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

夾在選民壓力與北京疑慮:國民黨的軍購兩難

全球地緣政治對立情勢加劇,台海戰爭風險提升,原本傾向阻擋對美軍購通過的國民黨近期態度軟化,3月5日拍板通過「3500億+N」軍購案版本。國民黨此舉是希望挽回選民擔心KMT過度親中的疑慮,但是對於共產黨而言,國民黨承認軍售,無疑是增加未來武統的難度,將對國民黨保持警戒。所以國民黨無論如何都在軍購案面臨兩難。 國民黨具備雙重身份,它表面是繼承中華民國道統的「中國政黨」,以文化、民族、神話等吸引選民支持。現實上,它作為「地方的在野黨」參與台灣的政治。若在和平時期,這2種雙重身份還能切換無礙,甚至被解讀為有助情勢平穩。但在地緣政治緊張時,必然遭遇到衝突與兩難。 國民黨在軍購議題上從原本傾向阻擋,如今轉變為妥協,反映的是國民黨一直以來的正治定位困境。近期因為國際情勢緊張加上中國軍事壓力升高的原因,台灣民眾重視國防安全程度提升,多個民調顯示,台灣過半數的選民都支持通過對美軍購案。因此若國民黨選擇阻擋軍購,選民會保持「削弱國防、過度親中」的疑慮,導致流失更多中間與搖擺選票,只是對於國民黨而言,對美軍購的態度軟化,雖然能安撫部分選民的疑慮,但可能帶來中共的不信任,導致一直標榜的「兩岸溝通橋樑」將帶來折扣。 對於共產黨而言,國民黨在政治意義上是阻擋民進黨政府的盟友,但共產黨扶持國民黨,自然是希望統治台灣,完成統一中國的千秋大業,這也是對岸要扶持鄭麗文當黨主席的原因。所以從對岸角度而言,KMT承認對美軍購,無論具體金額有多少,將會大大增加統一的難度;若KMT也承認對美15%的關稅,將台灣整合進美國的經濟圈,再度減低對中的依賴度,國民黨的所作所為對中國政權並無助益。導致中共希望在野黨取得過半,癱瘓台灣政權的目標將大打折扣。恐怕對多疑的習近平而言,無論國民黨或者是鄭麗文都只是「實質上的台獨政黨」,早已失去信任,未來給予的兩岸紅利與交流可能減少,國民黨標榜的「溝通橋梁」角色已為名存實亡。 無論如何,國民黨傾向承認對美軍購通過,仍有助於提升台灣安全。這也代表隨著台海風險逐漸提升,台灣社會對於提升國防安全有了共識,任何削弱國防的政治立場,都可能在選舉中付出代價。不過國民黨由於歷史遺留下的政治定位困境,加上過去頻繁親中的苦果,無論如何都將在兩難情境下付出代價,這也是國民黨之所以在野12年的關鍵原因。 作者/粥董

