The Chinese National Federation of Industries released a white paper in July calling on the government to promote the use of English to “increase the internationalization and visibility of Taiwan.”
In response, Premier William Lai (賴清德) last month pledged to propose a “bilingual country” policy next year that would aim to make English a “second official language.”
There is a legitimate reason for the federation’s call.
According to the US-based Educational Testing Service, which develops the Test of English as a Foreign Language and Test of English for International Communication (TOEIC), Taiwan’s top 1,000 companies mostly require a threshold of 550 points on the TOEIC, which is much lower than the 700 points required by South Korea’s top enterprises in the 990-point test.
Even so, the average score for Taiwanese university students last year was a mere 517, meaning that many college students were not able to reach the low threshold.
Over almost two decades, each president has proposed a similar policy, then abandoned it due to the complexity and sensitivity of the issue. Lai’s bold pronouncement has stirred up controversy once again.
Apart from the high costs involved, academics questioned the necessity and feasibility of holding every government meeting and publishing all official documents in Chinese and English, while others expressed concern over potential drawbacks.
For example, Richard Lee (李家同), an honorary professor at National Tsing Hua University, pointed out that most bilingual countries in Asia are former British colonies. Tung Yu-li (董玉莉), a lecturer of English at Chung Yuan Christian University, warned that the measure might damage national identity. A newspaper even accused Lai of promoting “desinicization”(去中國化) by lowering the status of Chinese as Taiwan’s sole official language.
Putting aside questions of national identity and other controversial aspects of the policy, in the face of globalization, it would perhaps be more pragmatic to effectively improve the English proficiency of Taiwanese.
Universities should increase class hours devoted to English, and adopt practical materials and flexible teaching methods. They should offer bilingual or all-English classes to good students to prepare them for English in the workplace.
Unfortunately, many local universities are doing precisely the opposite. In an attempt to save money, most have canceled English courses, except for first-year students, while combining classes so that they can have more than 150 students each.
Meanwhile, many universities have changed first-year English courses from “compulsory” to “optional” to lay off part-time English teachers as the number of classes declined.
No wonder English ability among university students is worse than among senior-high school students, who last year scored an average of 559 on the TOEIC — 42 points higher than the average for college students.
The intention of the government’s policy is good, but it might be aiming a little too high. How can Taiwan possibly make English a second official language when many universities keep cutting courses and teachers?
If the government is determined to resolve the problem, it should start from the basics by fixing English-language education to cultivate sufficient talent while gradually building an English-friendly environment.
Moreover, government agencies should set an example by hiring more professionals to write their bilingual documents, publications and Web sites. Otherwise, the ambitious official language policy might turn into yet another empty slogan.
Chang Sheng-en is an assistant professor of English at National Taipei University of Business.
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