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

宏都拉斯會和台灣復交嗎?

近日宏都拉斯總統大選終於在紛擾中落幕,選前被美國總統川普指名力挺的保守派候選人納斯里·阿斯夫拉(Nasry Asfura)當選總統,而包括台灣在內的國際各界都關切阿斯夫拉上台後是否會實踐他選前的承諾:跟台灣復交。   宏都拉斯現任左派總統卡斯楚於2023年和台灣斷交,轉而和中國建交之後,在這幾年來,宏都拉斯並未受到和中國建交的好處,反而先蒙受和台灣斷交後白蝦出口大幅下降(台灣是其主要出口市場)的害處,更糟糕的是卡斯楚政府高調宣稱跟中國建交能換來巨額投資、解決龐大外債、並帶來新的出口市場。然而北京並未完全滿足卡斯楚政府的期望,被批評只做「表面工夫」,使得這場總統大選中,包括阿斯夫拉在內的兩位在野黨總統候選人都痛批中國開「芭樂票」,讓執政黨總統候選人飽受抨擊,也成為這次宏都拉斯總統大選政黨輪替的關鍵因素之一。   阿斯夫拉選前曾受訪時直言:「有美國、以色列和台灣組成的三角格局,我們就能建立強大的團隊」。有台灣外交高層向媒體表示,雙方已建立溝通管道,加上美國從旁協助,對於重新恢復邦交「可以期待」。   不過,在阿斯夫拉確定當選後,中國外交部對此回應「希望在『一個中國原則』下與宏都拉斯繼續發展雙邊關係」。似乎對持觀望態度,也有期望阿斯夫拉比照薩爾瓦多總統布格磊(Nayib Bukele)在上台後放棄和台灣復交的選前主張前例。   就目前看來,阿斯夫拉上台後的對台政策可能會有三個可能方向:   一、和台灣復交,實踐他在總統大選時的承諾,即使冒著中國斷交甚至外交報復也在所不惜,但是相應的,台灣要提供大量的經濟援助。   二、維持原狀,仿效薩爾瓦多總統布格磊在上台後決定維持和中國的邦交,不再考慮和台灣復交。   三、折衷方案,在考慮中國反彈的情況下,不尋求和台灣復交,但是讓台灣比照在其他無邦交國家的作法開設駐宏都拉斯代表處,而台灣也要在非官方層面積極援助宏都拉斯。   前述方案對台灣各有利弊,尤其是第三個可能方向對於台灣國安和外交主事者是個難題,因為在沒有建立邦交的情況下,台灣在宏都拉斯開設代表處的興趣就很低,但是美國川普政府是否會「強烈希望」台灣在這個條件下積極對宏都拉斯提供經濟援助,以支持親美且為川普所喜的阿斯夫拉政府,這個情境值得台灣國安和外交主事者正視。   因此,未來台灣是否能和宏都拉斯恢復邦交,仍然有不少變數,也需要台灣、美國和宏都拉斯三方的折衝交涉,更必須對中國可能的動作做好因應,才能順利讓台灣重新以邦交國的身分重返宏都拉斯。 作者:洄瀾客  

台南市長初選政見會誰占優?

