A lawmaker questioned Premier Yu Shyi-kun in English during a recent interpellation session, putting all those present on edge as if they were students taking a test. The legislator acted like a teacher catching a student mak-ing mistakes and even stopped the "good students" from coming to his aid as interpreters. After-wards, the lawmaker praised Yu's pronunciation, saying that with more practice his English would be OK.
If proficiency in the English language is an indicator of the competence of government officials, why not just put Taiwan's English teachers in charge of the affairs of state?
To be sure, English is set to become the universal language, and it is the foreign language on which Taiwan has spent the most educational resources. But Tai-wan has never been colonized by an English-speaking country nor is English the nation's official language. It is not normal to question government officials in a foreign language. If the interpellator does not speak the official language, he or she, rather than the official on the podium, should bring in an interpreter.
It is even more unreasonable for the lawmaker to prevent the official from seeking assistance with interpretation. Would officials be prohibited from having interpreters if, one day, lawmakers were to start speaking Russian or French?
Language acquisition requires time and a suitable environment. Anyone growing up in the US can speak English. To show off one's English-language skills to others is simply to reveal one's coarseness and arrogance. It is only in the eyes of linguists that "languages are born equal." The fact is that language always involves social and political power and equality of language will therefore never exist. At a time when a sort of "English language-induced anxiety disorder" is sweeping the nation, those in the legislature should not add fuel to the fire.
Linguistic arrogance is nothing new to Taiwanese. During the Japanese era, Chinese was relegated to secondary importance behind Japanese. Over the past half century, the predominance of Mandarin has made the use of local dialects less widespread. Are we now to be faced with the prospect of English taking supremacy over our mother tongues?
The impact of a dominant language on the student's psychology needs to be given special attention. Already three different types of kindergartens have appeared: "all-American," "dual language" and "regular." When they enter primary school, children from these kindergartens will all be sitting in the same classrooms and the problems they face will be very complex.
Many scholars have already noted that this English language-induced anxiety disorder is not conducive to good language teaching or learning. It could even lead to a deterioration in native language skills. Language-related skills of logic and organization may also be affected.
I'll give an example. A few days ago, I visited the zoo. All around me, parents were telling their children things in a jumble of English and Chinese -- such as "你看,有一個 monkey 耶" (Look, there's a monkey) and "Annie, 牠們在 sleeping, 有沒有看到?" (Annie, they're sleeping. Can you see them?).
Such mixed use of languages has already caught the attention of academics in Hong Kong and Singapore, who believe this is one of the factors affecting students' ability in Chinese and language skills in general. There's a steady stream of teachers calling for less use of mixed language.
Teachers and parents in Taiwan, however, seem to lack this sense of alarm. They are even encouraging their children to sandwich English words into their speech. This is of course one of the symptoms of English language-induced anxiety disorder.
A great deal of caution must be used in the drafting of language policy. Dual-language education generally has two consequences. One is the expansion of language skills beyond the native language, which is, of course, a good thing. The other is an undermined native language, gradually causing it to atrophy and become more narrow, which is not necessarily what we want to see.
Taiwan has always been envious of the English language skills of the ethnic Chinese populations of Hong Kong and Singapore. Today, Mandarin Chinese schools are a dime a dozen in Hong Kong. Singapore is also vigorously promoting Mandarin studies. They are now reviewing the gains and losses of their language policies over the last several decades. Hong Kong has a two scripts and three languages policy -- the Roman alphabet and Chinese characters; English, Mandarin and Cantonese. Singapore has one script and several languages -- the Roman alphabet and English, Mandarin, Minnan, Cantonese, Malay and Indian languages).
Over the last few decades, Chinese-language education has been stronger in Taiwan than in Singapore and Hong Kong, but we do not seem to value our own assets nor look to the experiences of those places. Blindly giving English a high profile and promoting it as the language of a superior country is not the road to successful dual-language education.
There are of course many advantages to studying a foreign language. The South Korean TV series The Way of Business is a story about a translator who has struck it rich thanks to his Chinese-language skills. Practical considerations aside, the thinking and vision of dual language speakers are often broader and more diverse than those of people who only know their native language. The premise for successful dual-language education, how-ever, is successful native language education, not diminution -- or even replacement -- of the native language.
It is to be hoped that sound methods will be used to expand the nation's language skills and the study of foreign languages and that English language-induced anxiety disorder will not spread from the legislature to kindergartens. In the final analysis, language is about communication, not showing off.
Sharon Lai is an assistant professor in the Graduate Institute of Translation and Interpretation at National Taiwan Normal University.
Translated by Jackie Lin and Perry Svensson
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
Taiwan is confronting escalating threats from its behemoth neighbor. Last month, the Chinese People’s Liberation Army conducted live-fire drills in the East China Sea, practicing blockades and precision strikes on simulated targets, while its escalating cyberattacks targeting government, financial and telecommunication systems threaten to disrupt Taiwan’s digital infrastructure. The mounting geopolitical pressure underscores Taiwan’s need to strengthen its defense capabilities to deter possible aggression and improve civilian preparedness. The consequences of inadequate preparation have been made all too clear by the tragic situation in Ukraine. Taiwan can build on its successful COVID-19 response, marked by effective planning and execution, to enhance
Since taking office, US President Donald Trump has upheld the core goals of “making America safer, stronger, and more prosperous,” fully implementing an “America first” policy. Countries have responded cautiously to the fresh style and rapid pace of the new Trump administration. The US has prioritized reindustrialization, building a stronger US role in the Indo-Pacific, and countering China’s malicious influence. This has created a high degree of alignment between the interests of Taiwan and the US in security, economics, technology and other spheres. Taiwan must properly understand the Trump administration’s intentions and coordinate, connect and correspond with US strategic goals.
RSS