In Ndrahutse’s (2011) article entitled “Speaking up for the mother tongue”, she asserts that 'English language skills' are beneficial only in the short-run and it carries unexpected ‘negative consequences’ in the long-run for the non-educated and survival of racial distinctiveness. 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 still prevails in many countries. Many 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 distinctiveness and at the same time encourage people to learn internationally recognized languages for economic and social purposes. Ndrahutse also points out that “mother tongue-based multilingual education projects” fail because the need of preserving cultural distinctiveness is neglected. Ndrahutse lastly asserts that teachers, education and finance ministries should work together to emphasize the need to learn both Mother Tongue and English language and improve education standards.
The above summary hence reflects the threat that the exchange of culture and mobility could undeniably pose towards preserving cultural distinctiveness, in this increasingly globalized world. I personally agree with Ndrahutse that Mother Tongue should be given more attention. However, I felt that the 'English language skills' that she discussed in this article mainly focused on the 'negative consequences' that prioritizing English encompasses. It could be discussed more positively. Therefore, while Mother Tongue language should be given more priority, English should not be totally credited for threatening the survival of racial distinctiveness and I hope that a country rich in racial diversity like Singapore, would uphold its unique feature of bilingualism.
As mentioned in the above paragraph, I agree with Ndrahutse 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 globalized world, cultural distinctiveness had 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, her 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.
Even though it is true that ‘English language skills’ carries ‘negative consequences’ in the long-run, as Ndrahutse brought up in the article, the benefits of 'English language skills' should be looked at more positively. English is a universal language and it has both short-term and long-term benefits. As mentioned by Ndrahutse, 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, Ndrahutse mentions that ‘English language skills’ would widen the gap between the educated and non-educated which would cause social problems. However, I personally think otherwise. Learning a common language could 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.
In conclusion, this article brought up a social problem that prevails in many countries today. It definitely did its part in promoting the importance of mother tongue. I personally think that both English and mother tongue should be given equal priority as they are equally important. I hope that Singapore will continue to work hard towards a bilingual nation and inculcate the importance of our racial identity and distinctiveness to the younger generations.
Bibliography
Susy Ndrahutse, ‘Speaking for the mother tongue’, Guardian Weekly
Thank you, Xenia, for working so diligently on this updated draft of a very good reader response. It is much improved.
ReplyDelete