社會觀察 . 獨立評論 . 多元觀點 . 公共書寫 . 世代翻轉

  • Home
  • English
  • 評論
  • 民意
  • 時事
  • 生活
  • 國際
  • 歷史
  • 世代
  • 吶喊廣場
  • 轉載
  • 投稿須知

Taiwan & Bilingualism – A Personal Perspective

  • English Article
  • 時事
  • 民意

It seems like the real problem here is that – according to the government – the English ability of Taiwanese people just isn’t up to snuff. But if that’s the case, why not just change the way it’s taught at school instead of implementing an all-encompassing policy?

Does Taiwan really need to become a bilingual nation? According to the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) administration, which recently introduced a policy to that effect, the answer is ‘yes’. But what gives? I mean, what are the actual benefits of making everyone learn English?

Taiwan is planning bilingual education before 2030. Photo: Shutterstock
Taiwan is planning bilingual education before 2030. Photo: Shutterstock

It certainly sounds nice to say that – just like Hong Kong, Singapore and the Philippines – everybody in Taiwan can speak English as well as the native Mandarin. But isn’t that already happening, to some extent? Currently, Taiwanese children start learning English in primary school (while some begin way before that, enrolling in private classes at as early as three years old!), and – as anyone who’s lived there knows – many parents also send their kids to cram schools at night, to study even more English (among other subjects). Plus, when people in Taipei set eyes on a Western person, they often spontaneously break into that international lingua franca.

Actually, the amount of people that speak English in Taipei can be disconcerting, especially if you’re trying to learn Mandarin. For example – as a foreigner attempting to learn Chinese myself – the following is a common experience I’ve had: I walk into a coffee shop, and the girl behind the counter sees me and immediately says: “Hi, welcome. How are you?” I then go up to order, determined to use my fledgling Chinese language skills – despite what she’s just said – and utter, “Qing gei wo yi bei nai cha, xie xie” (請給我一杯奶茶,謝謝). Having made it clear that I speak a little Mandarin, I naturally expect her to respond in that language, as it’s the native tongue of the land we’re in, and yet, instead she says, “You want hot or cold?” – a question that, infuriatingly, isn’t even completely correct English! At that point I usually get frustrated and mutter, “Hot”, quickly stepping aside to avoid talking more in a language I didn’t intend to speak upon entering.

Perhaps that barista just wants to make me feel at home by speaking ‘my’ language (but what if I were French? Or Italian? Or Russian?). However, it’s also possible that she simply wants to ‘use me’ to practice her English, or maybe her belief that foreigners don’t speak Mandarin is so strong that she can’t trust the evidence of her senses. (Side note: I recently visited Japan, where I found that people always, regardless of what you look like, start off by speaking in Japanese, and only after you begin hemming and hawking or a make a confused face do they switch to English). Don’t get me wrong – Taiwanese people are some of the nicest, most polite and welcoming on Earth, but it’s kind of annoying when you’re trying to improve your Chinese – a difficult language to begin with – and everywhere you go people talk to you in English, because, well, you’re white.

But I digress. The point is that, from the perspective of foreigners who come to Taiwan to learn Mandarin (and there quite a few of them), the idea of making Taiwan a bilingual country may seem unnecessary, if not absurd, as most people under the age of 35 – at least in the capital – appear to already have that ability, while a policy of forcing everyone to speak English may diminish even further the natural Chinese practice opportunities available on the street.

But, besides this (somewhat selfish) point, there are other reasons I’m not so enthusiastic about Taiwan becoming English-bilingual.

First, one doesn’t need to be fully bilingual to function effectively in the international business world. Many people, from lots of different nations, do just fine with the English they learn through normal channels – e.g., at school or by studying abroad – and although they may not be able to write poetry or read Faulkner without having a dictionary handy, they don’t need to. What they need, basically, is to understand an English-language email (not exactly advanced literature) and be able to have a straightforward conversation about negotiating prices, invoicing, technology, etc. I’ve personally worked for two different Taiwanese companies over the years, and at both of them a lot of people spoke decent English, meaning we had few problems communicating and the workflow was almost never impeded by language issues. Frankly, it just doesn’t seem necessary to expend so many resources making everyone bilingual if all they’re going to do is chat with foreign clients.

