Why are British people so bad at language learning?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by mr yeet
yeet
Original post by AperfectBalance
Firstly the lessons are terrible.
With a comment like that, yours obviously were.
Original post by AperfectBalance
Secondly we have created the most used language in the world we can communicate somewhat with the most amount of people in the world with English.
Mandarin is the world's most spoken language, but okay.
Also, did we create the language? Really? Our language feels more like an amalgamation of many other languages, unless etymology is a fat liar.
Yes my lessons were certainly awful, and you are incorrect mandarin has the most native speakers, English has the most speakers and can easily be considered the lingua franca.
And yes we did create English as we know it today regardless of what other languages influenced it, many other countries have English loan words and have been influenced by many other languages, doesnt change that the Japanese created Japanese as we know it or anything at all.
And yes we did create English as we know it today regardless of what other languages influenced it, many other countries have English loan words and have been influenced by many other languages, doesnt change that the Japanese created Japanese as we know it or anything at all.
Original post by AperfectBalance
many other countries have English loan words and have been influenced by many other languages, doesnt change that the Japanese created Japanese as we know it or anything at all.
What do you mean by this? Could you elaborate?
That obviously nearly all languages take influence from other languages, but it does not change the fact that English is a language made by the English or that Japanese is a language made by Japanese people.
As someone who graduated with a degree in foreign languages, here are some of my thoughts:
It's actually a shame that MFL subjects are considered extremely difficult to do well in these days. I would say that the content of the curriculum is at a lower standard than it should be but perhaps most students perform poorly because of the way they're taught it (via memorisation).
Regarding the content, it's extremely boring and irrelevant. I didn't enjoy any of the topics at school. I'm surprised I even applied to study languages at university considering how uninteresting the themes for the classes were. The sad thing is that I'm the only person from my year, below my year, and above my year, who went onto study foreign languages and who speaks more than one fluently. None of my childhood friends know any other languages (apart from the bilingual ones whose parents immigrated here).
I sometimes think about becoming a foreign language teacher at a local high school and whipping everyone into shape. I really do find it appalling how language education generally is. At both primary and high school/sixth form, I was fortunate to have some extremely competent teachers but I also had many extremely poor ones. And, I am sure that fantastic teachers for languages exist; but, the problem is that the curriculum doesn't require fluency from the students. It just requires a good memory.
Not a single one of my university peers in my language classes owed their fluency to their classes in school. It was either because they had an obsession with telenovelas, love for anime, a villa in the south of France and so on. I've asked countless of people what their experiences of languages was like at school, people from Scotland, England, Wales and both Irelands, and it was always the same - that the language education they had received in school was pretty much useless.
I actually remember thinking during sixth form that I was fluent in French and Spanish, but boy was I wrong. A lot of what I learned wasn't even correct. It was correct enough to get full marks or whatever in sixth form. I found this out the hard way in my 1st year classes at university where I basically had to re-learn the fundamentals.
For A2 languages, you can get full marks if you memorise certain things. The most efficient and successful teachers will teach their students how to the pass the exams. At university, however, there's a huge emphasis on application of the language. In other words, you need to be fluent enough to apply your knowledge to whatever situation. I was even taught this during 1st year Japanese (which I started as a beginner). I was learning the basics and yet I was expected to apply my knowledge to specific situations/scenarios in all my tests/exams.
I would love to have a word with whoever creates the curriculum for foreign languages teaching in British schools.
•
British education for foreign languages is awful. I did both French and Spanish in Scotland and although the final year exams were more advanced than their English A level counterparts, the curriculum wasn't very good. This extends to the A levels as well. Unfortunately, the UK still heavily relies on simple memorisation to pass language exams. Yes, even A2 language exams can be passed through simple memorisation.
•
It might be difficult to implement (I'm not sure as I haven't given it much thought) but I wish that a) languages were introduced to British children at a much earlier age b) there was a higher emphasis on culture at earlier stages so that the children would develop a curiosity toward other civilisations and their languages c) high school foreign language education (especially at the later stages of school) would mimic the way I was taught languages at university - plenty of hands-on practice in the form of fun roleplays, small group presentations, continuous tests/quizzes, the language of teaching to not be in English (this is often only the case at A2 but should be introduced much, much earlier) and grammar explanations made simple/easy to understand (not throwing around random jargon that a teenager like myself wouldn't understand)
•
I don't know what the curriculum for foreign languages in other parts of Europe is like but I assume it to be much better than ours.
