Job Discussion Forums

[Mike_2003]

I read with interest a discussion on another forum some time ago which purported that people from the US/UK were bad at languages and ignorant due to the fact that proportionally less of us have a second language in comparison with other nations. It didn�t really surprise me at the time at a quick check of some statistics on the net prove this to be true. I don�t recall the exact numbers but the comparison I found showed that about 5-10% less British people acquire a second language than other Europeans.

However, if we think again at these statistics, what they don�t take into account is the motivation for learning a second language. If we take a typical European country, what percentage of learners are purely learning a SL for perceived financial gain? I�d argue that a considerable number of them are learning English for this reason alone. How many of them would invest in learning English, or another language, if their native tongue were a major international language of business? I�d guess that not many would bother.

As Brits and Americans generally don�t need to learn a SL for improved career or financial opportunities, what percentage of them are learning a language simply for cultural interest, self-improvement, because they believe it a good experience, or to help them on their travels? Possibly a significantly high proportion of those with a SL. Taking this into account the number of Brits with a SL could be seen to be quite high (I have no idea about the stats regarding the US).

So are we more �culturally insensitive and ignorant�? Or is it simply because we have less to gain from learning a second language? And are more of us, in fact, motivated by less material and more academic/cultural goals?

Any thoughts?

Mike

[baby predator]

Interesting post.
I work with a bunch of Europeans from different countries, and from talking to them about how/why they learned English as a second language it seems several factors unite to encourage them to learn it:

1. They are surrounded by it from when they are kids: tv, music, magazines etc

2. They start learning it in school long before Brits begin their foreign language instruction and it is often a compulsory subject.

3. They study English for longer (7-10 years in Germany) I was only obliged to study a foreign language for three years, and I didnt leave school that long ago.

I dont know how much I go along with the financial motive argument. If you are an Italian who lives in Italy and you aren't much interested in working in an English speaking country, chances are you still speak a fair amount of English.

The UK's poor record in second language acquisition has a lot to do with laziness, but also the fact that we can't get ourselves together to decide which language we should immerse ourselves in. For our European neighbours, the choice is relatively simple, but who do we plump for? Choosing French or German opens up all sorts of political and cultural debates which never get resolved. We are never quite sure if we should choose Chinese, Urdu or Farsi in the urban areas. What about our dwindling local languages such as Gaelic and Cornish?

So we go for a mixture of all, with no real determination and little encouragement from the educational establishment or our peers. "Why are you learning that? Everyone over there speaks English..." I think that in fact, most Brits ( I don't dare speak for North Americans) do learn a second language for improved career options. That's not to say that some of us don't do it for other reasons, but moolah has to be a big motivating factor in many cases.

What interests me about this topic is that people who acquire a second language early on in life seem to be much more adept at going on to acquire a third or fourth. Anyone have any statistics about that?

[richard ame]

Hi Mike
Yeah you're right we are basically a lazy bunch about learning a second language for the reasons you said ,also this idea is reinforced by people who run seinars and workshops with litle sketches such as , If I can speak more than 3 languages I'm multilingual, if I speak only 2 languages I'm bilingual and if I speak only one language then I must be English . I think that mindset is preety extreme but I'm sure there are others who will disagree,however for myself I would love to be able to converse well in Turkish as it is the place I now call home and at the end of the day it would make life here that more enjoyable . By the by Ayvalik is still a nice place and the property is still going cheap say about 7- 10 grand for starters depending on how much you enjoy DİY .

[Kent F. Kruhoeffer]

Hi Mike_2003:

In my case, I grew up in a bilingual house: Dad emigrated from Germany to the USA in 1953, so German was ALWAYS the L2 at home and on the phone with our German relatives.

I still remember quite vividly how hard it was for me at the tender age of 6 or 7 to learn how to say "Happy Birthday Grandma!" in German. How hard can it be, you ask? OK, try this one on for size: "Herzlichen Gluekwuensch zum Geburtstag, liebe Oma!"

Given the above 'family roots', it was only logical that I should study German throughout High School and university. Damned glad I did too, 'cuz when I arrived in Munich in 1989, speaking fluent German was the single most important factor that allowed me to find both a good job AND obtain a proper and legal working visa.

So ... here's to Dad, for knowing intuitively that I'd return 'home' one day!

Regards,
KEnt

[rogan]

I agree - starting early makes language acquisition easier.

My twins, age 15, learnt French as they were learning English, from age 2.

They are obviously bilingual (their language of preference is French, though).

Having picked up German as L3 they are currently working on Russian as L4

[Mike_2003]

I think the point that there is no particularly obvious second language for us to learn is especially true. At school we had to take French for five years, although I would never have regarded it as being a second language at the time as I still struggled with even the most basic sentences when I crossed the channel. I also dabbled in Latin and German neither with any particular conviction. Now I can say that Turkish is a second language but even this is not purely a result of necessity. So I think it would be fair to say that necessity is a huge factor.

I looked up a few stats on the net. It seems that in a sample of 16'000 Europeans, about 75% said they regarded English as an important second language for reasons of career improvement. Even if the person has no desire to work in an English speaking country, there is a good chance that English will be useful: reading articles relating to the job, dealing with imports and exports, attending seminars and conferences, following international trends, and of course in the tourism sector. All things we can do in the UK without any extra linguistic effort expended on our part.

