Reader Response Draft 1

In Susy’s (2011) article entitled “Speaking up for the mother tongue”, she asserts that even though 'English language skills' are beneficial in the short-run, it carries ‘negative consequences’ in the long-run for the people and nation itself. The ‘negative consequences’ are the growing disparity between the educated and non-educated, social problems that will arise because of this disparity and restricting more people towards contribution to ‘larger development aims’. The difficulty faced in learning languages in schools prevails in many countries. Much efforts have been made to promote “mother tongue-based multilingual education projects” across school systems in an attempt to preserve and develop their unique cultural images and languages and at the same time encourage strong skills in important languages for economic and social purposes. She claims “mother tongue-based multilingual education projects” fails because its importance is not well understood. Besides teachers, education and finance ministries should work together to improve education standards.

I agree with Susy that we should ‘speak up for the mother tongue’ and her claim that “mother tongue-based multilingual education projects” fails mainly because its importance is not well understood. Learning mother tongue language is important because it preserves the unique cultural identity and the language itself. However, in this globalised world, many cultural distinctiveness have been slowly eroding because only ‘prestigious languages’ such as English are prioritized.  In the case of a bilingual nation such as Singapore, even though mother tongue remains a compulsory language in primary and secondary school, its priority is more inclined towards English. This is evident in the difference in the importance of English and mother tongue grades. It is important to pass English and less important to pass mother tongue. In fact, unlike English, passing mother tongue is not a prerequisite to enter tertiary institutions. It is hence important to ‘speak up for the mother tongue’ in Singapore because being bilingual is a distinct feature of our nation and we should work towards a more balanced bilingual education by inculcating the importance of mother tongue.

However, I agree to a small extent that ‘English language skills’ are only beneficial in the short-run and it carries ‘negative consequences’ in the long-run. English is a universal language and it has both short-term and long-term benefits. As mentioned by Susy, it is true that English is beneficial for economic opportunities. Many jobs require ‘English language skills’ and it is beneficial for those who are climbing up the social ladder by acquiring a better job overseas. It is not necessarily fully harmful in the long-run. In the article, Susy mentions that ‘English language skills’ would widen the gap between the educated and non-educated which would cause social problems. I personally think otherwise. I believe that learning a common language would improve social problems because many social problems arise due to misunderstanding between people with different backgrounds. Besides being able to better understand each other, learning English allows people of different backgrounds to have something in common. In the case of Singapore, I believe that English is important for social harmony in the long-run especially when it is a country filled with diverse racial and cultural identities. Without a common language, there will be a greater social gap between different racial group. Hence, I agree to a small extent that ‘English language skills’ would only bring harm in the long run.

(to be continued...)