美國中東雷達站在美伊戰爭的作用是什麼?從TPY-2到台灣樂山雷達的預警與防衛價值

美伊戰爭升溫後,外界很快注意到美軍在中東的「雷達站」比戰機更像真正的中樞。原因很簡單:空襲與飛彈互射的本質是「誰先看見、誰先算出彈道、誰先把情報送到攔截系統」。路透與華爾街日報都指出,伊朗近期把攻擊重點放在美國與盟邦的雷達、通訊與防空設施,因為一旦削弱偵測與指管鏈路,攔截效率就會整體下降,形成區域防空的破口。 在中東,美軍常用的關鍵感測器之一是 AN/TPY-2。這類X波段雷達可在「前置預警」或「末端防禦」模式運作,前者用於更早捕捉彈道飛彈發射與分離特徵,後者則與THAAD等系統配合提高末段攔截解算精度。其價值不只在「看見目標」,還在於能區分彈頭與碎片、把高品質追蹤資料送入整體彈道飛彈防禦系統的C2BMC指管網路,讓多國、多套攔截器共享同一個空情與彈道圖像。 當雷達網運作正常,它把美伊戰場變成一場「提前預警—分層攔截—戰果評估」的工程;但當雷達被打壞,問題會立即外溢:攔截器必須更晚起飛、可用反應時間縮短、誤判率提高,連帶推升基地與城市的風險。這也是為什麼外媒報導美軍正急於替換在約旦受損的THAAD雷達,因為雷達不是可有可無的配角,而是整個防空體系的眼睛。 把鏡頭拉回台灣,邏輯完全一致。台灣的樂山長程預警雷達(常被稱為PAVE PAWS系統)核心價值在「更早」發現高空與彈道目標,讓台灣能更快進入戰備流程:發布警報、分散重要目標、啟動防空與指揮鏈路。外媒與台灣媒體都指出,樂山雷達具備長距離偵測與追蹤能力,可對飛彈與航空目標提供即時態勢資訊;在解放軍飛彈活動頻繁的情境下,它直接影響台灣的反應時間與整體防空資源調度。 因此,美伊戰爭給台灣最直接的啟示不是「要不要更多攔截彈」,而是「感測器與指管鏈路必須可生存」。中東的經驗顯示,對手會用低成本無人機、飛彈或滲透手段優先打擊雷達與通訊節點,因為摧毀眼睛比硬碰硬更有效。台灣若要放大樂山雷達的防衛效益,重點在強化其周邊防空、反無人機、備援電力與通訊冗餘,並確保雷達情資能快速分發到各層防空與指揮單位。雷達不是結論,它只是讓整套防衛體系「看得見、來得及、打得到」的起點。 作者:新公民議會編輯小組

台灣為何無法晉級WBC八強?2勝2敗仍出局的關鍵與球迷期待

台灣隊本屆WBC在東京巨蛋打出戲劇性走勢:首戰以0比3輸澳洲、次戰遭日本13比0提前扣倒,一度瀕臨淘汰;之後先以14比0「7局扣倒」捷克止血,再以延長賽5比4力克南韓,把戰績拉回2勝2敗。 但最終仍無緣前八強,原因不是單一場輸贏,而是「短賽制的總體失分」把台灣推入最殘酷的加賽規則:台灣、南韓、澳洲同為2勝2敗,彼此對戰又互咬,最後以「每防守出局數失分」的方式比較,南韓勝出晉級,台灣出局。 回到出局的根本原因,第一是前兩戰失分結構過於集中。對澳洲雖只失3分,但打線被三位左投壓制,全場僅3安打且遭完封;對日本則在前段被迅速拉開差距,形成13比0的扣倒失利。 短期賽制最怕「一場大比分」,因為它會把後面必須追的分差與失分率門檻一次抬高;即使後段連勝,也可能因加賽計算而失去主動權,台灣正是典型案例。 第二是攻擊輸出不夠穩定,尤其在面對不同型態投手時,容易出現「一場爆發、一場沉默」。捷克戰的14分與速度壓迫(盜壘戰術、連續上壘)展現台灣的天花板,但前兩戰的低效率也暴露「上壘與長打不能同時到位」的問題;在需要「至少贏、甚至要贏得漂亮」的情境下,這種波動會直接影響晉級機率。 第三是賽程與分組強度:同組有日本、南韓、澳洲,使得每一場都接近淘汰賽,容錯率極低。當你先吞兩敗,後面等於場場都要用「必勝+控失分」來計算,任何一局崩盤都會把整個小組的數學題改寫。 球迷的期待其實很具體,不是空泛的「下次加油」。第一,要把「對左投的攻擊策略」制度化,避免再次被連續左投封鎖。第二,投手調度要更偏向「止血優先」:短賽制不怕小輸,最怕被扣倒與失分爆量。第三,強化進攻的可複製性,把捷克戰的速度與壓迫,轉成對強隊也能維持的上壘模式。最後,是把東京巨蛋的高密度應援能量轉化為穩定輸出,而不是只在順風局放大優勢。 作者:新公民議會編輯小組

