Register  Login  Active Topics  Maps  

Lack of languages stifles Brits and USers

  Tags: Monolingual
 Language Learning Forum : General discussion Post Reply
95 messages over 12 pages: 1 24 5 6 7 ... 3 ... 11 12 Next >>
Gemuse
Senior Member
Germany
Joined 3875 days ago

818 posts - 1189 votes 
Speaks: English
Studies: German

 
 Message 17 of 95
09 July 2014 at 8:50pm | IP Logged 
Yes, but the article was about the US/UK.

The article read like a total piece of crap. A quote from the article:
Quote:
In America, academics produced a report last year, Across the Atlantic, Languages for All?: The Anglophone Challenge White Paper, that found demand for languages other than English had increased so dramatically that the US education system was now "failing to provide a critical skill to the majority of this country's youth".

If you read the report, it is basically academics agreeing in a meeting that "...".
No data provided.

I fully agree with EMK's analysis.

I'll also add one thing to EMK's post. Learning languages has advantages, thats a given. However, we must also look at the *cost* of learning a new language. IMHO it makes no sense to foist extra languages upon the masses when only a very tiny % of jobs will require a second language, and when US/UK can import bilingual workers from other countries. If UK really wants to improve its global dominance, it must cultivate a culture of innovation and entrepreneurship; having more bilingual people will do jack. A lot of swedes speak two languages, but Sweden does not dominate the world.

Edited by Gemuse on 09 July 2014 at 9:54pm

4 persons have voted this message useful



shk00design
Triglot
Senior Member
Canada
Joined 4237 days ago

747 posts - 1123 votes 
Speaks: Cantonese*, English, Mandarin
Studies: French

 
 Message 18 of 95
09 July 2014 at 10:08pm | IP Logged 
Hampie wrote:
Wait a little here, Peking isn't Beijing because the English could not pronounce it, but
rather because it is based on another Chinese variety than Putonghua. Same goes for Canton – which is
almost identical to the mandarin counterpart Guandong. I'm not in any way defending the British
Empires colonialism – however, the reason for Chinese cities and phenomenons having other names
in English is not solely because Englishmen cannot pronounce mandarin.

Peking and Beijing are the same word, the former being from a dialect of Chinese that did not undergo
the palatalization of stops before i, like, say, Cantonese. Then, we should also mention that most older
names uses older transcriptions and not Hanyu Pinyin but rather Wade-Giles.

The professor I had in Chinese emphatically used Peking and and told the students to do the same –
comparing it to us saying Rome and not Roma, Florens and not Firenze, Copenhagen and not
Kopenhavn. There's nothing wrong with Peking. There's nothing wrong with Bombay.


According to Michael, an expat 老外 from the West:
The short answer — or the one given on Wikipedia, in any case – is that in Chinese, the city’s name
has always been pronounced “Beijing,” but early Western visitors to China (specifically, 17th century
French missionaries) rendered it into the Roman alphabet as “Peking.” When the PRC introduced the
Pinyin system in 1958, the new spelling “Beijing” was adopted to more accurately reflect the name’s
pronunciation.
The original article:
From Peking to Beijing: A Long and Bumpy Trip

After referring to the article, I don't think the origin of the word Peking had to do with different
Chinese dialects, but more to do with the phonetics used when the Europeans tried to Romanize the
name 北京 with the Latin alphabet.

Edited by shk00design on 09 July 2014 at 10:10pm

1 person has voted this message useful





emk
Diglot
Moderator
United States
Joined 5325 days ago

2615 posts - 8806 votes 
Speaks: English*, FrenchB2
Studies: Spanish, Ancient Egyptian
Personal Language Map

 
 Message 19 of 95
09 July 2014 at 10:14pm | IP Logged 
s_allard wrote:
The situation in Canada hardly needs mentioning. Many people have no use or need for French, but those who do know French will tell you that it has been very useful and in many cases necessary to get a job.

patrickwilken wrote:
So I strongly suspect that if you speak the local language of our employer you'll accrue benefits even if they officially state that English is all you need.

