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
  • 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

「文」「昌」會合要「稱帝稱君」?

      政壇若有星象學,那今年 11月 18 日這天,大概就是「文昌星過境、諸事皆可八卦」的日子。黃國昌與鄭麗文坐下來討論「聯合內閣」,乍看之下像兩人準備在政壇開啟新朝代,彷彿古代大臣密會要推舉帝王。然而,我國總統是一人一票選出有直接民意基礎,不是靠談判誕生,內閣也不是政黨茶會上就能「你一個、我一個」分配。於是這場見面,更像一部政治喜劇、也是一場行伍不全的軍演。       當下台灣的情勢可說是內外皆緊;外有對岸灰色作戰侵擾;美國則是想在商貿中占盡台灣便宜,加上美中對抗進入深化期,使台灣在地緣政治上更加敏感;內部則是藍白在國會裡彼此角力、互踩線,彷彿誰若不每天拌幾句嘴就不算發薪。社會對在野的期待原本是「請好好監督」,結果監督變直播,直播成表演,表演又變成政黨互動的唯一語言。在這樣的背景下,任何跨黨見面都會被放大,尤其是兩位風格迥異的政治人物;一位是曾以戰鬥姿態聞名的法政論辯者,一位是兼俱威柔的文化政治家,兩者坐在一起,究竟是理性對話或是各取所需的見面,尤其兩者在黨內面臨類似問題,一者阿北官司未解、隱約有太陽「潛龍」著。另者,則面臨群陽共舞,皆須藉外部勢力來團結個人權威。       然而,若說這次會面背後有什麼深不可測的政治企圖,那也未必。黃國昌過去以犀利批判累積名聲,到了民眾黨後又成為黨內最能製造新聞的人物,但聲量畢竟不是治理。此時與鄭麗文見面,對他而言,是一次踩進「國政場域」的小試身手。須塑造自己不只會拆東牆,也能造西牆;不只會揮刀,也能拿筆談政策。至於是否真的能拿起那支筆錯落何方,仍須視利益交涉程度,至少當日會面須作足場面與架子。        反觀鄭麗文,即使過去與白營互有攻防,但她仍願意出席這種會談,顯示出藍營中生代並非只在黨內接班,更能處理自朱主席以來藍白未竟之合;又或未該次見面抬高政治地位,最終目的仍是擁兵自重,畢竟該次雖當選主席確不能代表全體台灣人,甚至是淺藍選民。        至於媒體最愛炒作的「聯合內閣」,誠為一種不切實際的政治泡沫、毫無實體面可支持。觀察我國憲法經1990年代以來修憲以趨近本土化,總統職位不但是憲法賦予更是台灣民主文化獨特性的象徵。是故,不可能由一場會面來否決修憲成果與運行多年之體制,這場會面、這場宣示,更多是一種政治訊號,即藍白企圖建構新類型政治平台來架空現有執政團隊,還是那套「讓執政黨出包、挑戰者坐擁選票」的老式戰略邏輯。但試想,一旦該架空當權者平台逐漸淪為政治常態,兩人有幸成為總統後又逢難以一黨獨大局面;或是曾經盟友尋求更多資源,勝利者將如何分配?在野者是否又使歷史重複,一樣的亂局刻寫入青史,政治是否將為饒舌者服務?       若要說這場「文昌合」是否真會讓誰稱帝稱君,那大概只能說:台灣民主不是宮廷戲,那年頭早過去了。台灣的帝王由選票產生,不靠結盟、不靠密會。黃國昌想累積治理形象,鄭麗文展現政務能力,各自都沒有錯;但權力光環不是靠會面生成,而是靠國家制度規範與人民選票決定。總之,政黨交流與結盟固然在形式上值得肯定,然實際目的確是長期隱患,究竟誰會在這場「文會」中脫穎而出、尚在未定之天;唯一確定的是「武鬥」執政黨將進入新階段,但看隨後造化。 作者  /  風林火山