•
Although foreign language education across the world isn't the best (Japan does an even worse job), the thing is that English is ubiquitous within contemporary society. Ergo, even if the English classes in a particular country are bad, the students will still be exposed to English. Through learning English, they'll become adept at picking up other languages with relative ease. This is an obvious problem for us Brits as we only consume English media.
It's actually a shame that MFL subjects are considered extremely difficult to do well in these days. I would say that the content of the curriculum is at a lower standard than it should be but perhaps most students perform poorly because of the way they're taught it (via memorisation).
Regarding the content, it's extremely boring and irrelevant. I didn't enjoy any of the topics at school. I'm surprised I even applied to study languages at university considering how uninteresting the themes for the classes were. The sad thing is that I'm the only person from my year, below my year, and above my year, who went onto study foreign languages and who speaks more than one fluently. None of my childhood friends know any other languages (apart from the bilingual ones whose parents immigrated here).
I sometimes think about becoming a foreign language teacher at a local high school and whipping everyone into shape. I really do find it appalling how language education generally is. At both primary and high school/sixth form, I was fortunate to have some extremely competent teachers but I also had many extremely poor ones. And, I am sure that fantastic teachers for languages exist; but, the problem is that the curriculum doesn't require fluency from the students. It just requires a good memory.
Not a single one of my university peers in my language classes owed their fluency to their classes in school. It was either because they had an obsession with telenovelas, love for anime, a villa in the south of France and so on. I've asked countless of people what their experiences of languages was like at school, people from Scotland, England, Wales and both Irelands, and it was always the same - that the language education they had received in school was pretty much useless.
I actually remember thinking during sixth form that I was fluent in French and Spanish, but boy was I wrong. A lot of what I learned wasn't even correct. It was correct enough to get full marks or whatever in sixth form. I found this out the hard way in my 1st year classes at university where I basically had to re-learn the fundamentals.
For A2 languages, you can get full marks if you memorise certain things. The most efficient and successful teachers will teach their students how to the pass the exams. At university, however, there's a huge emphasis on application of the language. In other words, you need to be fluent enough to apply your knowledge to whatever situation. I was even taught this during 1st year Japanese (which I started as a beginner). I was learning the basics and yet I was expected to apply my knowledge to specific situations/scenarios in all my tests/exams.
I would love to have a word with whoever creates the curriculum for foreign languages teaching in British schools.
(edited 4 years ago)
As someone who gave learning Italian a fairly serious attempt from scratch on my own as an adult, I have become increasingly sceptical that you can 'teach' MFLs in schools to a high level where it transitions into holiday/business use/culture. I have also become even more sceptical of how languages seem to be taught in secondary schools. I think one of the problems is the cult of brilliance and instant gratification aside from other excellent points others have made. Too many people have this idea that learning a language is for extremely 'gifted' people. This is completely wrong. If anything the opposite is true, it's an low level activity accumulated over time (yes you can fast track or boost it) where during active phases it is built and if it stops it just goes dormant (and can be reignited). This also goes completely contrary to much of modern life that you need bang for your buck, you need instant results, to make an impact straight away, make progress quickly etc. Learning a language, the results, people can be very exciting, the actual process can be very habitual, mundane and unexciting.
I learnt French and German at school and don't list it as a language. If i was wanting to learn either of those seriously what I learnt at school is just a base to springboard off. The way it was taught, pretty much entirely useless for real life.
I learnt French and German at school and don't list it as a language. If i was wanting to learn either of those seriously what I learnt at school is just a base to springboard off. The way it was taught, pretty much entirely useless for real life.
Original post by AperfectBalance
That obviously nearly all languages take influence from other languages, but it does not change the fact that English is a language made by the English or that Japanese is a language made by Japanese people.
True, as arrogant as it sounds, English is the global lingua franca due to first, the success of the British Empire and the growth of America as a global superpower, so many do not have as much of the same need to learn English that exists in other countries, though doesn't take away from how useful language skills can be in certain jobs or as a healthy interest.