民進黨近日舉行2026年台南市長提名政見會,民進黨立委陳亭妃大打建設牌,提出「交通七彩行」、「科技三軸」等政見,希望翻轉台南溪北等地區;民進黨立委林俊憲則強化社會福利,透過補貼疫苗、營養午餐等費用,減少老人、母親、小孩族群的負擔。我認為,依台南目前的氛圍是陳亭妃占優,但林俊憲仍有翻盤機會,而兩人如何更完整將政見轉化為人民心中的願景,仍有一段路要走。 陳亭妃在政見會訴求經濟建設牌,透過手舉牌介紹市政白皮書的政見,含串聯溪北、溪南地區、發展花卉園區、台南科學園區、沙崙綠能園區以及發展鐵路地下化、環狀線等交通建設。陳亭妃希望透過公共建設來縮短舊台南縣市區的差距,這對於苦於產業空心化、人口外流的舊台南縣區民眾很有吸引力。 但是在技術面上,陳亭妃在政見會表達太多想法,導致人民無法聚焦她的市政願景,建議可將整理好的政策牛肉餵給人民,讓更多市民同感。在政見面上,許多建設仍缺乏何時完工等具體數字。另外,公共建設的成效與招商引資密切相關,建議陳亭妃未來應多強調招商能力。 林俊憲在政見會主打「照顧市民」,希望在經濟成長的同時也能促進社會分配,推出老人健保費免費、生育津貼、免費施打帶狀皰疹疫苗、國中小免費教科書與營養午餐免費等政見。林俊憲事後也在臉書指出,他希望將經濟成長轉化為福利,而提高福利是一種對未來的投資。這對於剛移入南科的新婚家庭、長者、有小孩的父母有吸引力。 但在技術面上,林俊憲在政見會最先強調「照顧長者」,其次提到家庭與小孩,可能讓人民有「社福偏重長者」的疑慮,雖然長者在選舉上是重要的票倉,且長者也需要被照顧,但作為一名市長候選人,更多強調未來願景會是更好的政見。雖然林在臉書指出,提高福利是投資未來,可惜他在政見會上較少著墨,且選民查看社群平台意願不高,恐怕讓選民有「大開社福支票」的疑慮。 在政見面上,林俊憲認為,台南科學園區的經濟成果要回饋市民,這當然是正確的想法,但南科的所得稅與營業稅大都歸中央,而房屋稅與地價稅歸台南市,其實市政府收到的錢並不算多,只能靠中央的統籌分配款回饋給地方。若依照新修財劃法可能不利於台南市,但社福支出會愈來愈大,建議林未來可強調如何兼顧招商與社福的規劃。 總體而言,陳亭妃與林俊憲在政見會展現鮮明的形象,陳亭妃定位是民進黨黨內的挑戰者,若能明確訴求如「翻轉溪北」、「拚經濟」等論述,更能讓台南選民共感,但大型建設依賴中央與地方合作,建議陳多補強與中央政府合作能力與招商相關論述。而林俊憲定位為台南市前市長賴清德路線的繼承者,經濟路線延續台南市府,並強調發展社會福利,但若林俊憲若能證明自己不只是守成者,而是「超越賴清德的市長」,更能提升選舉勝算。 作者/Oscar

Taiwan’s Legislature and Its Centrality to First Island Chain Security

In contemporary Indo-Pacific security discourse, the First Island Chain is widely recognized as a critical geostrategic barrier that shapes the balance of power between China and the United States. Within […]

鰲拜也救不了平安夜:當「洋節」撞上中共的深層恐懼!