柯文哲與黃國昌的深層矛盾

柯文哲深陷圖利風暴後,黃國昌也捲入涉貪疑雲,台灣民眾黨「兩顆太陽」之爭,在2026選舉即將來臨之刻,也愈來愈檯面化。   從權力結構來看,民眾黨目前是「創黨教主」與「實權黨魁」的雙核心政黨,外界常以「兩個太陽」形容柯文哲和黃國昌的關係。   在多數白營支持者心中,創黨主席柯文哲始終是無可取代的精神領袖,也是民眾黨的品牌所在。而現任主席黃國昌則是掌握黨機器、國會戰線、輿論攻防,負責把民眾黨推上新聞標題、在立院與街頭開火。柯黃兩人之間,是一種既合作又互相依存的關係,同時也存在資源分配與政黨未來走向的深層矛盾。   柯、黃兩人是短期利益的合作,而非長遠理念的結合,雙方心知肚明。黃國昌過去太陽花學運和時代力量的背景,被視為親綠的改革派,他甚至公開批評過柯文哲的兩岸立場,直到2023 年,兩人才逐步靠攏結盟。   黃國昌加入民眾黨後,積極參與黨團運作、指揮國會戰線,並在柯文哲陷入司法風波、聲勢受挫之際,順勢接任黨主席、接管民眾黨,同時,他也把自己的政治命運和柯文哲捆綁在一起。   攤開民眾黨黨章,民眾黨只有一個黨主席,就是黃國昌。黨主席權力高度且集中。而從實務運作而言,民眾黨幾乎所有重大政治路線、選舉戰略與藍白關係的最終定奪,仍然無法繞開柯文哲。前後兩個當主席,一者權力來自黨職與程序,一者權威來自創黨道統與小草信仰。   黨內曾有「小事問黃國昌,大事要看柯 P」的說法,這反映出柯、黃兩人合作當中,仍存有戒心、緊張關係和未來的權力矛盾。   就黃國昌的角度而言,他身為黨主席,掌握中委會、黨務人事與2026選戰提名佈局,是名符其實的實權黨魁。然而,基層小草的情緒,仍高度依附在柯文哲身上。未來,一旦柯文哲的司法案件有明顯轉折、聲勢大起大落;民眾黨是否應該真正告別一人政黨,這一問題就不能再拖延。   民眾黨長期被視為「一人政黨」,但是一人政黨,卻有兩顆太陽。這象徵民眾黨已經從「獨尊柯文哲的個人政黨」,轉型成「柯文哲掌握品牌與道統、黃國昌掌握組織與機器」的雙核心格局。固然黨章上只有一個黨主席,但在黨員和小草支持者心中,「創黨教主」與「實權黨魁」這兩套權力結構,是可以理解且接受的。  柯文哲、黃國昌未來能否長期共存,走向分裂內戰,將決定民眾黨在 2026 之後,能否延續政治生命。 作者:江諺行

請問鄭麗文「區長」:一國兩區的「中央政府」是誰 ?

你我台灣小公民問鄭麗文「區長」,她所主張的「一國兩區」的中央政府到底是誰?她一定爽快、毫無懸念的回答「當然是中華民國」。 如果你我把同樣問國台辦,或是中南海或領導大爺們( 假如他們不以為忤,願意回答我們的疑問 ),他們一定回答「為甚麽不去問聯合國,他們的決議文?假若沒有安全理事會的成員有否決權,你們會怎麼樣了?」安理會會不會多數議決「中國只有一個,台灣屬於中國,『中華人民共和國』是中國的唯一代表!」 所以鄭麗文主席要當「中華民國的區長」不是想像那麽容易?—— 說真的!你我台灣小公民們此時可能會聽到台北的政治達人們在捧腹大笑:「你們以為鄭主席在說真的!她在項莊舞劍,志在沛公,她要的是『中華人民共和國』的區長!」 國台辦和中南海的大老板當然心知肚明,不願點破,全盤否認,因為鄭麗文這樣說,有些台灣選民,尤其是藍營的同路人會買單!因為鄭麗文要當「中華人民共和國區長」,要先把中華民國抬出來,當中華民國總統再說!」 所以以往說的「溫水煮青蛙」策略一點也沒錯:先煮熟中華民國總統,自然中華人民共和國區長,跟著一起熟,水到渠成,一蛙兩吃 :厲害啊!鄭主席真是厲害,怪不得對岸會尊稱你是「統一女神」! 所以問鄭麗文「區長」:一國兩區的「中央政府」是誰?是假議題,全要看強國間的航母戰鬪羣,誰的比較「船堅炮利」?近日中國在黃海海軍大演習,把1894年清帝國和日本帝國雙方數十艘海軍艦隊在黃海的大戰鬪,重來一回,溫故而知新,給日本首相當頭棒喝,也給美國海軍當局一個嚴厲警告:不只南海,西太平洋也要分成兩半,各有所屬,我們現在可有我們的「無敵艦隊」! 台灣的小公民們倒是願意向中國政府建議:因鄭麗文主席,出身(野百合花)學運,羣眾演說,口若懸河,但從沒有經過「沙場」的考驗,萬一親臨實境,觳觫戰慄,貽笑大方! 所以,當下次「福州航母」路過台灣海峽,要特意邀請鄭主席上艦參訪,親身體驗上國的威武雄壯,有朝一日,可身為中華人民共和國公民而自豪,—— 鄭主席的親身驗證下,誰才是「中央政府」不証而自明,無庸置疑,絕對不會是「中華民國 」! 作者: 李隱

防詐防過頭-寧可錯殺一百,不可漏放一個?