Second, Taiwan has an ugly history of its native tongues being suppressed by the powers that be. Initially, it was the Japanese, who during the colonial period did their best to eradicate Hokkien (aka Taiwanese) and other indigenous languages through compulsory education in their own tongue, and then, when the Kuomintang arrived in 1949, they made everyone speak Mandarin in an effort – once again – to stamp out the native idioms they didn’t care for. Both these efforts eventually failed (although almost everyone now does speak Mandarin), as many people on the island still speak Taiwanese and other languages. But given this disturbing historical situation, the government should at the very least tread lightly over any notion of introducing a new, foreign idiom that every citizen has to learn. For instance, how will the less-frequently spoken Hakka and Aboriginal tongues fare when the speakers of them – besides needing to learn Mandarin – are also forced to acquire English? Will these seemingly less ‘useful’ and more ‘obscure’ languages simply fall by the wayside from disuse? And while the administration’s reason for implementing its bilingual policy is to help Taiwan’s ‘economic competitiveness’ – something most citizens probably support – I have wonder what the Japanese and KMT’s justifications were for getting everyone to learn their languages.

Finally, the DPP National Development Council Minister, Chen Mei-ling – whose agency is responsible for the new policy – cites the English fluency of officials in Germany, which she recently visited, as an inspiration for Taiwan’s bilingualism. The irony, though, is that neither Germany nor any other non-native English-speaking country in Europe considers itself ‘bilingual’ or lists English as an official language. They simply have an effective education system for language learning – one that likely emphasizes speaking and listening over the reading and rote memorizing of Taiwan’s.

It seems like the real problem here is that – according to the government – the English ability of Taiwanese people just isn’t up to snuff. But if that’s the case, why not just change the way it’s taught at school instead of implementing an all-encompassing policy? Maybe it’s because the administration believes that by making bilingualism law, schools will have no choice but to comply, accelerating the process of Taiwan becoming a global competitor (in fact, the target for making the country bilingual is set for 2030, which feels far-fetched given that it took the British – who, like the Japanese, were colonial invaders – 20 years to make all Singaporeans speak their language). If that’s the case, one can only hope the DPP gives this issue the sensitivity it deserves, and doesn’t end up putting ‘business competitiveness’ ahead of its own people’s identity. Otherwise, the administration may go down in history as a version of those very powers it claims to vehemently oppose.

Author / Javier Smith

Share this:

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Email
  • More
  • Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • Pinterest
  • LinkedIn

Related

Bilingual Education 教育 社會 雙語
2019-07-21 Javier Smith

Post navigation

我們不一樣 — 酒店公關啟示錄(三) → ← 柯文哲現在撿到槍還來的及嗎?

Related Posts

[轉] 生活在北韓是什麼感覺?脫北者說:當人類被壓迫成動物,就沒有壓迫感了

她叫 Yeonmi Park,13 歲從北韓脫逃。 ​ 在全美第一的 Podcast 節目裡,Yeonmi 冷靜的對主持人 Joe Rogan 說: 「當你感到被欺壓的時候,你還不算真正被欺壓;欺壓的最高級,是連壓迫感都感覺不到。」 ​ 北韓的人民過著純樸、親近大自然的生活。 ​ 他們種稻米、地瓜之類的營養作物,只是,所有糧食都是國家的,100% 收成必須上繳。 ​ 如果國家沒配發,那抓野生蜻蜓、兔子,還有在土裡收集零碎米粒,就是存活之道。 ​ Yeonmi 說:「當人類吃飽,會有成千上萬的思想和疑問; ​ 但極權者發現,人類飢餓的時候就只剩一種想法 —— 想吃飽。」 ​ 北韓沒收本該統一發配的糧食、讓人們自生自滅之後,就是一場大型殘忍的「飢餓遊戲」。 ​ […]

別演了,國民黨的「3500億+N」只是向北京遞出的投名狀! 

