In a recent letter ("Multiple tongues a hindrance" Feb. 2, Page 8), Michael Turton said that in Kenyan schools "local languages were forbidden, just as Taiwanese was 30 years ago [in Taiwan]. This was a reasonable policy, and could easily be applied here."
Turton also stated that English should become a medium of instruction in Taiwanese schools, as it is in many formerly-colonized African societies, claiming that this practice helps to enhance internationalization.
Turton did not mention that the use of colonial languages in Africa has been widely associated with low levels of educational achievement. Indeed, a large body of research suggests that children learn basic subjects and are less likely to drop out of school when their native languages are used as mediums of instruction.
In short, the policy of using what are essentially foreign languages as mediums of instruction are likely to have contributed to the high rate of educational failure which exists in many African societies, and are therefore one reason why these countries actually lag well behind much of the world in terms of internationalization and development.
Turton also claims that Hong Kong and Singapore have a "significant advantage" over Taiwan in international commerce due to their "mastery of English." Aside from a lack of logic in comparing Taiwan with two tiny city-states, which both happen to be former British colonies, Turton also fails to mention that Taiwan outperformed both places during the recent Asian economic crisis.
Furthermore, the use of English in Hong Kong schools has recently been reduced, in part because of research suggesting that students there were failing to learn either English or Cantonese properly.
Finally, as for the implication that it would be "reasonable" to return to the policy of forbidding local languages, it is my impression that it is precisely these kind of policies which the people of Taiwan do not ever wish to return to.
Matthew Ward
Taipei
Donald Trump’s return to the White House has offered Taiwan a paradoxical mix of reassurance and risk. Trump’s visceral hostility toward China could reinforce deterrence in the Taiwan Strait. Yet his disdain for alliances and penchant for transactional bargaining threaten to erode what Taiwan needs most: a reliable US commitment. Taiwan’s security depends less on US power than on US reliability, but Trump is undermining the latter. Deterrence without credibility is a hollow shield. Trump’s China policy in his second term has oscillated wildly between confrontation and conciliation. One day, he threatens Beijing with “massive” tariffs and calls China America’s “greatest geopolitical
On Sunday, 13 new urgent care centers (UCC) officially began operations across the six special municipalities. The purpose of the centers — which are open from 8am to midnight on Sundays and national holidays — is to reduce congestion in hospital emergency rooms, especially during the nine-day Lunar New Year holiday next year. It remains to be seen how effective these centers would be. For one, it is difficult for people to judge for themselves whether their condition warrants visiting a major hospital or a UCC — long-term public education and health promotions are necessary. Second, many emergency departments acknowledge
US President Donald Trump’s seemingly throwaway “Taiwan is Taiwan” statement has been appearing in headlines all over the media. Although it appears to have been made in passing, the comment nevertheless reveals something about Trump’s views and his understanding of Taiwan’s situation. In line with the Taiwan Relations Act, the US and Taiwan enjoy unofficial, but close economic, cultural and national defense ties. They lack official diplomatic relations, but maintain a partnership based on shared democratic values and strategic alignment. Excluding China, Taiwan maintains a level of diplomatic relations, official or otherwise, with many nations worldwide. It can be said that
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) made the astonishing assertion during an interview with Germany’s Deutsche Welle, published on Friday last week, that Russian President Vladimir Putin is not a dictator. She also essentially absolved Putin of blame for initiating the war in Ukraine. Commentators have since listed the reasons that Cheng’s assertion was not only absurd, but bordered on dangerous. Her claim is certainly absurd to the extent that there is no need to discuss the substance of it: It would be far more useful to assess what drove her to make the point and stick so
RSS