Mandarin has the most native speakers, but is pretty much limited to China, and rarely used as a lingua franca, especially due to its complicated structure, and the fact that it exists in a bubble, unlike speakers of English as a second language across most of Europe, India, Africa, the Americas etc. so doubt that Mandarin will become the dominant language despite their economic success and as a future superpower.
Original post by Quick-use
As someone who graduated with a degree in foreign languages, here are some of my thoughts:
It's actually a shame that MFL subjects are considered extremely difficult to do well in these days. I would say that the content of the curriculum is at a lower standard than it should be but perhaps most students perform poorly because of the way they're taught it (via memorisation).
Regarding the content, it's extremely boring and irrelevant. I didn't enjoy any of the topics at school. I'm surprised I even applied to study languages at university considering how uninteresting the themes for the classes were. The sad thing is that I'm the only person from my year, below my year, and above my year, who went onto study foreign languages and who speaks more than one fluently. None of my childhood friends know any other languages (apart from the bilingual ones whose parents immigrated here).
I sometimes think about becoming a foreign language teacher at a local high school and whipping everyone into shape. I really do find it appalling how language education generally is. At both primary and high school/sixth form, I was fortunate to have some extremely competent teachers but I also had many extremely poor ones. And, I am sure that fantastic teachers for languages exist; but, the problem is that the curriculum doesn't require fluency from the students. It just requires a good memory.
Not a single one of my university peers in my language classes owed their fluency to their classes in school. It was either because they had an obsession with telenovelas, love for anime, a villa in the south of France and so on. I've asked countless of people what their experiences of languages was like at school, people from Scotland, England, Wales and both Irelands, and it was always the same - that the language education they had received in school was pretty much useless.
I actually remember thinking during sixth form that I was fluent in French and Spanish, but boy was I wrong. A lot of what I learned wasn't even correct. It was correct enough to get full marks or whatever in sixth form. I found this out the hard way in my 1st year classes at university where I basically had to re-learn the fundamentals.
For A2 languages, you can get full marks if you memorise certain things. The most efficient and successful teachers will teach their students how to the pass the exams. At university, however, there's a huge emphasis on application of the language. In other words, you need to be fluent enough to apply your knowledge to whatever situation. I was even taught this during 1st year Japanese (which I started as a beginner). I was learning the basics and yet I was expected to apply my knowledge to specific situations/scenarios in all my tests/exams.
I would love to have a word with whoever creates the curriculum for foreign languages teaching in British schools.ENg
•
British education for foreign languages is awful. I did both French and Spanish in Scotland and although the final year exams were more advanced than their English A level counterparts, the curriculum wasn't very good. This extends to the A levels as well. Unfortunately, the UK still heavily relies on simple memorisation to pass language exams. Yes, even A2 language exams can be passed through simple memorisation.
•
It might be difficult to implement (I'm not sure as I haven't given it much thought) but I wish that a) languages were introduced to British children at a much earlier age b) there was a higher emphasis on culture at earlier stages so that the children would develop a curiosity toward other civilisations and their languages c) high school foreign language education (especially at the later stages of school) would mimic the way I was taught languages at university - plenty of hands-on practice in the form of fun roleplays, small group presentations, continuous tests/quizzes, the language of teaching to not be in English (this is often only the case at A2 but should be introduced much, much earlier) and grammar explanations made simple/easy to understand (not throwing around random jargon that a teenager like myself wouldn't understand)
•
I don't know what the curriculum for foreign languages in other parts of Europe is like but I assume it to be much better than ours.
•
Although foreign language education across the world isn't the best (Japan does an even worse job), the thing is that English is ubiquitous within contemporary society. Ergo, even if the English classes in a particular country are bad, the students will still be exposed to English. Through learning English, they'll become adept at picking up other languages with relative ease. This is an obvious problem for us Brits as we only consume English media.
It's actually a shame that MFL subjects are considered extremely difficult to do well in these days. I would say that the content of the curriculum is at a lower standard than it should be but perhaps most students perform poorly because of the way they're taught it (via memorisation).
