A longstanding argument

The argument goes back a long time. In the aftermath of World War I, it was suggested that language ignorance had played a substantial part in both the events that led up to it and the failure of Britain to be sufficiently prepared and militarily more successful.

In 1918, the Leathes report into the Modern Language provision in British schools pointed to the dual purpose of language teaching as an essential component of a “liberal education” on the one hand and a necessity for “commerce and public service”, on the other.

The debate has continued to oscillate between these two arguments ever since, with government and public interest typically increasing at times of political crises, such as the Cold War.

The internet is teeming with articles about the benefits of bilingualism, few of which are likely to persuade young people to put more effort into their French homework. Yes, it can boost your brain power, but so does eating broccoli, and when has that ever interested your teenager?

Of more interest, particularly to the parents of those teenagers who come to our Open Days at the University of York, worried about spending tens of thousands of pounds on a potentially ‘low value degree’ for their offspring, are some hard financial facts.

It may be reassuring for those parents to hear that “language ignorance” damages the UK economy to the tune of 3.5% of GDP, or around £80bn per year at current rates, and that knowing another language can boost lifetime income by up to 15%. Furthermore, and counter to popular opinion, languages can be learned at any age.

Two arguments, however, are very frequently raised in the debate on the value of language learning in English-speaking countries. The first was already raised above: why should we put effort into learning French, Spanish, Italian, etc., when the speakers of these languages are already proficient in English?

The answer is that we should learn these languages precisely because their speakers know English. In any situation of communication and negotiation, language professionals are needed who have a good knowledge of one language and a native knowledge of the other.

That is the reason why native speakers of different languages all speaking English with each other understand each other better than a native and a non-native.

My colleagues and I recently did some market research to prepare for a new MA course in Interpreting, Translating and Applied Technologies, and we found that from huge international organisations, such as the EU, down to local businesses, one of the biggest obstacles to both communication and trade is the scarcity of native English translators and interpreters, with global demand for these roles expected to increase by nearly 50% over the next 10 years.

The cultural and communicative factors that may or may not make an international business meeting a success are complex, but when a Chinese and an English delegation communicate exclusively through native interpreters of one of the languages, this can lead to a skewed cultural and power structure, as well as to interpreting users having to make a greater effort to understand the interpretation, which in turn may have an impact on their perceptions of interpreting quality.  

English is arguably the most successful export and the most precious natural resource of the British Isles, and we are missing a huge trick in leaving its exploitation to other nations.

The second argument is that both language learning resources, such as Duolingo, and AI tools will make foreign language teaching in schools as well as the necessity to know foreign languages in the first place obsolete in the short term.

This, too, is wrong: such tools can enhance the experience of learning languages and using them professionally, but they are no substitute for the real thing. The challenge here is to the language educators, to evolve our pedagogical approaches and classroom strategies to teach our students to use them as effectively as possible.

If I were a 16-year old today, wanting an education that would all but guarantee me good employment, interesting opportunities, and the chance to travel, I would do a language A-level, a BA in business management or international relations with a language minor, and a postgraduate degree in translating or interpreting, teaching me how to use AI tools to best effect.

It is nice to see that so many people in the UK appear to agree with me – let’s get languages back into the school curriculum!

Professor Monika S Schmid is Professor of Linguistics and Head of Department of Language and Linguistic Science at the University of York.
 

See her website at https://languageattrition.org/ or contact her at monika.schmid@york.ac.uk