I definitely agree that knowing the the local language where you live is enormously useful. You'll have more jobs open to you, you'll be able to interact with the society around you, and you won't be stuck in an English bubble. This isn't just a matter of employability, but also basic self-respect in the long run.

Of course, there are even a few places where it helps to know several languages; Montreal is a fun city to be bilingual in. And I imagine it doesn't hurt to speak whatever language your employer uses at their headquarters.

My real point is that one of two things are true:

1. US and UK businesses aren't actually suffering from a lack of language skills, or
2. They are suffering, but they're not willing to cough up more than a 2% salary bonus.

When there's a true shortage of critical skills, it's hard to miss. Salaries go up. Recruiters steal company telephone directories and spam everybody with employment offers. College students smell easy money, and change their majors. "Bootcamps" spring up everywhere to teach everybody the necessary skills.

This sort of thing can happen with languages, as in this discussion of working in Montreal:

Quote:
I assume your wife is Canadian; if not, she will face greater obstacles in getting a job than her lack of fluency in French. If she is authorized to work in Canada, being unilingual/English will make it extremely difficult to find a job. Before even dusting off her resume, she might want to enroll in an intensive French immersion program.

Quote:
While not impossible to find work as a unilingual anglophone in Montreal, I would say many doors will be closed to her. I try to think of the anglos I know who fit this category... the few that I know either work as a specialist in the biotech/telecommunications industry, as a software specialist or managed to get a position at an English-language institution in the city. The latter jobs I believe are quite competitive.

Most anglos I know in this city (myself included) are now bilingual, a radical transformation from the English-speaking community of 30 (even 15) years ago in Montreal. I'd hypothesize that anglophones really wised up, desirous to keep open as many doors for themselves and their kids as possible…

If employers really want language skills badly enough, even monolingual English speakers will learn, and teach their kids.

You can see the same process in the opposite direction in Montreal, too:

Quote:
Je regarde jobboom et me fait peur.... Faut il être bilingue pour trouver un job?? Je suis française et nul en anglais pensez vous que cella rendra difficile ma recherche d emploie?

I'm looking at jobboom and it makes me afraid. Is it necessary to be bilingual to find a job? I'm French, and horrible at English. Do you think that will make my job search difficult?

C'est quand meme un très gros atout, et quasi indispensable à Montréal.

It's a very great asset, and quasi-indispensable in Montreal.

Bien sur certains diront que c'est possible, mais c est évident que sans l 'anglais tu peux au moins oublier 50% des offres, voir largement +

Of course some will say it's possible, but it's evident that without English, you can forget at least 50% of offers, or even considerably more.

This is what an actual shortage of language skills looks like on the ground: job searches get a lot easier for people who speak multiple languages, and potential employees get motivated to learn.

I'm quite sure that nothing like this exists in the northeastern US. OK, every once in a blue moon somebody will send an email to Alliance Française mailing list in Burlington, Vermont looking for retail employees who speak French, because Burlington is less than 2 hours south of Montreal.

Now, personally I'm a huge fan of language learning, and I think a lot more people should learn languages. It's fun, it's rewarding, it's easier than most people think (especially if you only want B1 or B2), and it opens up whole new worlds. But at the same time, I don't buy the argument that US and UK companies have an especially desperate need for bilingual employees right now.

If somebody wanted to claim that US and UK companies should invest more money in multi-lingual employees, but they're too clueless to realize the advantages, I'd be happy to listen to that argument. But surveying a bunch of employers and asking them "Would foreign language skills be nice?" won't answer that question. Instead, ask them:

1. How many jobs at your company normally require knowledge of more than one language?
2. How much extra would you pay to hire multi-lingual employees?
3. How much money did you lose last year because you couldn't get multi-lingual employees?
4 persons have voted this message useful



Gemuse
Senior Member
Germany
Joined 3875 days ago

818 posts - 1189 votes 
Speaks: English
Studies: German

 
 Message 20 of 95
09 July 2014 at 10:42pm | IP Logged 
EMK, you should write a blog where you direct your acute reasoning skills on to the various half-baked claims that politicians/newpapers/economists/health-experts make; and show people what critical analysis really looks like.

