speaks: English*, Czech*, Spanish Studies: German | Message 35 of 66 05 July 2010 at 4:29pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
English will never take over Europe. Euro English might.
When a German person says I want to buy the handy that is the best actually he means I want to buy the cell phone/mobile phone that is currently the best
That's just crazy! Europe is going to fall behind the rest of the world. It takes a lot of effort to learn ONE language let alone TWO languages. I can see the future now. In order to promote multilingualism silly subjects like Science and Maths will no longer be taught. They will be replaced by linguistics, Language A and Language B. In the future Europeans will no longer know how to count and will believe that the Earth is flat. They will however be able to say hello in 25 languages!!!!!! Edited by John Smith on 05 July 2010 at 4:46pm 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Tyr Senior Member Sweden Joined 5784 days ago 316 posts - 384 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Swedish | Message 36 of 66 05 July 2010 at 6:17pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
English's dominance isn't due to the dominace of the US. Its more down to the former dominance of Britain spreading it so much and then the US picking up directly from this and running.
In the past when one country supplanted another as most dominant it had to start from the bottom with establishing its language as the dominant one- just look to the 19th century. Post Napoleonic Wars the UK was by far the most powerful nation in the world yet French persisted long after Napoleon was beat down. English never had this, it had one English speaking nation gradually supplant another as richest. As a British person I have to say I'm not a fan of English's dominance. It means its a lot harder for Brits to learn foreign languages- we don't have the easy and necessary option of English as our first- and we look ignorant as a result. But...dominant it is. And in many ways thats a good thing. Its a easy language to anyone (compared to others such as German or French), it can absorb a lot of damage and endure being misused in ways that would destroy other languages, its grammar is simple and not necessary and, I suppose its also a fairly middle language between the two dominant groups of Europe- Germanic and Romance. Even assuming Britain being a minor unimportant place and there being no one else speaking English I could well imagine there being some pushing English as the language for Europe due to it being a middle ground compromise.
Ouch. That sucks. I hereby declare that Scots is a language not a dialect and...err....Scouse. Yes. Scouse is now a different language. There. No Britain doesn't need to worry. Seriously though- isn't this a much easier thing to achieve for some (well...most in Europe) than native English speakers? Also: I wouldn't see Chinese taking over. Even the Chinese government themselves recognise the difficulty of Chinese and are big supporters of improved English skills in Asia. Also, China is never going to be the dominant nation ala the US in the 90s. We're heading for a world with a more even spread of power where you'll have the US, China, the EU and India all with a decent case for being the top dog. English is already the default, the US is mostly English speaking (though Spanish will make some inroads and be recognised as official in some states its not taking over), India's key language of education and anyone with a decent job is English and English is one of the main languages of Europe (the main one of those main languages). I think English will stay the lingua franca for all timne now. Edited by Tyr on 05 July 2010 at 6:24pm 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| shahvlad Newbie Belgium Joined 5311 days ago 19 posts - 38 votes | Message 37 of 66 05 July 2010 at 7:38pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
John, I couldn't agree more with what you wrote. The argument that the topic starter also happened to mention is that "Europe" has succeeded in preventing war on the continent, thus we ought to be in favor of European integration and federalize the European nations. And then there's the dislike of U.S. political power, of course. Now, without wanting to turn this into a political debate on the need for the EU (and believe me, I'd rather be studying my Russian than waste my time on that discussion :D ), I do have to say that I and other with me (though perhaps not so many on this forum) beg to differ on this seemingly conventional wisdom. For years there was mainly economic cooperation, not a full-fledged union. Half of the European continent still lived under Soviet rule and enjoyed little freedom or economic prosperity. After they regained their freedom and, supposedly, their right to self-rule, they joined the EU, and now they find themselves being subjected to the will of Brussels. This is why, unlike the Europhiles among us, I am skeptical of European integration and favor a more informal and decentralized economic union or something of a 'confederacy' of nation states that would never involve imposing an artificial new European identity on others. Identity and language are closely linked to each other. Hence many Europhiles see a need for a common European language. However, I think it is utopian to think people will entirely forget their history and traditions. As long as people speak different languages, they will always be aware of at least some differences between themselves and other nations. You would have to raise children in the new language to have them forget about their background. Does anyone have the right to impose that on people? My answer is no. I find it inhumane. These days they all have their mouths full of "diversity" but the natural diversity that exists on the continent is being destroyed by multicultural ideology and delusions of grandeur about "reunifying" Europe. I think if they continue this way, they're only going to drive people further away from each other. There is no reason whatsoever why in the name of peace people should be forced to become multilingual and adopt a new identity. We're already seeing what social engineering will lead to in this topic - increased strife, tensions, bad memories from past times when empires would impose their language on people, and so on. I believe people can coexist peacefully on the