Can Learning Languages Help You Better Understand Science and Technology?
View PDF | Print View
by: phil.yaffe@yahoo.com
Total views: 9
Word Count: 1860
"I was 24 years old when
I first began thinking and speaking in a foreign language. It was like being
released from prison. I saw my cell door swinging open and my mind flying free.
That was over 40 years ago, but the picture is as fresh now as if it had just happened."
I am a linguistic iconoclast. Throughout my life (I am now in my seventh
decade), I have heard the mantra that learning a foreign language gives you
invaluable insights into the cultures of the people who speak it. I don't
believe it.
In addition to my native English (I grew up in
California
have a good working knowledge of three more. I doubt that all this effort has
given me any insights into the cultures of the people who speak these languages.
At least no insights that I couldn't have acquired more easily in 30 - 60
minutes by reading a well-written essay or in a few hours by attending well-crafted
social-cultural lectures.
By contrast, I have acquired a deeper understanding of science.
What does science have to do with language? Actually, very little. But it
has a lot to do with flexible thinking. And this is where science and language
learning converge.
Contrary to the common belief, science is not about certainty but rather
uncertainty. Good scientists are always looking for what has been overlooked,
i.e. they are always searching for surprises and welcome them when they happen.
They know that moment we believe a phenomenon is "natural" and must
be that way, or that it is "unnatural" and cannot be that way, we are
either heading for trouble or missing out on something important.
For example, Albert Einstein investigated the "unnatural" belief
that a beam of light in space must always have the same velocity; other
scientists had spent decades trying to disprove this. He wanted to see where this
"unnatural" might lead. In fact, it lead to e = mc˛, the formula for
atomic energy, and transformed the world.
It is not necessary to be a genius like Einstein (who spoke German, French,
Italian and English), or even a scientist at all, in order to profit from the
mind-stretching benefits of learning foreign languages. In our daily lives we
all make assumptions about how the world works; often we are not even aware that
we are making them. And that's the danger. If we are insensitive to our assumptions,
we are almost certain to end up believing things that aren't true and refusing
to believe things that are true.
Learning languages can help correct this parlous state of affairs. How?
Quite simply, because nowhere else are our assumptions more rapidly and
forcefully challenged by other assumptions about what is or isn't natural that
are equally valid.
Here are some simple examples.
1; Trailing Adjectives
It is "natural" to put adjectives before a noun, e.g. "an
unidentified flying object". Well not really. Many languages put
adjectives after the noun, e.g. "un objet volant non-identifie". You
could argue the "naturalness" of these conflicting practices both
ways. In English, we prefer to describe something before identifying what it
is, as if to build up the suspense. In French, they prefer to identify what it
is first and describe it afterwards. Who is right?
2. Optional Pronouns
English speakers take it for granted that constructing a sentence
requires a subject and a verb. The subject can be either a proper noun (John
talks) or a pronoun (He talks). If you have any acquaintance with Spanish, you know
that in this language the pronoun is usually not necessary. You would still say
"Juan habla" (John talks); however, in most cases you would simply
say "Habla" for "He talks". In fact, if you use a pronoun
where it isn't required ("El habla"), you would be committing a serious
error.
3. No Distinction between Male and Female
English speakers learning French are often puzzled by the language's apparent
inability to distinguish between male and female. For example, "This is
his book" and "This is her book" in French are both "C'est
son livre". The possessive adjective "son" means both
"his" and "her". If it is absolutely necessary to
distinguish between "his" book and "her" book, there is a
way of doing so. However, it is employed only when absolutely necessary.
But isn't it always absolutely necessary? It seems so unnatural not to
specify whether the book's owner is male or female. Isn't this fundamental
information?
It may seem so, but it isn't. By the same logic, it should be fundamental
information to distinguish between male and female when saying "This is
their book", but we don't. "This is your book" can be either
male, female, or both, but we never specify. Even "This is my book"
can be either male or female, but again we don't specify.
Having grown up speaking only English, you probably have never noticed
this inconsistency in the language. Neither had I. I simply knew that is was "natural"
to distinguish between his and her book, until a Frenchman asked me why. I
couldn't tell him.