國民黨拋出「3800億+N」軍購特別條例草案,表面上高舉「替人民看緊荷包」、「避免空白授權」的正義大旗,實則卻是一場精心算計的政治大戲。明眼人都看得出來,劇本的走向與北京的戰略利益不謀而合。說穿了,所謂的「加碼」與「嚴謹」,不過是為了掩飾其「實質擋案」的司馬昭之心。 首先,任何稍具軍事常識的人都知道,現代軍事採購尤其是涉及高科技戰機與飛彈系統,動輒耗時五至十年起跳。國民黨版的草案將執行年限死死訂在2028年12月31日,將原本跨年度的長期建案強行壓縮在短短幾年內完成,這不叫「提升效率」,這叫「不可能的任務」。 更荒謬的是,國民黨還要在條例中硬塞入美方必須簽署「延遲交貨懲罰條款」的要求。這完全是無視國際軍售現實的「毒藥條款」。美國對台軍售屬於主權國家間的「對外軍事銷售」,並非一般商業合約,美方根本不可能接受這種懲罰性條款。 國民黨提出這種必被駁回的條件,就好比要求店家「不簽署割地賠款條約就不買東西」,其目的根本不是為了買到東西,而是為了讓交易破局,然後雙手一攤說,「你看,是美國人不賣,不是我不買。」這種設下技術性障礙的手法,名為「防弊」,實為「設障」。 其次,為了合理化擋案行徑,國民黨不惜祭出「泥巴戰」,將民進黨時期的「鐽震案」與國民黨執政時的「拉法葉案」混為一談,試圖塑造「天下烏鴉一般黑」的假象。 我們必須嚴正指出事實,鐽震案的核心在於行政程序瑕疵與規避監督的企圖,這是一個「未遂的制度設計錯誤」。但該公司隨即解散,沒有執行任何購案,更沒有一毛錢公帑落入私人口袋,司法調查也證實無人因貪汙被定罪。 反觀國民黨的「拉法葉案」,那是經過台、法、瑞三國司法認證的驚天弊案。高達近百億台幣的非法佣金流向不明,更伴隨著海軍上校尹清楓的離奇死亡以及後續一連串關係人的意外身亡。這是一場賠上軍官性命、動搖國本的結構性腐敗。 國民黨拿一個「沒貪到錢且已解散」的鐽震案,來類比一個「死人無數且贓款橫流」的拉法葉案,這種道德相對主義的操作,簡直是教科書級別的無恥。 再者,國民黨口口聲聲說要「發價書」、要「嚴謹程序」,但在中共軍機艦日夜騷擾台灣周邊海空域的當下,這種「技術性杯葛」顯得格外諷刺且危險。 「3800億+N」這個看似加碼的數字遊戲,其實是一個無法兌現的空頭支票。國民黨深知,只要卡住預算、設下美方無法接受的條款,軍購案就會無限期延宕,這不正是北京最樂見的結果。國民黨只是為了向對岸交出一張漂亮的投名狀,好讓某些買辦階級能繼續在兩岸紅利中苟延殘喘。 最後,年底大選,人民該給國民黨「幾席+N」?當一個政黨在中央不惜以國家安全為籌碼,向敵對勢力獻媚;在地方,他們又有什麼資格談論「安居樂業」? 別忘了,現代戰爭中的「民防系統」與地方政府息息相關。一個在國會裡千方百計要解除台灣武裝的政黨,若讓他們掌握了縣市首長的行政資源,戰時這些地方政府是會成為國軍的後盾,還是成為配合敵軍登陸的帶路黨? 國民黨以為「3800億+N」是高明的騙術,但台灣人民在年底的縣市長大選,給國民黨的席次不該只是減少,而應該是徹底的「歸零+N」。這個「N」,是「Negative(負數)」,代表著台灣社會對賣台行徑的負分評價;這個「N」,更是「No」,是對那些吃裡扒外、將台灣生存權當作政治籌碼的政客,最堅決的唾棄與否定。 作者:秦靖

