I have always believed (and probably always will) believe that language is a tool of expressing culture. Language detached from culture can never be truly considered a true language as it is then effectively detached from all cultural nuances essential for generating deep conversations. Thus, a person without cultural knowledge associated with a particular language can never be considered fluent in that particular language no matter how effortlessly the person can speak it.
The above logic is the fundamental reason I am against all efforts to introduce English (or any other language, for that matter) as the working language for a non-English-speaking environment. Because English, as known by her native speakers, ignores all socio-cultural customs of the non-English-speaking locality…this is especially true in Japan, where the various unwritten social rules of embarrassment and isolation so commonly used is practically unknown in the Western world where English originates.
However, at the same time, I, as someone who lived in the West, believe in the importance of NOT having social hierarchy as the precondition for advancing new ideas and encouraging innovation. So, I am beginning to increasingly think that, perhaps English should be introduced forcefully against the will of every non-English speaker, at least in Japan, in order to break down certain excessive social barriers.
With that thought in mind, I actually attempted to use English’s lack of social hierarchy to my advantage at times. At good times, the use of English allowed me to speak much more freely to people much older than me (without caring about the honorific terms so commonly fidgeted about in Japanese, of course). And at bad times, the use of English allowed me to, well, speak freely to people much older than me, largely to their dismay (not mentioned incomprehension).
Here is a recent instance that is perhaps worth mentioning. I was walking around the crowded company canteen around noon looking for seats for myself and my friends. Four older coworkers (much older, perhaps late 30s) were sitting at a table, chatting away even though their lunches are completely finished. I (honestly, with a bit of hesitation…hats off to my sensitivity for Japanese culture) approached them and plainly said, “Are you finished? Would you let us use the table?” (Exact words)
The guy at the table was obviously displeased (I can see it on his face), yet not he or his female companion can comprehend what I was saying. The woman simply pointed at the table and puzzling look, prompting me to give a plain “yes” in reply. The group of four vanished from the table in an instant. No words are exchanged, but the emotional tensions were quite obvious in the situation.
Yet, reflecting back on the situation, I am becoming ever more doubtful than English, as is the case now, is actually being implemented in a hierarchy-reducing way. In this particular situation, we can assume that if the man at the table actually spoke English (or knew I spoke Japanese), he probably would have said something along the lines of “you foreign new grads need to know your place.” Because he cannot communicate his anger, he simply had to suppress it in that situation.
In other words, I, in that situation, am not enforcing English’s socially equalizing quality, but instead simply implied to the Japanese that I do not understand the nuances of Japanese social hierarchy. I was making the Japanese understand the positive social intentions behind using English, but simply used “speaking English only” as an unfair leverage to prevent lengthy interaction on social values.
And certain enough, those lengthy interactions on social values will definitely become more necessary and inevitable over time. Forcing others to do something against their will, whether it is learning the language or the culture behind it, can only lead to lowered motivation and outright opposition. And looking back, what I did there (really condescendingly) at the cafeteria should be considered as something that would definitely push the whole English-nization project toward “against the will” for most Japanese.
The above logic is the fundamental reason I am against all efforts to introduce English (or any other language, for that matter) as the working language for a non-English-speaking environment. Because English, as known by her native speakers, ignores all socio-cultural customs of the non-English-speaking locality…this is especially true in Japan, where the various unwritten social rules of embarrassment and isolation so commonly used is practically unknown in the Western world where English originates.
However, at the same time, I, as someone who lived in the West, believe in the importance of NOT having social hierarchy as the precondition for advancing new ideas and encouraging innovation. So, I am beginning to increasingly think that, perhaps English should be introduced forcefully against the will of every non-English speaker, at least in Japan, in order to break down certain excessive social barriers.
With that thought in mind, I actually attempted to use English’s lack of social hierarchy to my advantage at times. At good times, the use of English allowed me to speak much more freely to people much older than me (without caring about the honorific terms so commonly fidgeted about in Japanese, of course). And at bad times, the use of English allowed me to, well, speak freely to people much older than me, largely to their dismay (not mentioned incomprehension).
Here is a recent instance that is perhaps worth mentioning. I was walking around the crowded company canteen around noon looking for seats for myself and my friends. Four older coworkers (much older, perhaps late 30s) were sitting at a table, chatting away even though their lunches are completely finished. I (honestly, with a bit of hesitation…hats off to my sensitivity for Japanese culture) approached them and plainly said, “Are you finished? Would you let us use the table?” (Exact words)
The guy at the table was obviously displeased (I can see it on his face), yet not he or his female companion can comprehend what I was saying. The woman simply pointed at the table and puzzling look, prompting me to give a plain “yes” in reply. The group of four vanished from the table in an instant. No words are exchanged, but the emotional tensions were quite obvious in the situation.
Yet, reflecting back on the situation, I am becoming ever more doubtful than English, as is the case now, is actually being implemented in a hierarchy-reducing way. In this particular situation, we can assume that if the man at the table actually spoke English (or knew I spoke Japanese), he probably would have said something along the lines of “you foreign new grads need to know your place.” Because he cannot communicate his anger, he simply had to suppress it in that situation.
In other words, I, in that situation, am not enforcing English’s socially equalizing quality, but instead simply implied to the Japanese that I do not understand the nuances of Japanese social hierarchy. I was making the Japanese understand the positive social intentions behind using English, but simply used “speaking English only” as an unfair leverage to prevent lengthy interaction on social values.
And certain enough, those lengthy interactions on social values will definitely become more necessary and inevitable over time. Forcing others to do something against their will, whether it is learning the language or the culture behind it, can only lead to lowered motivation and outright opposition. And looking back, what I did there (really condescendingly) at the cafeteria should be considered as something that would definitely push the whole English-nization project toward “against the will” for most Japanese.
Comments
Post a Comment