I still think it is a little harsh to call us "lazy" though. A lot of European countries not only do business in English but also have more than one language (Only 2% of Luxemburgers can only speak one language, the figure is 66% for Britain).

I can sympathize with you Richard. Even living in a foreign country doesn't alway force us English speakers to develop a second language quickly. My wife is Turkish but we generally converse in English because our relationship developed in the UK and it was at least 3 or 4 years before I could hold down a conversation in Turkish, we speak English in our work, probably have access to English TV and literature, many of our friends and acquaintances probably prefer to use English with us, and there is a limit to how much of a foreign language you need down the local shops. So even spending a considerable time abroad doesn't absolutely guarantee quick and steady SL acquisition!

Conversely, almost anyone coming to the UK would have to use English almost exclusively throughout their stay - one big advantage for foreign students coming to the UK - they won't be popping into their local cornershop to find the gentleman behind the counter conversant in their first language! "20 Marlboro? Certainly, sir. Zhi mare badist ta wo ayo kakkok damiti gwa!"

I think I did read once about a government paper suggesting that all youngsters in the UK start learning a SL at an earlier age but I never found out the outcome. Anyone know anything more about that?

Mike

[scot47]

Foreign Languages are poorly taught in most schools in Britain. I am lucky in that I had the opportunity to do two modern foreign languages. It is about the only lasting benefit i still have from my secondary education - 40 years ago !

I am still amazed at the number of UK and US EFL teachers I meet who have never learnt a foreign language. How can you understand what is going on in foreign language learning if you yourself have never learned one ? I say scrap all those certs and dips and make would-be EFL teachers learn Latin - and maybe Russian.

Amazing too how people still believe that old lie - "They all speak English over there."

[arioch36]

I am amazed at the number of ESL people who have no interest in learning a second language.

I think one major problem, as said, is what language should be taught. Most schools I know had problems finding good teachers for any language besides spainish. And it really wasn't a "serious" course.

Bigger and richer schools often have several language courses. If the government said .., "okay, schools, the official second language will be French" then I think their would be better results (well, maybe French wouldn't br too popular in the US right now)

There is little motivation to learn a second language other then love of travel, or love of the language. This leaves 98% of the students out.

Finally, the vast majority of students will always be as lazy as the teacher allows. And simialr to teachimg english in foreign countries, there is little motivation for the teacher in the US to do more then teach a "fun class"

[Roger]

Maybe the word "lazy" is not strong enough - try snobbish!
And in the case of EUropeans speaking English, I doubt that career prospects have anything to do with people's interest in English.
It is rather that most Europeans love travelling overland, and that's when English is a great advantage. BUt English is almost always the second foreign tongue for these people, so if they have acquired their first foreign language well then there is an extra motivation to excel at English! Typically, An IKtalian would become fluent in French first; he uses it both in France and in French-speaking parts of Italy (near the Alps) or with French tourists. English he will use when he travels to Turkey, India, Australia.

Actually, there have always been Brits and Americans that knew more than one foreign tongue: Prolific novelist Anthony Burgess knew Russian, Malay, German, Italian and Latin (and this reflected in his writing very often).

Another conclusion, however, might be that if natigve English speakers are so bad at learning an L 2, they cannot be quite that good at teaching English either!

[Wolf]

[Mike_2003]

Learning Turkish has certainly helped me understand my students' problems. Understanding difficulties in grammar gives me a good idea before each lesson where they are likely to become unstuck and enables me to prepare those areas in more detail. Unfortunately, Turkish grammar is so different from English grammar that it's most areas...

[johnslat]

The only problem I see with learning the L2 of the place you're working is that it may cause you to rely too heavily on that L2 in the classroom, especially at the lower levels. I've seen it happen. We had a guy here who was quite fluent in Arabic and while passing his classroom one day, I heard part of his lesson. It was divided about 50/50 between Arabic and English. Not such a good idea, I think.
Regards,
John

[Mike_2003]

That is a big danger. I never let on to my students how much Turkish I know, especially at the beginning when I want to get them into the habit of communicating with me solely in English. Most of my students are accomplished enough to use English all the time and even if I know the Turkish equivalent of a word they are trying to understand I prefer to explain it in English, partly not to break the spell of ignorance of their language and partly because I believe a longer explanation in English will stick in their minds for a greater period of time.

Again, my learning of a second language came in handy in this respect. I noticed that when I'm reading a novel in Turkish and I stop to look up a word in the dictionary, should I encounter the same word again a few pages later I have generally already forgetten the translation. (Or maybe this just means I have a terrible memory... ) So now I try to use a Turkish-Turkish dictionary instead as I feel the effort involved in understand and analysing the definition consolidates the word more fully in my mind. This emphasised the importance of not just simply allowing students to check in a bilinguial dictionary or even worse, translating for them.

Mike

[Kereru]

I agree with many that the problem for English speakers can be WHICH second language? This is worse in a country like NZ (or Australia) where our neighbours are Asian - schools are divided on the need to teach Chinese, Korean or Japanese, when the parents want their kids to learn Spanish, French or German.

[Wolf]