[轉] 【書摘】《圍堵中國:全球抗中新秩序下的中國末路與台灣生存新戰略》

4-5台美戰略結盟新時代 二○二四年是《台灣關係法》實施四十五周年,不僅意義重大,也是思考和建構如何深化台美關係與戰略合作的一次重要契機。 過去四十五年來,隨著國際政治情勢的進展與演變,當年制定台灣關係法的背景與環境,與今日的亞太情勢與台美關係,既有相異之處,也有相似之處。 相異之處在於,當年美國對中國的認知與戰略思維,與今日大不相同。一方面當年美國基於「聯中制蘇」以及謀求中國市場的需要,卡特(Jimmy Carter)政府在一種對中國的錯誤期待之下,與中國建立了外交關係,在某種意義上,等同於背棄一個在二戰期間並肩作戰的忠實盟友;另一方面,在遺憾之餘,美國國會也通過了《台灣關係法》,以高於美中《三公報》的法律規格,確保對台灣安全與前途的承諾。四十五年來,歷史已經證明《台灣關係法》的制定,既是睿智的,也是必要的。 相似之處在於,台美雙方至今對中共的本質有了深刻的共同認識。一方面,美國已經從對中國的錯誤期待中醒覺過來,並在繼承《台灣關係法》的原則與精神之下,認識到台美關係的深化與合作,才是符合台美雙邊利益與世界發展的道路;另一方面,四十五年來已經證明,台美之間共享民主體制與自由價值的事實,使得台美之間強化戰略聯盟,已經成為穩定區域和平與國際秩序的必要之舉。 一、何謂「台美戰略結盟」?──「台美聯合備戰體系」的建構 這裡所說的「結盟」,不是國際政治上的「同盟」(alliance),而是「聯盟」(coalition)。基於台美之間為不具正式外交關係的友好國家,所以台美戰略結盟不同於類似「美日安保」或「美菲共同防禦」的軍事同盟關係,而是基於更為寬廣的區域和平所進行的安全合作,也就是「以共同的戰略對手為目標的軍事合作」。 在此意義上,台美目前以及未來的軍事合作,真正的目的並非如大眾傳言讓台灣作為美國代理人的先鋒敢死隊,也不是台灣為了美國從事一場「代理戰爭」,而是為台灣爭取抵抗共軍侵台的時間與空間,以利於美盟軍力進行聯合反擊。因此,我把「台美軍事結盟」定義為「台美聯合備戰體系」的建構,也就是在台美緊密和專業的合作之下,共同遏制中共對台灣以及亞太區域的侵略與威脅。 但是,這裡所說的「備戰」是從積極意義上來表述的。對於所謂戰爭,一般來說有三種對應方式:一是備戰,二是迎戰,三是作戰。這裡我所謂的「備戰」,不是消極被動的、無可奈何的本土抗戰,而是積極主動的反制作戰。正是在這意義上,台美的軍事結盟才具有前瞻性與效用性,也使《台灣關係法》在保護台海安全上具有靈活性與可持續性。 二、台美戰略聯盟的新思維 我這裡要引述美國前國務卿蓬佩奧(Mike Pompeo)以及前美國海軍軍官、哈德遜研究所(Hudson Institute)高級研究員克拉克(Bryan Clark),投書於《國會山莊報》(The Hill)的一篇文章,題為〈可能有助美軍捍衛台灣的新戰略概念〉(A new strategic concept could be useful in the US military’s defense of Taiwan)。文章呼籲,美國五角大廈應該跳脫傳統思維,以部署「專門部隊」來應對中共對台灣的攻擊。 文章中有兩個關鍵詞,一是美國的「戰略死局」,意思包括: […]

