Re: One language for the world

Christophe Grandsire wrote:
>
> At 00:47 07/06/00 -0500, you wrote:
> >
> >The current fashion of English is by no means assured.  At the moment,
> >English is perhaps only slightly more widespread (due to mass-
> >communication and masseducation) than French was two centuries ago.
> >The major reason for the sheer numbers who speak English is the colonial
> >habits of the British Empire, whose commercial expansion entailed military
> >outposts which, in some cases, developed into full-fledged cities.  Excess
> >population, too, was a reason for her North American colonies, and later
> >places like Australia and New Zealand.    It is really only in these
> countries
> >where English wholly predominates.  Elsewhere, English is a trading and
> >scientific language, no doubt, but often of questionable fluency (I think we
> >can all agree that the French and Germans, though nearly universally
> taught it,
> >are not so often required to use it as, say, the Quebecois are).
>
> Very true. And even our teaching of it is questionable. How can you become
> fluent in English with 2 hours of English a week (and nothing during
> holidays) while you hear no English at all elsewhere? My own fluency in
> English (which I often find questionable) comes mainly from the list, from
> my experience of work outside of France and from my foreign boy-friend :) .
> Thanks to that, I got 945 points out of 990 at the TOEIC! :)) (I happen to
> have had the best score of the promotion :)) ) Now, I've finished with
> English classes for ever (while my studies are not finished), and finishing
> with English classes when you are 24 is rather rare (only high technical
> studies do that, my sister who is studying Right has only one hour of
> English a week, and it will last only for the first two or three years of
> her current studies, unless programs change). Generally, you stop learning
> English after the Baccalaureate (at 18) or sometimes even before. As you
> begin around 13, and with a system of teaching which is very bad in my
> opinion, it's rather difficult to become fluent in the language, unless you
> work on your own...
>
But then again, here in Canada, and I'd imagine in other English
speaking countries, our learning of foreign languages is even worse than
that. In Canada we start learning French when we are 8 or 9, in the
fourth grade, and we continue until we are 14 or 15 in the ninth grade.
We have the option of continuing from then, but I stopped because in
those 6 years I learned embarassingly little. I'm taking German now, and
that's more heavy duty learning, but still, I only have three years to
take it and I don't know how much I'll be able to learn then. That is,
if I don't continue to take it in University.

Really, the only thing that's keeping English as a major language
outside of English speaking countries, as far as I can tell, is because
most Americans can speak other languages that well.

That said, I've amassed enough proficiency in French to read written
French, like your website, Christophe, but if I ever met you we'd have
to speak in English (or maybe German) because I'd be completely lost in
French. I also can't write French very well. Je suis un telephon
chocolat. That's all I know, and I'm probably wrong about that, too.

--
Robert, knowing embarassingly little French, and showing it, too!