Regarding the content, it's extremely boring and irrelevant. I didn't enjoy any of the topics at school. I'm surprised I even applied to study languages at university considering how uninteresting the themes for the classes were. The sad thing is that I'm the only person from my year, below my year, and above my year, who went onto study foreign languages and who speaks more than one fluently. None of my childhood friends know any other languages (apart from the bilingual ones whose parents immigrated here).
I sometimes think about becoming a foreign language teacher at a local high school and whipping everyone into shape. I really do find it appalling how language education generally is. At both primary and high school/sixth form, I was fortunate to have some extremely competent teachers but I also had many extremely poor ones. And, I am sure that fantastic teachers for languages exist; but, the problem is that the curriculum doesn't require fluency from the students. It just requires a good memory.
Not a single one of my university peers in my language classes owed their fluency to their classes in school. It was either because they had an obsession with telenovelas, love for anime, a villa in the south of France and so on. I've asked countless of people what their experiences of languages was like at school, people from Scotland, England, Wales and both Irelands, and it was always the same - that the language education they had received in school was pretty much useless.
I actually remember thinking during sixth form that I was fluent in French and Spanish, but boy was I wrong. A lot of what I learned wasn't even correct. It was correct enough to get full marks or whatever in sixth form. I found this out the hard way in my 1st year classes at university where I basically had to re-learn the fundamentals.
For A2 languages, you can get full marks if you memorise certain things. The most efficient and successful teachers will teach their students how to the pass the exams. At university, however, there's a huge emphasis on application of the language. In other words, you need to be fluent enough to apply your knowledge to whatever situation. I was even taught this during 1st year Japanese (which I started as a beginner). I was learning the basics and yet I was expected to apply my knowledge to specific situations/scenarios in all my tests/exams.
I would love to have a word with whoever creates the curriculum for foreign languages teaching in British schools.
ENgI agree with you that languages are badly taught in the U.K. My daughter is fluent in Spanish but only after living with a non English speaking Spanish family in Madrid for a year and attending 20 hours Spanish tuition per week while there.
Original post by classicleah
I've recently come back from a semester abroad and one of the things I learned there was that the majority of British people are horrendous at languages and language learning. Particularly when compared to our European counterparts. My international friends on average spoke about 3 to 4 languages each. Yet I and my British friends knew just English and at most A1 level French or Spanish with the acception of a forgotten GCSE.
It seems shocking to me that the British education system is so behind on such matters a fundimental area of learning. Particularly in todays increasingly globalised world. Surely if our education system is being praised as one of the best in the world it should have language learning and teaching mastered. Except it seems the majority of British young people who have learnt a second language seem to come from a certain socio-economic background or have learnt from immigrant parents. Correct me if you think I'm wrong or generalising but I believe the government need to better in providing widespread and consistent language learning to students from a young age.
I'd also like to give a brief mention to societies attitude towards language learning in general. Certainly the older generation at least seem to have the "well everybody speaks English, so why bother?" mentality.
Do does anyone have any thoughts? Does anyone disagree? Can you think of any other factors that come into play? And do you think the education system is fully to blaim or is it a wider problem of society?
It seems shocking to me that the British education system is so behind on such matters a fundimental area of learning. Particularly in todays increasingly globalised world. Surely if our education system is being praised as one of the best in the world it should have language learning and teaching mastered. Except it seems the majority of British young people who have learnt a second language seem to come from a certain socio-economic background or have learnt from immigrant parents. Correct me if you think I'm wrong or generalising but I believe the government need to better in providing widespread and consistent language learning to students from a young age.
I'd also like to give a brief mention to societies attitude towards language learning in general. Certainly the older generation at least seem to have the "well everybody speaks English, so why bother?" mentality.
Do does anyone have any thoughts? Does anyone disagree? Can you think of any other factors that come into play? And do you think the education system is fully to blaim or is it a wider problem of society?
I think that part of the problem is that because the Brits claimed a lot of land as there own and forced their religion/ language on other cultures we historically never felt the need to learn other languages as we believed that was for "foreigners" to do. However, I also think that because we don't start serious language learning until secondary school which is quite old in comparison to other countries. However because English is still an important language other countries teach it to their children while they are still fairly young. As a bilingual person, I know that the only reason that I have that skill is that it was what my mother spoke to me before I started an English school. I have never lived in any other country apart from England. Eventually, having to only speak English, I started to lose some of the fluency I once had. On the other hand, I try to keep it up because I find it really useful.
