Learning to UNDERSTAND languages vs. learning English

Akim   Wed Jun 07, 2006 6:06 am GMT
>>>Germans joke that Mallorca is the seventeenth Bundesland. ;)

And the Turks joke that Berlin is the third-largest Turkish city after Istanbul un Ankara. LOL's
Vytenis   Wed Jun 07, 2006 6:19 am GMT
Let's get back to the original idea of this discussion, shall we?
My belief is that if the EU policies support (at leat in words) the REAL multilingualizm and multiculturalizm, then shouldn't they promote widespread teaching to if not to speak then at least to understand as many EU languages as possible. Should't they make it a matter of a major EU policy to implement and encourage this teaching throughout schools? After all, promotiung REAL multilingualizm will promote REAL multiculturalizm and better understanding of other cultures.

As for American cultural domination, that's inevitable. America and all thins American (including American pronunciation of English words among the teenagers all over the world) will remain "cool" until the happy day when Uncle Sam will go bust as the world dictator.
greg   Wed Jun 07, 2006 6:53 am GMT
Jav : « Thanks to Benjamin (not greg) I'm able to reply »
J'en suis ravi : tu n'as pas fait avancer la conversation d'un iota. Mais sans doute tel n'était pas ton objectif.

Jav : « My remark was meant to be sarcasm on the first post of this topic.But I think I created a great opportunity for a person like greg to spew his Anti American sentiments.Again, rather childish and immature. »
Il faut de l'esprit et du talent pour se prévaloir d'un ton sarcastique. J'ai bien peur que ta tirade ne soit tombée à plat.
D'autre part, si le simple rappel des faits te paraît équivaloir à de l'états-uniophobie, c'est que tu dois être soit hypersensible soit sous-informé — peut-être les deux ?
Vladimir   Wed Jun 07, 2006 10:08 am GMT
I will try to respect the etiquette’s constraints which some people here want everybody to respect. So if I am not understood or if I am misunderstood - because of my terrible English - it’s not my fault.

>>> Vytenis “After all, everyone would agree that a person can express themselves much better in their native language”

In my opinion it’s very important point. Is it worth to communicate the poor things ? Or is it more wise not to communicate at all ? In other words is it better trying to create something of very bad quality in the Universe on not to create at all. There are already a lot of very noisy things in our world which add to a complexity, misunderstanding and hence facilitate the demagogy, intellectual terrorism, manipulations of masses (populaces) etc.

The last sentence in Wittgenstein’s “Logische-Philosophische Abhandlung“ is:
Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muß man schweigen.
Which gives (translated in English – not by me)
Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent.
Which gives (translated in French – not by me)
Sur ce dont on ne peut parler, il faut garder le silence.

So I think that the first thing which can be made by the “linguistic elites” is not to ban the expression of others in the languages of their choice in any given moment. Especially on the forum like that.

>>> Jav “assasination of the French President Chirac by Australian secret agents for leaving the room when a fellow countryman gave a speech in English "

Very fun! If I wanted to respect etiquette imposed in this forum I should say LOL! (n’est ce pas ?)

Just a quotation of Le Figaro (see http://www.lefigaro.fr/france/20060323.WWW000000425_seilliere_parle_anglais_chirac_part_fache.html) to make it more comprehensive for those of all of us who are very far from the problem of survive of French language in the Ocean of very poor and very bad (in average; included the mine) English.

« …Alors que le président de l'Unice, organisation qui rassemble les confédérations patronales des différents pays de l'UE, commençait son intervention en anglais, le président français l'a interrompu pour s'en étonner…. »
« …’Je vais m'exprimer en anglais parce que c'est la langue des affaires’, a répondu l’ancien président du Medef. Pour marquer sa désapprobation, Jacques Chirac s'est alors levé, emmenant avec lui ses deux ministres Thierry Breton (Economie et Finances) et Philippe Douste-Blazy (Affaires étrangères), à la surprise générale. Le président français est toutefois revenu après l'intervention de M. Seillière… »
And finally :
« …Le français est avec l'anglais et l'allemand l'une des trois langues de travail de l'Union européenne et la tradition dans les sommets veut que chaque participant s'exprime dans sa langue nationale, avec traduction simultanée… »

I guess that everybody is free to do what he or she wants to do. M. Seillière was free to speak his very poor English instead of express his intelligence in his native language, be translated by experienced interpreters (it creates more jobs!) and be perfectly understood by everybody.
Chirac was free to show to Seillière and to everybody that he disagree with him and that it’s not a minor question.
That’s all.
Benjamin   Wed Jun 07, 2006 10:37 am GMT
The official language of the session at which M. Seillière spoke English was *English*. And realistically, the reason why Chirac made a fuss about it was to create a distraction from the problems in France regarding the new economic laws.
Benjamin   Wed Jun 07, 2006 10:38 am GMT
*the new EMPLOYMENT laws; not the new economic laws.
Jav   Wed Jun 07, 2006 1:06 pm GMT
>>J'en suis ravi : tu n'as pas fait avancer la conversation d'un iota. Mais sans doute tel n'était pas ton objectif. <<

>>
Il faut de l'esprit et du talent pour se prévaloir d'un ton sarcastique. J'ai bien peur que ta tirade ne soit tombée à plat.
D'autre part, si le simple rappel des faits te paraît équivaloir à de l'états-uniophobie, c'est que tu dois être soit hypersensible soit sous-informé — peut-être les deux ? <<

Do you get some kind of kick out acting arrogant greg?Sad.
Benjamin (or others of course) could you please translate this text again?
Benjamin   Wed Jun 07, 2006 2:29 pm GMT
Of course! ^_^

« J'en suis ravi : tu n'as pas fait avancer la conversation d'un iota. Mais sans doute tel n'était pas ton objectif. »

It amuses me: you have not contributed to the discussion at all. But that was undoubtedly not your intention.

