A hands on approach may give students another reason to take a foreign language
Chris Campbell
-Staff Writer-
Spoken English is so engrained into the brains of Americans that most hardly spend time thinking
about the written word and even less about other culture’s means of communication. It is only when
fulfilling the foreign language requirement of high school or college curricula that any thought is given
to any other country beyond our borders.
The typical assumptions associated with learning a different language pan between either confidence
that one is familiar with their own native tongue and, therefore, could learn a new one fairly easily, to
the derogatory “Why do I have to learn their language?” “Why don’t they just learn English?”
The truth lies nowhere in the midst of either of these, but instead that there is more work involved
to learning a foreign language than even the most rigorous college class will tell. And the most
undesirable truth is that, besides requiring countless hours of repetition and memorization, transferring
one’s knowledge of their own language to another requires mastering English grammar first.
Basic grammar is taught in elementary school, but is not covered in enough detail for grade school
students to comprehend its significance. Secondary school language arts classes in here in the United
States teach students to write basic essays, some poetry, and interpret classic literature, but hardly
anything about prepositional phrases, modifying nouns, or transitive verbs. Take, for example, the
typical American whose best writing skills consist of “lol” and “omg.” Somehow a word such as “ur”
can mean “your” and “your” really means “you are.”
Simply put, the public school system should beef up the language arts curriculum in primary schools
to avoid such a debacle and so that students who take foreign languages have the proper frame of
reference to spend more time learning vocabulary instead of basic grammar.
The typical guide on how to learn a language says that one need acquire a vocabulary of approximately
1500 words to converse in any given language (more than 10,000 to read literature). However, the
problem is that students are only taught one way to say a given phrase. For example, instead of saying
ecstatic, jovial, or jubilant, all that is taught in a typical foreign language class is to say “happy.”
Learning a language from a regimented book does not necessarily help. A typical book might teach
grammar rules, but lacks the “drill-and-kill” practice that is required. Reading the boring rules does
not stimulate retention. And most importantly, key structures such as idioms and synonyms are not
mentioned.
Colleges have the upper hand in this matter, but do not capitalize on it. Since college students pay
to learn the language, they should actually be taught the language. When students finish the foreign
language requirement for an undergraduate degree, their ability is meager at best.
Post secondary education needs to reconfigure foreign language classes so that typical Americans,
with their unknowing and unwilling attitudes, can be forewarned of what they are really up against.
Otherwise what is the point of requiring college students to take foreign language in the first place? For
those who really do want to learn the language, being taught in an isolated classroom atmosphere will
not dispel the humiliation of encountering a native speaker.
