Education 14 - Linguistics of Foreign Language Teaching

Teaching foreign languages may be considered by some as the prerogative of bilingual teachers.  This assumes (a) bilingualism, and (b) teacher training, but one important qualification is usually forgotten … linguistics.

     Bilingualism - Although a bilingual teacher should be able to teach reading and writing, listening and speaking must be the prerogative of the native language teacher.  This principle is also known for its importance with translators.

     Teacher Training - Knowledge of the subject is, of course, essential, but formal teacher training is crucial.  Registration at teaching colleges should center on graduates of major subjects, with concentration on teaching philosophies and practise.

Thus, from experience, one observes new teachers presenting themselves in front of classes with a teacher trainer hovering, necessarily, in the background.  Difficulties occur when a foreign language is the subject to be taught.  For example, a British teacher teaching English to British students would be a straight forward matter, but the same teacher teaching French to the same students will need additional qualifications and experience.  Equally, a Chinese teacher using English to teach Chinese to Bangladeshi students, a common example, will require even greater experience.

Linguistics, in these, and similar scenarios, is often ignored.  A common problem seen with learning a foreign language is accurate pronunciation in speaking and listening.  British students in London will have some difficulty if taught by a teacher from Edinburgh, and, obviously, Bangladeshi students will have even greater difficulty learning Chinese from a teacher using English as an implement (Even though English is an official language of the country).

Teachers of foreign languages are often unaware of linguistic principles and sometimes use their intuition towards success.  Others, usually, those without training, unfortunately, may develop unfair thoughts about their student's ability.  The answer is both interesting and simple, and therefore, enjoyable.

Linguistics teaches us that our speech varies enormously because of the distances that we live away from each other.  Over long periods of time, we create different words and phrases for the same thing.  Physically, our vocal cords adapt differently, such that one ethnic group is unable to make the ‘th’ sound, and another group will pronounce an ‘f’ as a ‘v’, etc.  Such detail includes those who may have many different words for one item, for example, the word ‘ice’ by the Inuit people, or the absence of the word ‘please' in the Chinese language. 

Such knowledge becomes enjoyable for most of us when it is realized that to overcome these problems we must study, not only the history and culture of the people, but the history and culture of the language.  In fact it is our duty to the students to diligently make this study.  Then, when you, next, face the student with an arm raised to ask the question, “Why are the words ‘meet’ and ‘meat’ spelt differently, but pronounced the same?” you could discuss Germanic origins, etc.  It is probable that listening to William Shakespeare would, then, be enjoyed.  

Politics 10 - Thin Edge of the Wedge

The U.K., the place of my birth but, now, a place that is almost unrecognizable in certain areas.  The County of Kent, where I grew up, known as The Garden of England, feels different, as if there is a pulsing undercurrent of unrest.  My loved Thomas Hardy County of Dorset, pictured on Christmas cards (Remember those?), breathes the fresh air with innocence of an uncertain future.  London, of course, has always been a multicultural city, since being established by the Romans, and where it was usually difficult to distinguish one culture from another but, now, there is an obvious ‘frontal attack’ by an increasingly dominant, and vociferous, Islamic community ... and the government appears to lack any authority for which to display the necessary control.

My Peaceful English Country House

Most English villages developed around small farming groups.  Produce marketing established the eventual village shop;  A religious need built a church;  eventually, a sense of community introduced the Public House (Pub).  Over the years, there were more shops, churches and, certainly, more pubs, as towns and cities were born (Please excuse the simplification).

Today, Christian churches are closing, and Islamic domes are constructed above their roofs.  Many shops are boarded up because of changing customer needs and, in their place, some are reopening with signs written solely in Islamic script (The Quebec language police would have a heyday with that).  The need for social community takes place in the mosque (although the ‘need’ for some Muslims is doubtful), and, thus, the once-popular pub has closed, and dereliction has taken over ... a probable breeding ground for extremists.

No, this is not Dhaka, Bangladesh, but London, U.K., 2013

A good friend of mine who made a more extensive tour of the U.K. recently, wrote to say that he was forced to double-check his air tickets because he felt sure that he had landed in Pakistan by mistake.  He wasn’t exaggerating. 

One is bound to ask, why do Muslims emigrate to a country that sells world-famous pork sausages, tasteful ale, and listens to glorious choirs singing in cathedrals every Sunday.?  If I had wished to become an Australian, I would have gone to Australia, but I admired the Canadian way of life and came to Canada.  Is this new wave of immigration the result of Muslims wishing to become British because they admire the British way of life?  It seems such an alarmingly sad question when they carry banners saying, “Kill the Queen” and “Sharia law for everyone”.

I think this to be a very important question for a country like Canada which believes, wrongly, in a policy of multiculturalism.  In 2012, 257,515 immigrants and 23,056 refugees came to Canada, and the Minister for Immigration states that these numbers are planned to continue in the future.  It may be too late for the U.K. (and France), but it could be a warning for us. 

The U.K. and Canada (and other similar countries) occasionally make changes to their respective list of “safe” countries, (Countries from which refugees are no longer accepted).  It occurs to me that refugees from these countries who have enjoyed the safety, and benefits from our welfare systems, could be deported back ... certainly, if they have not proven to be productive members of our society (I have written elsewhere about the huge number of criminal immigrants in our over-crowded goals).

I see it as the thin edge of the wedge, that requires a sensible strengthening of immigration and deportation laws.

As a Postscript, my attention is focussed on our indigenous communities.  They are Canadians too, yet we segregate them to wilderness reserves.  I am tempted to suggest that we set up reserves for refugees too, after all, Australia does it.  Remember, qualified immigrants come here after a long intensive scrutiny to integrate and become tax-paying, employed Canadians, whilst refugees come to simply escape politically and culturally unsafe countries.  I imagine that when the word travels globally that refugees in Canada no longer live in highly subsidized, high-rise apartments, etc. (usually, better than low-income Canadians) there would be an remarkable reduction in refugee numbers ... simply because some of them are not refugees, but ‘queue-jumpers’.

Now, we shall discover if controversy creates discussion, anonymously or otherwise.   

Your comment is welcome by clicking below