WBC台灣隊對捷克戰績與最新戰況:14比0止血後,真正的生死戰才開始

台灣隊在本屆WBC小組賽對捷克的交手。台灣隊3月7日於東京巨蛋以14比0、7局提前扣倒捷克,拿下預賽首勝,也把晉級希望從懸崖邊拉回來。這場比賽由費爾柴德滿貫砲帶動攻勢,全隊跑出8次盜壘成功、火力與速度一次到位,形成典型「不對稱進攻」的壓迫感。 但這一勝的意義,並不是「穩了」,而是「終於有資格談下一步」。因為台灣在C組前兩戰先以0比3不敵澳洲、再遭日本13比0扣倒,前三戰打完才把戰績拉到1勝2敗,仍處在被動局面。 目前C組形勢更殘酷:日本與澳洲同為2勝0敗,韓國1勝1敗,台灣1勝2敗,捷克0勝3敗已確定墊底。 也因此台灣「剩下的路」非常明確:下一戰必須擊敗韓國,而且還牽涉到失分與對戰比較的淘汰條件。今周刊整理的戰況直接點出,台灣因先前對澳洲失分3分,對韓國不只要贏,還可能需要贏4分以上,才更能掌握晉級的計算空間。 接下來賽程也等於把命運交給連鎖結果:台灣與韓國的對戰在3月8日上午11點開打;同日晚上是澳洲對日本;之後3月9日韓國對澳洲、3月10日捷克對日本收尾。 台灣已無多餘場次可修正,必須把「對韓國」當作決賽級別來打,並同時緊盯韓國對澳洲的結果,因為那場很可能決定第二張門票最終落點。 這屆台灣隊的問題從來不是「有沒有球星」,而是「能不能在短賽制把勝率最大化」。對捷克14比0是必要的止血,但真正的考驗在於:面對韓國這種投打均衡、臨場調度成熟的對手,台灣能否把上一場的速度、壓迫式跑壘與早期得分,轉成可重複的得分模型;以及能否在投手調度上避免「一局崩盤」把失分差放大。因為在這個小組,勝負之外,「分差」本身就是另一個比分板。 新公民議會編輯小組

Recent Posts

[轉] 生活在北韓是什麼感覺?脫北者說:當人類被壓迫成動物,就沒有壓迫感了

[轉] 生活在北韓是什麼感覺?脫北者說:當人類被壓迫成動物,就沒有壓迫感了

她叫 Yeonmi Park,13 歲從北韓脫逃。 ​ 在全美第一的 Podcast 節目裡,Yeonmi 冷靜的對主持人 Joe Rogan 說: 「當你感到被欺壓的時候,你還不算真正被欺壓;欺壓的最高級,是連壓迫感都感覺不到。」 ​ 北韓的人民過著純樸、親近大自然的生活。 ​ 他們種稻米、地瓜之類的營養作物,只是,所有糧食都是國家的,100% 收成必須上繳。 ​ [...]

More Info
別演了,國民黨的「3500億+N」只是向北京遞出的投名狀! 

別演了,國民黨的「3500億+N」只是向北京遞出的投名狀! 

國民黨拋出「3800億+N」軍購特別條例草案,表面上高舉「替人民看緊荷包」、「避免空白授權」的正義大旗,實則卻是一場精心算計的政治大戲。明眼人都看得出來,劇本的走向與北京的戰略利益不謀而合。說穿了,所謂的「加碼」與「嚴謹」,不過是為了掩飾其「實質擋案」的司馬昭之心。 [...]

More Info
[轉] 【書摘】《圍堵中國:全球抗中新秩序下的中國末路與台灣生存新戰略》

[轉] 【書摘】《圍堵中國:全球抗中新秩序下的中國末路與台灣生存新戰略》

4-5台美戰略結盟新時代 二○二四年是《台灣關係法》實施四十五周年,不僅意義重大,也是思考和建構如何深化台美關係與戰略合作的一次重要契機。 過去四十五年來,隨著國際政治情勢的進展與演變,當年制定台灣關係法的背景與環境,與今日的亞太情勢與台美關係,既有相異之處,也有相似之處。 [...]

More Info
WBC台灣隊對捷克戰績與最新戰況:14比0止血後,真正的生死戰才開始

WBC台灣隊對捷克戰績與最新戰況:14比0止血後,真正的生死戰才開始

台灣隊在本屆WBC小組賽對捷克的交手。台灣隊3月7日於東京巨蛋以14比0、7局提前扣倒捷克,拿下預賽首勝,也把晉級希望從懸崖邊拉回來。這場比賽由費爾柴德滿貫砲帶動攻勢,全隊跑出8次盜壘成功、火力與速度一次到位,形成典型「不對稱進攻」的壓迫感。 [...]

More Info

搜尋

精選文章

川習會的中美矛盾是戰略,不是貿易!

2017-04-08 韓非

八仙樂園爆炸案:缺乏常識造成的災難

2015-06-28 異想

彰化縣民輪替後的哀與愁

2016-03-06 許家瑋

新文明病:儲物症(Hoarding disorder)似正在增加

2015-04-13 楊庸一

訂閱本站

輸入你的電子郵件訂閱新文章並接收新通知。

Powered by WordPress | theme Dream Way
Powered by WordPress | theme Dream Way