basis of trade and mutual respect and cooperation, but forcing them to adopt the languages or traditions of others, or abandoning their identity altogether, is disrespectful and will simply provoke increased wariness and dislike of others. So keep language policy to the people, that is, to their democratically elected national governments rather than to Eurocratic social engineers living in ivory towers. Let the law of supply and demand be a guide in deciding what foreign languages to learn. And finally, let every man be free to decide what is best for him. Let the aspiring scientist excel in his own field and leave multilingualism to those who have the capability to or need for it. Some people hate foreign languages. Well, good, let them hate foreign languages. I hate math because I suck at it. I recognize the importance of having a working knowledge of math, but there is no reason why everyone should be an expert. Same goes for languages, in my view. We can't all be linguists, businessmen, French teachers or whatever. And those working in a particular sector where they need a foreign language will be studying the language as part of their curriculum or have the ability to study it offered by their company - all of this is possible without the need for any government legislation! Businesses know what's best for them. Also, we need monolingual folk who prefer the laws of physics to German or Spanish, and construction workers who may not care or have the need to speak a foreign language. On a sidenote, many people in Flanders learn two or three foreign languages in secondary school. Does that make all of us bilingual or trilingual? Sure, on the surface. And though I think it's fair to say we're quite good at languages, after a couple of years of having left school, many people are left with "only" a working knowledge of one or two foreign languages because they don't really use or need them. Nobody can force them to maintain their language skills. And then there's the quality of foreign language education itself. Quantity is irrelevant. It's the quality and usefulness that count. It's better to master only one foreign language than to know five foreign languages at the intermediate level because you can hardly use all of them. Sorry for making this so long. PS: On the issue of Esperanto, let's not kid ourselves. It's all about perception. Esperanto does look and sound like yet another Romance language to me, no matter how unjustified that may be from a linguistic point of view. But none of those linguistic counterarguments I've seen will ever change anything about people's perception and the fact that people who are not language enthusiasts couldn't care less. Edited by shahvlad on 05 July 2010 at 7:52pm 3 persons have voted this message useful | |||||||||
| cordelia0507 Senior Member United Kingdom Joined 5840 days ago 1473 posts - 2176 votes Speaks: Swedish* Studies: German, Russian | Message 38 of 66 05 July 2010 at 7:57pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
For you this may sound "crazy" - but to many it's completely normal. Good luck to the EU trying to implement that in the UK though. ;-) Personally I studied three foreign languages at school, and this was totally normal for my school and country. I made no particular effort and was not interested in any language at the time, but I am bilingual and can get by in French and Spanish (and lately in Russian after taking it up as an adult, ) School can definitely fill a role there. I don't think my science or history skills suffered; they are standing up well against people in the UK for example, who only study one foreign language in school. About half of my Swedish friends are good enough at German or French (+english) to be considered trilingual and thereby meeting the EU goal. In many of the smaller bilingual countries, going up to three is nothing special at all; for example Belgium where the EU commission happens to be located. I don't think it's a big deal to be trilingual there at all; most of the people I work with there seem to be. No harm in having high standards; kudos to the EU for that! Personally I think they could make it much easier for everyone by using Esperanto instead of English as first mandatory language across the union. No standard for pronounciation and the grammar doesn't give anyone an unfair advantage (like, right now, the Slavic speakers have to struggle much harder than others in Europe to become good at English - that's unfair!!) But since that's unlikely to happen, I think the vision they have is sensible and I am glad to hear they've considered this. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Sennin Senior Member Bulgaria Joined 6036 days ago 1457 posts - 1759 votes 5 sounds | Message 39 of 66 05 July 2010 at 8:21pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
Haha, well... :).There is a target, so there are also some policies for achieving it. For example there is funding for student exchanges, like Erasmus, and also for teacher exchange programmers. These are some good things, but I agree overall such a target is too optimistic. Especially for the UK. Tough luck, English being so dominant ;). It is beneficial for most Brits, but not for language learners. Edited by Sennin on 05 July 2010 at 8:29pm 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Volte Tetraglot Senior Member Switzerland Joined 6441 days ago 4474 posts - 6726 votes Speaks: English*, Esperanto, German, Italian Studies: French, Finnish, Mandarin, Japanese | Message 40 of 66 05 July 2010 at 8:29pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
Seconded. Swiss schools teach multiple languages, while still being a lot more demanding in math and science than schools in some major English-speaking countries.
I largely agree about the grammar (it's not absolutely neutral, but for speakers of various European languages, it is pretty close). Whether it has a standard for pronunciation depends on what you mean, I suppose - the sounds are somewhat defined, after all, and various language groups do characteristically make various pronunciation mistakes. For instance, English speakers tend to make pure vowels into diphthongs, which they absolutely should not be. The "hx' sound is troublesome for many people too, although it's falling out of use. 3 persons have voted this message useful |
|  | 
Printable version
|
| Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization. |