Edited by Gemuse on 09 July 2014 at 10:47pm

1 person has voted this message useful



patrickwilken
Senior Member
Germany
radiant-flux.net
Joined 4326 days ago

1546 posts - 3200 votes 
Studies: German

 
 Message 21 of 95
09 July 2014 at 11:18pm | IP Logged 
emk wrote:

patrickwilken wrote:
So I strongly suspect that if you speak the local language of our employer you'll accrue benefits even if they officially state that English is all you need.

I definitely agree that knowing the the local language where you live is enormously useful. You'll have more jobs open to you, you'll be able to interact with the society around you, and you won't be stuck in an English bubble. This isn't just a matter of employability, but also basic self-respect in the long run.


I think we are completely on the same page here.

emk wrote:

If somebody wanted to claim that US and UK companies should invest more money in multi-lingual employees, but they're too clueless to realize the advantages, I'd be happy to listen to that argument. But surveying a bunch of employers and asking them "Would foreign language skills be nice?" won't answer that question. Instead, ask them:

1. How many jobs at your company normally require knowledge of more than one language?
2. How much extra would you pay to hire multi-lingual employees?
3. How much money did you lose last year because you couldn't get multi-lingual employees?


I guess the question may well be whether people running businesses in general would have a good understanding of this anyway. I am sure there must be studies that show that X-dollars invested in non-linguistic education today pays off Y-dollars in improvements to the economy at a later date.

I suspect that the economies of certain countries might well benefit from additional languages as well - although company people might not immediately see this, especially if they come from monolingual cultures themselves.

Of course if this were true, I suspect the languages (perhaps with the exception of English) are going to be pretty regionally specific - it might be worth something for the economies of countries if more people learnt Spanish in Brazil, or Chinese in Japan, for instance.


Edited by patrickwilken on 10 July 2014 at 8:58am

1 person has voted this message useful



s_allard
Triglot
Senior Member
Canada
Joined 5223 days ago

2704 posts - 5425 votes 
Speaks: French*, English, Spanish
Studies: Polish

 
 Message 22 of 95
09 July 2014 at 11:57pm | IP Logged 
I don't think anybody disputes the fact that the large majority of people in the US, UK, and even certain parts of
Canada, have no need for foreign languages in their jobs. Actually, I think it is the same in most countries of the
world. We know that many small countries such as Holland and the Scandinavian countries speak good English,
but how many actually use English in their work or their daily lives? I think it's probably a minority.

At what about countries with large populations? In a country like Japan with very little immigration and a
homogenous population, why are there thousands of foreigners teaching English to people who probably will
never use it? And China is a fine example where there is a huge emphasis on learning English and little actual
necessity.

Why this massive interest in learning English everywhere in the world? To answer this question in a roundabout
way, I wish to point out that in many major cities of the world there are "international" schools that cater to the
local elite. All these schools emphasize languages. For example, in Toronto there is the Toronto French School
that is modelled on the French lycée with teaching nearly all in French. Unsurprisingly, it costs an arm and a leg
to send one's children there. But these kids are guaranteed to come out bilingual.

I'm sure there are similar schools throughout the US and around the world of course. And then there are all the
international schools in English in probably every major city in the world.

What we observe is that for the elite, bilingualism or multilingualism is important. Why? I'm pretty sure that the
perception is that in today's world multilingualism is a major advantage for one's career. And they are probably
totally right for the kinds of jobs that these children will aspire to.

So, if we want to assess how important foreign language skills are important for businesses in the US and UK,
what we have to look at is the international reach of the business. Many or most business in the US have no
foreign reach and therefore have no need for foreign languages.

But what of those businesses, large or small that have foreign markets? At some point there is some king of
language interface. Sure, English is the international language of business but there is no doubt that having
employees proficient in foreign languages is a major advantage.

