An Academia Sinica report entitled Social Ambitions of the Taiwanese Public, 2004 found that 65 percent of Taiwanese support mother-tongue education in schools. The ethnic group most in favor were the Hakka, whose support reached 74 percent.
Despite this strong support for native language training, the issue is frequently distorted by ideological concerns, the most common claim being that the call for native language training itself is ideologically motivated.
Even Chen Po-chang (陳伯璋), director of the Preparatory Office of the National Academy for Educational Research, has expressed criticism, saying that a recent decision to make native languages an elective subject in a compulsory language course that also offers English was a political decision and not based on expertise.
There is concern in education circles that this set-up will encourage students to choose English and that native language training will disappear from the elementary school curriculum.
So, is Chen’s position based on expertise or is it just partisan argument?
Jim Cummins, a professor at the University of Toronto, is an internationally renowned expert on bilingual education. He has proposed a theory of mutual interdependence of languages that claims the acquisition of second-language proficiency is built on the foundation of the mother tongue.
The mother tongue is not argued to be an obstacle to learning, but a resource for the acquisition of other languages. Cummins argues that educational institutions should provide children with a bilingual environment so that the two languages can feed off each other.
Cummins alerts us to the importance of native language training in stating that the mother tongue is the best educational medium. This point was also made by UNESCO in 1953 when it said the mother tongue was universally recognized as the best medium for educating children.
Another expert on bilingual education, James Crawford, has said the main reason it is so difficult to promote bilingual education is not that academic theory is lacking, but that information presented to the general public often consists of myths or prejudice disseminated by groups with a political agenda.
Taiwan needs to realize that the coexistence of several languages is a positive feature of society and not a justification for linguistic prejudice. The relationship between languages does not have to become a zero-sum game: We don’t need a diminished bilingual environment in which a mother tongue is abandoned to obtain a second language. Instead, the relationship between languages is additive; maintaining one’s mother tongue assists in the acquisition of other languages.
Language education planning today stands on the side of civic rights, not nationalism. Article 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights signed by President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) on May 15 states: “In those States in which ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities exist, persons belonging to such minorities shall not be denied the right, in community with the other members of their group, to enjoy their own culture, to profess and practice their own religion, or to use their own language.”
This shows that native language training not only coincides with the modern ideal of a state built on human rights, but also that it coincides in practice with the national interest. Blocking children from developing their mother tongue is not only a waste of national resources, it also violates the rights of the child.
Tiu Hak-khiam is an associate professor in the Department of Chinese Literature at National Taitung University.
TRANSLATED BY PERRY SVENSSON
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with