4. Inclusive and Explicit Forms of "You"
In English, we have only one way of saying "you", which covers
all situations. Many languages have several ways of saying it, notably the
"formal you" and the "familiar you". English used to have a
familiar "you" (thou), but it has essentially disappeared. But in
French and Spanish, for example, it is still widely used, making speakers of
these languages feel that English is somehow "incomplete".
Spanish speakers are particularly poorly served. In their language, not
only do they have a formal and familiar "you", they have them both in
the singular and plural. In other words, in Spanish there are four ways of
saying "you": formal singular (one person), familiar singular (one
person), formal plural (several persons), familiar plural (several persons). For
Spanish speakers, having these four options is natural and necessary; not
having them in English is unnatural and constricting.
5. Exclusive and Explicit Verb Forms
English has very few verb forms. For example, in the present tense we
say "I cook", "You cook", "He cooks", "She cooks",
"We cook", "They cook". In other words, there are only two
forms of the verb, "cook" and "cooks", depending on whom we
are talking about. In the past tense English has only one verb form, e.g.
"I cooked", "You cooked", "He cooked", "She
cooked", "We cooked", "They cooked". Likewise in the
future tense; everyone "will cook".
In other languages this is quite unnatural, because they use distinct
forms for each different person being talked about. For example, in French and
Spanish "I" is associated with one verb form, "you" with a
distinctly different verb form, "we" with yet another form, etc. And
of course there are distinct verb forms for the "familiar you" and
"formal you" (singular in French, and both singular and plural in
Spanish).
But doesn't all these differences make other languages significantly
more complex than English? Yes, indeed. However, they also make them
significantly more precise. For speakers of these languages, it is crucially
important to make these distinctions, because this is how their minds have been
trained to work. Just as it is crucially important for English speakers to
distinguish between "his" and "hers", because this is how
our minds have been trained to work.
Examples of these different ways of doing things from one language to
another are endless. Each time we encounter them our mind opens up a little bit
more, because the unexpressed assumptions we all carry around with us are
continually being challenged.
Growing up in
strongly opposed to language learning because it seemed so difficult and pointless.
I have since changed my mind. I now strongly advocate language learning. Not
because knowing a foreign language teaches us very much about others, but
because it teaches us so much about ourselves.
Accepting that language learning is more about mind expansion than
culture implies that language teaching must be fundamentally reformed.
I live in
two or three languages is the norm rather than the exception. This is generally
true throughout
teaching languages in the belief that people will actually use them makes sense.
The mind-expanding aspects of the effort come along as a welcomed bonus.
However for English speakers in general, and Americans in particular, it
is almost impossible to learn to speak foreign languages because it is so
difficult to practice them outside of the classroom. Here, the mind-expanding
aspects of language learning should be the primary objective, and courses
designed and taught in consequence.
If this were done, I believe that the American fear - and dare I say
loathing – of other languages could be reversed. The schools would lay down the
foundations of a language without trying to force students into the hopeless
and demoralizing task of trying to speak it.
With this foundation firmly in place, when a person traveled to an area
where that language is spoken, he would be able to rapidly turn his passive
knowledge into active use. Even better, even if he traveled to an area with a
totally different language, he would understand how languages work and
therefore be ready to learn the new language rapidly and without fear.
Finally, the general aversion – and again dare I say loathing – many
monolingual English speakers have of science and technology might also moderate.
A mind made flexible by language learning would find it much easier to grasp
and appreciate scientific principles than one still imprisoned in
single-language rigidity.
In an age dominated by science and technology, surely this would be a
benefit of ineffable importance.
Philip Yaffe is a former reporter/feature writer
with The Wall Street Journal and a
marketing communication consultant. He currently teaches a course in good
writing and good speaking in
published book In the “I” of the Storm: the Simple Secrets of Writing & Speaking
(Almost) like a Professional is available from Story Publishers in
(storypublishers.be) and Amazon (amazon.com).
For further information, contact:
Philip Yaffe
Tel:
+32 (0)2 660 0405
Email: phil.yaffe@yahoo.com
About the Author
Philip Yaffe is a
former writer with The Wall Street Journal and international marketing
communication consultant. He now teaches courses in persuasive communication in
Rating: Not yet rated
