A friend of mine passed this on a little while ago, and I’ve been mulling it over ever since. The story is about a paper published by the Scottish Government Languages Working Group which recommends that every student in state schools start learning two foreign languages, beginning with four-year-olds in their first year of school.
I have to confess I’m torn about this policy. On the surface it echoes a recent statement by the Modern Languages Association in the US, which I found very inspirational, and I am absolutely, unequivocally supportive of foreign language learning at all ages. That bilingualism (or better yet, multilingualism) is both a cognitive and potentially economic boost to young learners is no longer a subject of debate, and it is rather irritating that English speakers seem to be the only people who dismiss the importance of speaking other languages in our polyglot world. So this new Scottish government policy is admirable as well as ambitious.
My concern, however, is that this might be the last nail in the coffin of Scottish Gaelic: under the policy, the heritage language of Scottish students will not count for one of the two languages. Scottish Gaelic activists have been attempting a sort of revival, and have had some success (not nearly on par with Irish, though), but even so a report from 2001 showed that less than 2% of people living in Scotland had any competency in the language. It is already very rare for Scottish children to study their ancestral language. How likely is it that these students will take the time to study it once they’re also required to study English and two other foreign languages?
This is all academic, and I’m not Scottish so it isn’t my decision to make. The Scottish government has solid, pragmatic reasons for recommending this policy. But I never claimed to be a pragmatist. There has got to be a way for speakers of endangered languages to be high-functioning global citizens as well as fluent heritage language speakers. I do not think that’s unreasonably idealistic of me to say that. But where do we start?
polyglossic 
I tried learning this language on a whim in Jr. High, but sadly misunderstood the rules of pronunciation for a long time! (I thought my last name Roy might be Scottish, but research revealed it to be very French-Canadian, and any way “Rob Roy” just means “red rob” or Raibeart Ruagh.) It’s so sad to see it dying off, especially considering the fate of Manx and Cornish and other Celtic tongues.
Donovan Nagel at mezzoguild.com has been doing some work with Irish lately and got back from an immersion course there. It’s nice to see a measure of government support and popular interest.
Thanks for the post.
When I was a kid, we thought our family had some Welsh in our background…turns out we’re not so sure about that any more. But either way, I’ve always had a soft spot in my heart for the dying Celtic languages because of that. So of course I’m thoroughly enjoying Donovan’s posts 🙂
Language death just drives me nuts. In case I hadn’t mentioned that yet…
This reflects quite well a personal predicament I find myself in. I want to learn at least one endangered language, but I also want to learn German and Swedish and Dutch, all of which would be a lot more useful than said endangered language. I don’t expect to be able to maintain competence in more than 2 foreign languages (so; not including English, my native) at once, which means either not learning the endangered language or not learning two of the three Germanic languages I want to learn (and this is after arbitrarily narrowing down my list of target Germanic languages for pragmatic reasons. lol)
Why only two languages?? Dream big! Shoot for the stars! Learn ALL the languages! 😀
That’s my policy anyway
(note my earlier remark about not being a pragmatist)
The solution as far as the Scotts go I think should be to allow Scottish Gaelic to qualify as one of the two foreign languages, but not *require* Scottish Gaelic so that individual children and their parents can make the decision whether or not two dominant languages is more important than Gaelic and one dominant foreign language.
Yes of course, that’s a very sensible policy. However, the report hinges around the idea of making Scottish students more competitive in the job market and increasing Scottish GDP. Unfortunately when language policy hinges on “market,” endangered languages are always going to lose out 😦 Which is one of many reasons I am uncomfortable with that kind of reasoning.
A language can live only if its speakers believe that using it somehow still make a sense. So to give an example, have you ever asked yourselves why Catalan is so used and loved, in spite of all the oppression it had to endure?
In my opinion, it doesn’t make sense and it’s totally hopeless studying a language in school that nodoby speaks just to “save” it. The reality of Scotland (or Ireland, or the Principality of Monaco), where this happens, clearly demostrates it.
Stefano,
I think Catalan is actually a great example of the tremendous benefits that minority languages reap from institutional support and political establishment. Government policies and the Catalonian education system have gone very far in making Catalan as healthy as it is today.
The problem with this Scottish policy is that it only assigns value to languages that have economic currency in the EU. But there are many, many ways in which a language can be valuable – a fact that I’m sure Catalan speakers understand, considering Catalan isn’t really a big player on the global economic stage. Countless adult speakers of endangered languages regret the loss of their tongues, and lament that they were unable to learn them as children. Unfortunately, you can’t expect a kindergartener to make a nuanced educational decision or to predict future linguistic regret, and this policy takes away what little encouragement they ever might have had.
Pingback: Endangered Languages and Dialects « The Rose of Europe
Glad to see you’re still posting! I unfortunately have been very inactive as of lately…
I really find it interesting that you brought this up.
Personally, I find it valuable to learn many languages, especially at a young age. However, 4 years is a bit too young (in my opinion). I do not agree with the educational system of schooling at that young of an age. I realize it probably sounds crazy, as most of the US starts school at this young as well, but several European countries do not start “formal” schooling until much later. There have been multiple studies conducted that have proven the younger a child learns to read, the more likely a learning disability or reading disorder will occur/be diagnosed later on in life. I am actually writing about this very topic for an academic journal. It is very interesting!
Aside from my little rant above (hehe), I agree with you. English + 2 other foreign languages + Scottish Gaelic? I don’t see how any child could possibly conquer this. It is highly unlikely that he or she will have enough time, unfortunately.
There have been multiple studies conducted that have proven the younger a child learns to read, the more likely a learning disability or reading disorder will occur/be diagnosed later on in life. I am actually writing about this very topic for an academic journal. It is very interesting!
I meant to write reading, literacy, and bilingualism. Oops! Sorry,