« Il faut de l'esprit et du talent pour se prévaloir d'un ton sarcastique. J'ai bien peur que ta tirade ne soit tombée à plat.
D'autre part, si le simple rappel des faits te paraît équivaloir à de l'états-uniophobie, c'est que tu dois être soit hypersensible soit sous-informé — peut-être les deux ? »

You need spirit and talent to keep a successful sarcastic tone. I'm afraid that yours has fallen flat. Anyway, if the simple mention of facts appears to you to be equivalent to an irrational fear or hatred of the United States, you must either be hypersensitive or uninformed — perhaps both?
Guest   Wed Jun 07, 2006 3:35 pm GMT
<...conversation d'un iota...>
<...the discussion at all....>

Oops! I translated it as "an idiot's conversation"...Mmmm, I think mine shows more accuracy.
Benjamin   Wed Jun 07, 2006 3:48 pm GMT
Actually, the most literal translation would be 'the conversation an iota', but I chose to translate it more conceptually.
Vladimir   Wed Jun 07, 2006 4:52 pm GMT
>> Benjamin
The official language of the session at which M. Seillière spoke English was *English*. And realistically, the reason why Chirac made a fuss about it was to create a distraction from the problems in France regarding the new employment laws <<
Were there any other sections which official language was French ? If so, what rule governs his issue ? According to the quoted Figaro’s article there exist a tradition regarding the use of English, French and German languages. I suppose that it’s true and that the notion of “session’s official language” is not very important. In any case the “rule” of traditional languages is much more high level rule that any session’s level rule. However what is important [I repeat it because obviously my idea was not very clear because of this thread’s etiquette consisting in obligation to discuss in English] is whether there exist a difference between the actual English version of Seillière’s thinking and his potential native French version. I’m sure that the difference is enormous and that Chirac actually did not lose much leaving the session.
I am not a pro Chirac or against Seillière. It’s just coherent with the overall discussion and my general opinion about the role of “dominated” languages.
The suggestion about the real intention of Chirac - connection with a new employment law (as I understand you mean CPE ?) is just your personal opinion without any proof.
By the way, why do some of you demand others to translate greg’s French “nonsense” ? As I already mentioned what is important is the content and not the language (= form ?) . There is always a lot of job for the interpreters.
Now another point.
I don’t want to be qualified as someone who “spew his Anti American sentiments” as it happens easily on this forum. I just want to remark that, in my humble opinion, there exist two potentially opposite processes in the distribution of language skills across the peoples.
The first – positive. The non English native speakers make an additional intellectual effort in learning foreign languages, in particular English. At the same time they try to migrate to USA and to increase the general intellectual level of this country.
The second – negative. The English native speakers don’t want to learn any other foreign language because they don’t see any necessity in that. By doing so (rather by not doing so) they don’t make the same additional intellectual effort as other peoples. I suppose you understand what I mean. Of cause all this is nothing that a trend, something that is true in average.
My personal feeling is that the second negative trend is much more powerful then the first. As a result we risk, in the long run, be governed by the people which are less intelligent that we are.
Yet another barbarian invasion. Very pessimistic picture.
Benjamin   Wed Jun 07, 2006 5:20 pm GMT
I don't actually mind people posting in French, because I can read and write it. But I'm going to respond to Vladimir in English anyway, because he's written his post in English and I don't want others complaining to me for responding in the wrong language as well.

« I’m sure that the difference is enormous and that Chirac actually did not lose much leaving the session. »

I don't know. I know actually know Seillière. I had assumed that he spoke English fluently, but maybe not.

« The suggestion about the real intention of Chirac - connection with a new employment law (as I understand you mean CPE ?) is just your personal opinion without any proof. »

Yes, I meant the CPE. Of course it's just my opinion. But realistically, do you think that Chirac, who is fluent in English anyway, is really immature enough to have a tantrum over a French person speaking English at a session at which the official language was English? Politicians often try to create diversions from more pressing issues. This is, of course, under the assumption that Seillière spoke good English, which I'm now getting the impression perhaps was not the case.

« By the way, why do some of you demand others to translate greg’s French “nonsense” ? »

Jav doesn't 'demand' it — he just knows that I'll do it for him if he asks. You might also like to know that Jav isn't actually a native English-speaker either.

Vladimir — I'm going to ignore the rest of what you've written because you seemed to be suggesting that native English-speakers are 'less intelligent' than everyone else in the world. I hope that that was not the intention, because it wasn't a very 'intelligent' comment itself if it was.
Benjamin   Wed Jun 07, 2006 5:21 pm GMT
* I DON'T actually know Seillière
greg   Wed Jun 07, 2006 8:20 pm GMT
Bravo (et merci) pour ta traduction Benjamin !

Juste in truc : ici, <sans doute> = <probablement>. Le problème avec <sans doute> c'est qu'il veut tout dire et son contraire : <certainement> et <peut-être>.
Sigma   Wed Jun 07, 2006 10:30 pm GMT
Vladimir — I'm going to ignore the rest of what you've written because you seemed to be suggesting that native English-speakers are 'less intelligent' than everyone else in the world. I hope that that was not the intention, because it wasn't a very 'intelligent' comment itself if it was.

Yo pienso que Vladimir se refería a que ciertos hablantes nativos del Inglés son mas "conchudos" a la hora de aprender una lengua extranjera dado el estatus actual del Inglés, y no debido a que que estos sean "menos inteligentes" que el resto del mundo.