今年的平安夜,上海街頭上演了一齣比卡夫卡小說更荒誕的現實劇。一名年輕女子身著耶誕老人裝,在寒風中分送象徵祝福的「平安果」,卻被警方以「奇裝異服」與「擾亂秩序」為由帶走盤查。當一顆蘋果成為通往派出所的門票,當商場的耶誕樹在夜色中被倉皇拆除,我們必須追問,一個自詡擁有五千年文明底蘊的強權,為何會對一個穿紅衣、發糖果的白鬍子老人感到如此徹骨的恐懼? 這場席捲中國校園與街頭的「拒過洋節」運動,絕非民眾自發的文化覺醒,而是一場由上而下、為了揣摩上意而層層加碼的政治投誠。 首先,在這場整肅中,武漢商場推出的「鰲拜版耶誕老人」顯得格外諷刺。商家將周星馳電影中的清朝權臣鰲拜,轉化為「紅帽白鬍」的中國版耶誕老人。這本應是官方最愛聽的「文化自信」範本,民眾不再盲目崇洋,而是用本土影視符號去解構並同化西方節日。然而,即便換上了「輔政大臣」的面孔,依然逃不過被封殺的命運。這揭開了一個血淋淋的真相,當局恐懼的從來不是「耶穌」,也不是「西方意識形態」,而是任何具備強大號召力、且無法被黨機器完全收編的「社會動員形式」。不管你是聖尼古拉還是鰲拜,只要你能讓人們在街頭聚集、在網路上產生共鳴,你就是潛在的維穩威脅。 這種焦慮在早前針對大學生「夜騎開封」的無情封殺中早已露餡。那群年輕人既無政治口號,也無抗議標語,僅僅是為了吃一籠湯包。但在中共的治理邏輯裡,「自發性」即是「反動性」。 任何未經審批、不受管控的集體行動,無論其目的是慶祝節日還是青春夜騎,只要展現出規模效應與組織潛力,就會觸動政權最敏感的神經。 其次,如果街頭執法是粗暴的武斷,那麼校園裡的禁令則是陰毒的恐嚇。從湖北到浙江,教育系統的觸角已伸向學生的私人通訊領域。禁止互換禮物、禁止社交軟體頭像出現耶誕元素。山東某大學甚至將「過洋節」與「入黨資格」、「評優評獎」掛鉤,這是一種極其廉價且殘酷的治理手段。 校方深知,對中國學生而言,「檔案」上的污點等同於未來生存權的毀滅。他們將充滿歡樂的節日,異化為檢測政治忠誠的「試紙」。這種建立在威脅與恐嚇之上的「文化自信」,不過是一場掩耳盜鈴的笑話。 最後,雖然中央未明文發布全國性禁令,但地方官僚為了避險、為了邀功,往往選擇「寧左勿右」的極端執行。商場耶誕樹的「拆了又裝、裝了又拆」,生動演繹了地方官員在「刺激消費」與「政治正確」之間的集體精神分裂。 他們試圖通過物理上的隔離與心理上的恐嚇,構建一道文化的防火牆。但當一個政權的控制慾發展到連一顆蘋果、一頂紅帽、甚至是一次單車出遊都容不下的地步時,反映出的恰恰是其面對自由靈魂時,那種無法掩飾的蒼白與虛弱。一個連平安夜都容不下的強權,絕不可能擁有真正的「大國自信」。 作者:秦靖  

Recent Posts

宏都拉斯會和台灣復交嗎?

宏都拉斯會和台灣復交嗎?

近日宏都拉斯總統大選終於在紛擾中落幕,選前被美國總統川普指名力挺的保守派候選人納斯里·阿斯夫拉(Nasry Asfura)當選總統,而包括台灣在內的國際各界都關切阿斯夫拉上台後是否會實踐他選前的承諾:跟台灣復交。   [...]

More Info
台南市長初選政見會誰占優?

台南市長初選政見會誰占優?

民進黨近日舉行2026年台南市長提名政見會,民進黨立委陳亭妃大打建設牌,提出「交通七彩行」、「科技三軸」等政見,希望翻轉台南溪北等地區;民進黨立委林俊憲則強化社會福利,透過補貼疫苗、營養午餐等費用,減少老人、母親、小孩族群的負擔。我認為,依台南目前的氛圍是陳亭妃占優,但林俊憲仍有翻盤機會,而兩人如何更完整將政見轉化為人民心中的願景,仍有一段路要走。 [...]

More Info
Taiwan’s Legislature and Its Centrality to First Island Chain Security

Taiwan’s Legislature and Its Centrality to First Island Chain Security

In contemporary Indo-Pacific security discourse, the First Island Chain is widely recognized as a critical geostrategic barrier that shapes the balance of power between China and the United [...]

More Info
鰲拜也救不了平安夜:當「洋節」撞上中共的深層恐懼!

鰲拜也救不了平安夜:當「洋節」撞上中共的深層恐懼!

今年的平安夜,上海街頭上演了一齣比卡夫卡小說更荒誕的現實劇。一名年輕女子身著耶誕老人裝,在寒風中分送象徵祝福的「平安果」,卻被警方以「奇裝異服」與「擾亂秩序」為由帶走盤查。當一顆蘋果成為通往派出所的門票,當商場的耶誕樹在夜色中被倉皇拆除,我們必須追問,一個自詡擁有五千年文明底蘊的強權,為何會對一個穿紅衣、發糖果的白鬍子老人感到如此徹骨的恐懼? [...]

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