[轉] 當 Claude 走進布萊切利園:AI倫理、國防權力與 QuitGPT 的錯覺

Claude 進入布萊切利園 1939年,緊鄰牛津、劍橋與火車站之間大學線的布萊切利園(Bletchley Park),正式開始了破解德國恩尼格密碼機在內各項外國資訊的計畫。一開始,英國軍情處下轄的密碼學院私下招募的是「大學教授等級的男性」,包括圖靈在內,一些頂尖科學家進入團隊。但漸漸的,隨著工作與編制擴張,加以青年男性紛紛入伍,布萊切利園八千多名日以繼夜輪班拆解敵軍資訊的員工,有七成五是女性。 這些被後世稱為「布萊切利女孩」的年輕女性來自中產階級,擁有數學、物理、工程學位,有些則有特殊歐陸語言專長。她們是布萊切利園真正的中流砥柱,在1943年至1945年操作巨像電腦(Colossus Computer),後者是人類第一台電子數位可編程的電子計算機。 密碼學院遷入布萊切利園並開始招募人才,早於英國政府真正向德國宣戰數個月。他們獲得了華沙密碼局的啟發,把德國恩尼格密碼機當成「需要」且「可以」被解密的對象。沒多久,波蘭陷落,英國正式進入戰爭。 美國 Anthropic公司旗下大型語言模型 Claude,在近期美國對委內瑞拉與伊朗發動的軍事行動中,扮演的就是布萊切利園的角色。 透過與情報分析商 Palantir的合作,Claude 協助判讀衛星訊號、無人機數據和加密通訊。它本身並非真正在「戰鬥」,而是在「消除戰場迷霧」,把混亂的原始數據轉譯成指揮官能理解的「敵軍意圖預測」。某種程度上來說,美軍的這幾次精準打擊,都與 Claude 有關。 被迫離開布萊切利園 然而,奇怪的事情發生了。2026年二月,原本是 Anthropic 合作夥伴的 Palantir,向美國國防部警告,Anthropic 的員工「居然試圖詢問 Claude是如何被用在委內瑞拉行動中」,一個供應商居然想問倫理問題,直接被視為不可接受的挑釁。影響所及,美國國防部長 Pete Hegseth立刻在 2 月 24 日召見 Anthropic執行長 Dario […]

Recent Posts

別讓獨居長者倒下後才被發現

別讓獨居長者倒下後才被發現

[...]

More Info
夾在選民壓力與北京疑慮:國民黨的軍購兩難

夾在選民壓力與北京疑慮:國民黨的軍購兩難

全球地緣政治對立情勢加劇,台海戰爭風險提升,原本傾向阻擋對美軍購通過的國民黨近期態度軟化,3月5日拍板通過「3500億+N」軍購案版本。國民黨此舉是希望挽回選民擔心KMT過度親中的疑慮,但是對於共產黨而言,國民黨承認軍售,無疑是增加未來武統的難度,將對國民黨保持警戒。所以國民黨無論如何都在軍購案面臨兩難。 [...]

More Info
美國中東雷達站在美伊戰爭的作用是什麼?從TPY-2到台灣樂山雷達的預警與防衛價值

美國中東雷達站在美伊戰爭的作用是什麼?從TPY-2到台灣樂山雷達的預警與防衛價值

美伊戰爭升溫後,外界很快注意到美軍在中東的「雷達站」比戰機更像真正的中樞。原因很簡單:空襲與飛彈互射的本質是「誰先看見、誰先算出彈道、誰先把情報送到攔截系統」。路透與華爾街日報都指出,伊朗近期把攻擊重點放在美國與盟邦的雷達、通訊與防空設施,因為一旦削弱偵測與指管鏈路,攔截效率就會整體下降,形成區域防空的破口。 在中東,美軍常用的關鍵感測器之一是 [...]

More Info
台灣為何無法晉級WBC八強?2勝2敗仍出局的關鍵與球迷期待

台灣為何無法晉級WBC八強?2勝2敗仍出局的關鍵與球迷期待

台灣隊本屆WBC在東京巨蛋打出戲劇性走勢:首戰以0比3輸澳洲、次戰遭日本13比0提前扣倒,一度瀕臨淘汰;之後先以14比0「7局扣倒」捷克止血,再以延長賽5比4力克南韓,把戰績拉回2勝2敗。 但最終仍無緣前八強,原因不是單一場輸贏,而是「短賽制的總體失分」把台灣推入最殘酷的加賽規則:台灣、南韓、澳洲同為2勝2敗,彼此對戰又互咬,最後以「每防守出局數失分」的方式比較,南韓勝出晉級,台灣出局。 [...]

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