Overall I think it is an endless cycle of: "Well all the other countries seem to know English so we don't need to learn other languages."
Mixture of there not being a sustained interest to provide teaching at young ages to a high standard, and the fact, I believe, there's an assumption that as English is the major language of the world, it's not as important a skill to possess. I've definitely heard many students throughout education suggest there's no point when everyone is clamouring to learn English.
It's a shame, because I think everyone should endeavour to learn a second language at least, whether it's for interest or career prospects.
It's a shame, because I think everyone should endeavour to learn a second language at least, whether it's for interest or career prospects.
Original post by AperfectBalance
Yes my lessons were certainly awful, and you are incorrect mandarin has the most native speakers, English has the most speakers and can easily be considered the lingua franca.
You are wrong. Mandarin has more speakers worldwide than English. Any search that you put in online will show you this.
EDIT: Actually, you were right. English has the most native and non-native speakers.
Original post by AperfectBalance
And yes we did create English as we know it today regardless of what other languages influenced it, many other countries have English loan words and have been influenced by many other languages, doesnt change that the Japanese created Japanese as we know it or anything at all.
What is English as we know it today? Is it Standard British English, or Standard American English? Is it MLE? Is there even only one type?
I know people in Singapore may know English as Singlish or British English today.
(edited 4 years ago)
Original post by XOR_
Well, I think I was drunk most of my French lessons. Hope that helps.
Original post by Tolgarda
You are wrong. Mandarin has more speakers worldwide than English. Any search that you put in online will show you this.
EDIT: Actually, you were right. English has the most native and non-native speakers.
What is English as we know it today? Is it Standard British English, or Standard American English? Is it MLE? Is there even only one type?
I know people in Singapore may know English as Singlish or British English today.
EDIT: Actually, you were right. English has the most native and non-native speakers.
What is English as we know it today? Is it Standard British English, or Standard American English? Is it MLE? Is there even only one type?
I know people in Singapore may know English as Singlish or British English today.
Standard British English Anything else is a *******isation with varying degrees of severity
Original post by AperfectBalance
Standard British English Anything else is a *******isation with varying degrees of severity
Interesting. You sound like a prescriptivist in the linguistic sense.
While Standard British English has evolved over time, why would you say that it's current form is English 'as we know it today'? I'm not saying you're wrong, this is just a debate that I like hearing both sides of.
Original post by Tolgarda
Interesting. You sound like a prescriptivist in the linguistic sense.
While Standard British English has evolved over time, why would you say that it's current form is English 'as we know it today'? I'm not saying you're wrong, this is just a debate that I like hearing both sides of.
While Standard British English has evolved over time, why would you say that it's current form is English 'as we know it today'? I'm not saying you're wrong, this is just a debate that I like hearing both sides of.
Because it is the baseline that all Englishes come from just by virtue of history, not amount of speakers or use.
Original post by AperfectBalance
Because it is the baseline that all Englishes come from just by virtue of history, not amount of speakers or use.
Yeah. I can take that.
Just not interested in learning another language unless I have plans to go move to a place where that other language is the dominant language.
Yes it is a generalisation, but is it not accurate? around 60% of Brits only speak English, and only around 11% of British adults feel that they have competent skills in the foreign language (that they're best at)!
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Why are you concerned about migration?
- Moved from the UK to Turkey
- Why Not to Study in the Netherlands
- I need some help as an international student
- Rishi Sunak proposes the Advanced British Standard
- Are the majority of students studying Classics home students?
- Is it worth taking an A-Level in your Native language (Urdu)?
- Language degree to become a flight attendant?
- Japanese Studies at University
- If you could instantly become fluent in any foreign language which one would it be?
- Please answer this short questionnaire!
- Can anyone here speak an asian language?
- Teacher=Epic fail. Plain form and present form help? Exam!
- Anyone interested in joining a Sign Language group?
- Which country has the best literature?
- What Access course would be the best for doing a languages/linguistics degree?
- Roedean vs. Benenden
- The British guide for applying to a Dutch University (and surviving)
- what languages should i learn?
- I’m looking for a Spanish-speaking friend!
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 1 day ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 1 day ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