近年來詐騙已經變成是一種社會公害,詐騙手法百百種,令人防不勝防 損失輕者幾個月工資,嚴重者可能傾家蕩產。因此,防詐成為政府治安重點項目,要求銀行、電信業者被配合警政,嚴加防守。 但強力防詐的手段之下,也衍生出一群無辜的受害者,因為被銀行的「智慧化系統」誤判,變成限制帳戶,ATM提款與網路轉帳只能一萬、三萬,而且申訴未必有效。 以筆者本身的遭遇,2024年五月某天早上,在中國信託提款機要提領五萬多元,結果系統訊息說我的帳戶受到限制,還搞不清楚狀況,只好臨櫃去排隊近半小時,櫃檯也搞不清楚。 後來,回家撥客服電話,客服說是我的帳戶被警示帳戶設定成約定帳戶。問題是,誰約定我的帳戶,銀行也不能告訴我,我也不能申請解除這個約定關係,變成無解之謎。 於是我上網搜尋到金管會申訴信箱,向金管會與銀行局申訴,結果還是轉給中國信託處理,銀行一樣回覆不能解除限制,但終於釐清一個事實,是我多年前約定的某個帳戶,現在變成警示或衍生帳戶了,銀行的超級智慧化系統,就判定我的帳戶有問題,寧可錯殺一百,不可錯放一個。 既然是我約定的某個帳號,那銀行告訴我是哪一個,我去解除不就好了?不行!銀行就是不能告訴我是哪個帳號。這件事再次陷入死胡同。 這期間有超過三萬的轉帳,必須臨櫃辦理、或是每天三萬慢慢轉,有幾次還差點違約交割。只能說,極其不便。 直到今年,找到金融評議中心可以申請評議,又重新開始另一段維權之路,從中國信託的回覆公文來看,我在銀行的眼中是個可疑人士,例如:約定多個帳號、可疑的轉帳留言等。 在金融評議中心的評議之後,並未通過我要求的解除相關限制,因為這個案件沒有爭議金額,但我大概知道中國信託因為哪一類的帳號才判定我的帳戶有問題,所以解除了幾個類似帳號。 在解除可疑的約定帳號之後,銀行的態度與說法,又變成要保護我不被詐騙、銀行內規要求等,只能放寬到五萬/十萬的提款轉帳限額。 這件事歷時一年半,期間因為提款、轉帳的不便,也造成要臨櫃排隊的耗時處理程序,以及險些違約交割的風險。 現在為了防詐,銀行的各項措施越來越嚴格難搞,以中國信託為例,要設定約定帳號就只能是本人及家人的帳號,否則要提出相關正式佐證文件,而且各項業務動不動就要臨櫃,已經造成民眾的不便。 總而言之,要避免不必要的銀行限制,建議採取以下策略: 一、小心填寫轉帳留言:當銀行對你的帳戶有疑慮時,會檢視你過往轉帳記錄的備註,若有可疑的備註,銀行可能依此判定帳戶有疑慮,主動限制轉帳。 二、沒必要約定就不要約定帳號:難保哪天某個約定帳號變成警示或衍生帳戶,即使經過幾個月的申訴、評議過程,也未必能知道是哪個帳號。 三、瞭解維權流程:要進入金融評議中心流程,事先必須經過銀行或金管會正式申訴管道,未能解決的案件才能申請評議,雖不具強制效力,但還是可以嘗試。 詐騙集團很可惡,但為了防詐把民眾的金融權益犧牲掉,未必是件好事,對於不小心掉入政府與銀行政策的坑中的民眾,也應該提供解套的機制,而不是置之不理。 作者:叫我老闆

Recent Posts

「文」「昌」會合要「稱帝稱君」?

「文」「昌」會合要「稱帝稱君」?

      政壇若有星象學,那今年 11月 18 日這天,大概就是「文昌星過境、諸事皆可八卦」的日子。黃國昌與鄭麗文坐下來討論「聯合內閣」,乍看之下像兩人準備在政壇開啟新朝代,彷彿古代大臣密會要推舉帝王。然而,我國總統是一人一票選出有直接民意基礎,不是靠談判誕生,內閣也不是政黨茶會上就能「你一個、我一個」分配。於是這場見面,更像一部政治喜劇、也是一場行伍不全的軍演。     [...]

More Info
柯文哲與黃國昌的深層矛盾

柯文哲與黃國昌的深層矛盾

柯文哲深陷圖利風暴後,黃國昌也捲入涉貪疑雲,台灣民眾黨「兩顆太陽」之爭,在2026選舉即將來臨之刻,也愈來愈檯面化。   從權力結構來看,民眾黨目前是「創黨教主」與「實權黨魁」的雙核心政黨,外界常以「兩個太陽」形容柯文哲和黃國昌的關係。   [...]

More Info
請問鄭麗文「區長」:一國兩區的「中央政府」是誰 ?

請問鄭麗文「區長」:一國兩區的「中央政府」是誰 ?

你我台灣小公民問鄭麗文「區長」,她所主張的「一國兩區」的中央政府到底是誰?她一定爽快、毫無懸念的回答「當然是中華民國」。 如果你我把同樣問國台辦,或是中南海或領導大爺們( 假如他們不以為忤,願意回答我們的疑問 [...]

More Info
防詐防過頭-寧可錯殺一百,不可漏放一個?

防詐防過頭-寧可錯殺一百,不可漏放一個?

近年來詐騙已經變成是一種社會公害,詐騙手法百百種,令人防不勝防 損失輕者幾個月工資,嚴重者可能傾家蕩產。因此,防詐成為政府治安重點項目,要求銀行、電信業者被配合警政,嚴加防守。 但強力防詐的手段之下,也衍生出一群無辜的受害者,因為被銀行的「智慧化系統」誤判,變成限制帳戶,ATM提款與網路轉帳只能一萬、三萬,而且申訴未必有效。 [...]

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