From: James Bugden <jbugden@alis.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 1996 08:07:31 +0800
To: "'tcmay@got.net.at.Internet (Timothy C. May)>
Subject: RE: Why Americans feel no compulsion to learn foreign languages
Message-ID: <01BB1BD8.8B6BBC00@jbugden.alis.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Wednesday, March 27, 1996 9:55 AM, Tim May wrote
>For Europeans, knowing the language of one's immediate neighbors (probably
>only a hundred kilometers away), and knowing English, accounts for much of
>their language facility.

>Americans are typically thousands of miles away from those speaking
>Japanese, Mandarin, Tagalog, Polish, Italian, Dutch, Spanish, Hindi,
>Talegu, and the hundreds of other languages. It is not at all clear what
>language Americans should pick as a "second language" to study.

>Europeans who look down on Americans for not studying the language of their
>neigbors simply aren't familiar with a map. 

>There is not a single foreign language I can think of it that would help me
>in my goals or help anyone I know. This is the reality of a world dominated
>by English-speaking persons and in which all technical people learn
>English.

If I can paraphrase, you argue as follows:
1) People learn languages of those they may interact with. 
2) Americans do not interact with (enough) non-English speakers.
3) Therefore, learning another language does not help the goals of Americans.

While your phrase refers to geographical proximity, I think we could agree that the 
essential factor is that you interact with those that are close. If you never talk to your 
neighbours, you don't need to understand their language.

So my question: Do you not see the irony of writing this on the internet?

Plus ca change, plus c'est pareil.

Many threads within Cypherpunks have stated the irrelevancy of national boundaries
in this age of global communications. I would suggest that geographical proximity is
irrelevant for similar reasons. 

But the ability to communicate requires the ability to comprehend. While it may be 
true that "it is not at all clear what language Americans should pick as a 'second 
language'", it does not follow that you would not benefit from knowing one. 
Of course, this may be a chicken and egg problem in which your benefit is 
unclear before you learn a second language, but your motivation is zero 
unless you see the benefit.

If we choose to be unilingual, it is not because we would lack opportunity to use 
another language, but because we choose to decline such opportunity.

James Bugden
jbugden@alis.com