I'm thinking, for example, of a company I know that deals in security-related products. Latin America is a major
market for some unfortunate reasons. This company has a network of dealers in Latin America and participates in
various trade shows. How does this company interact with Latin America? Is it English only because "they all can
understand English."? Or do they have Spanish-speaking staff who can interact easily with the customers? Do you
stand a better chance of getting a job with this company if you speak great Spanish?

Where I live, many Canadian universities and private schools are falling over themselves to enter the Asian
markets. There are all sorts of trade missions and trade shows in China, Korea, Singapore, etc. Wouldn't these
schools love to have employees proficient in various Asian languages? Sure, they ultimately get them, but who
are they? More often than not they are local employees or Canadian heritage speakers of these Asian languages.

This is what the elite of all countries have discovered a long time ago. Good education from a reputable school
plus solid foreign language skills is a guaranteed winning combination.
2 persons have voted this message useful





jeff_lindqvist
Diglot
Moderator
SwedenRegistered users can see my Skype Name
Joined 6702 days ago

4250 posts - 5710 votes 
Speaks: Swedish*, English
Studies: German, Spanish, Russian, Dutch, Mandarin, Esperanto, Irish, French
Personal Language Map

 
 Message 23 of 95
10 July 2014 at 1:47am | IP Logged 
shk00design wrote:
(...)After referring to the article, I don't think the origin of the word Peking had to do with different Chinese dialects, but more to do with the phonetics used when the Europeans tried to Romanize the name 北京 with the Latin alphabet.


Have you seen this?

Quote:
The name Peking (along with the similar "Nanking" for Nanjing) originated with Western missionaries four hundred years ago (e.g. Latin: Pechinum used in Matteo Ricci's De Christiana expeditione apud Sinas, and Pequin in its English translation in Purchas his Pilgrimes). The name corresponds to the Middle Chinese pronunciation kjaeng prior to a phonetic shift from [kʲ] to [tɕ] (the sound represented by the pinyin letter j) and preserved among the southern dialects (e.g., Cantonese, Amoy, Min Nan, and Hakka) used by the traders of the port cities visited by early European traders.

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_Beijing)

How do you say 北京 in Cantonese?
4 persons have voted this message useful



Chung
Diglot
Senior Member
Joined 6949 days ago

4228 posts - 8259 votes 
20 sounds
Speaks: English*, French
Studies: Polish, Slovak, Uzbek, Turkish, Korean, Finnish

 
 Message 24 of 95
10 July 2014 at 3:01am | IP Logged 
jeff_lindqvist wrote:
shk00design wrote:
(...)After referring to the article, I don't think the origin of the word Peking had to do with different Chinese dialects, but more to do with the phonetics used when the Europeans tried to Romanize the name 北京 with the Latin alphabet.


Have you seen this?

Quote:
The name Peking (along with the similar "Nanking" for Nanjing) originated with Western missionaries four hundred years ago (e.g. Latin: Pechinum used in Matteo Ricci's De Christiana expeditione apud Sinas, and Pequin in its English translation in Purchas his Pilgrimes). The name corresponds to the Middle Chinese pronunciation kjaeng prior to a phonetic shift from [kʲ] to [tɕ] (the sound represented by the pinyin letter j) and preserved among the southern dialects (e.g., Cantonese, Amoy, Min Nan, and Hakka) used by the traders of the port cities visited by early European traders.

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_Beijing)

How do you say 北京 in Cantonese?


...and if you want to hear the realization of 北京 in other Chinese languages as well as Japanese and Korean, listen to the samples on Forvo.

The Min and one of the Hakka samples also demonstrate the retention of [kʲ].


1 person has voted this message useful



This discussion contains 95 messages over 12 pages: << Prev 1 24 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  Next >>


Post ReplyPost New Topic Printable version Printable version

You cannot post new topics in this forum - You cannot reply to topics in this forum - You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum - You cannot create polls in this forum - You cannot vote in polls in this forum


This page was generated in 0.5938 seconds.


DHTML Menu By Milonic JavaScript
Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved
No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization.