Once in a while, one gets to meet one of those people who take upon themselves to learn as many languages as possible. After conquering one language, they practice the language through conversations with native speakers and equally minded language learners, all the while moving to study another new language. They call such behavior "a hobby" based on a fascination with cultures. Others, already having a hard time learning one foreign language, not to mention one after another, simply describe those with the language learning hobby as "naturally talented at learning languages."
Such a description assumes that the ability to learn new languages is fundamentally an innate one. Some people are simply innately better at processing and acquiring new linguistic capabilities, and it is just impossible for others to learn such capabilities later in life. To those who make such arguments, the ability to learn a new language is almost part of a person's personality, in which those who are more outgoing, more talkative, and more sociable will have a natural upper hand in learning languages. It is, for them, no different from meeting new friends from different social circles.
The argument is, of course, highly deterministic, with the outrageous assumption that people are incapable of acquiring the ability to learn a new skillset later on in their life. But the fact that the belief of there being some people who are simply better at learning new languages than others reflects the anxiety and even hopelessness with which people confront the task of being able to speak another language that they did not grow up with. The daunting task of memorizing the thousands of vocab, grammar rules, and the underlying social norms behind language use frustrate people to such a degree that they rather blame genetics for their failure to become fluent in a second language.
Examining people who are good at and interested in learning new languages, however, illustrate that they succeed not because they are particularly adroit or even diligent about memorizing words, rules, and norms. Instead, these are people who tend to be very logical about how they talk, structuring what they say in a very rational and clear manner easily understood by others. The skill to talk logically is, at the same time, not related to the person's educational attainment, sociability/talkativeness, and certainly not limited to a particular language.
Those who talk logically does not necessarily have to be very fluent in the language that is being used. In fact, the most logical speakers tend to string together the most widely understood, "simple" words, avoiding professional and academic jargons that exclude people from outside a small community of those with professional training in the subject being talked about. Instead of attempting to piece together the most complex sentences available to their repertoire, they focus more on using the simplest ways to express the most in-depth and complex ideas.
Even so, they do not need to say very much to make themselves and their ideas understood. Perhaps they are not too familiar with what is grammatically correct in the foreign languages that they are using to express themselves. But by sticking to a very logical process of making a simple argument, following it up with easily comprehensible evidence as support, and then concluding by revisiting the argument, they manage to have their arguments understood by others even if what is uttered are nothing more than a string of words pieced together haphazardly to express an idea.
Yet, by focusing not on the words used and the grammatical clarity, but instead on the idea being expressed and the evidence used to support it, logical speakers can impress native speakers even when their skills in the language is truly mediocre. In having the conversation, native speakers are so intrigued by the powerful ideas being exchanged that they easily overlook the fact that their conversation partners are using the wrong words and not following correct grammar to express those very ideas. The logic supersedes linguistic limitations.
The reality is that, more often than not, and particularly in foreign settings, good communication is "good" not because the language being used has a top-notch vocabulary set and is grammatically impeccable. Good communication is "good" because the communicators can gain immensely from the act of communication, through the exchange of ideas, the buildup of fraternity, and mutual understanding of deliverables. Perfect understanding of a language helps but is not necessary. Those who like learning languages understand this point, and that is perhaps why they enjoy learning new languages, despite all the frustrations and anxieties of learning.
Such a description assumes that the ability to learn new languages is fundamentally an innate one. Some people are simply innately better at processing and acquiring new linguistic capabilities, and it is just impossible for others to learn such capabilities later in life. To those who make such arguments, the ability to learn a new language is almost part of a person's personality, in which those who are more outgoing, more talkative, and more sociable will have a natural upper hand in learning languages. It is, for them, no different from meeting new friends from different social circles.
The argument is, of course, highly deterministic, with the outrageous assumption that people are incapable of acquiring the ability to learn a new skillset later on in their life. But the fact that the belief of there being some people who are simply better at learning new languages than others reflects the anxiety and even hopelessness with which people confront the task of being able to speak another language that they did not grow up with. The daunting task of memorizing the thousands of vocab, grammar rules, and the underlying social norms behind language use frustrate people to such a degree that they rather blame genetics for their failure to become fluent in a second language.
Examining people who are good at and interested in learning new languages, however, illustrate that they succeed not because they are particularly adroit or even diligent about memorizing words, rules, and norms. Instead, these are people who tend to be very logical about how they talk, structuring what they say in a very rational and clear manner easily understood by others. The skill to talk logically is, at the same time, not related to the person's educational attainment, sociability/talkativeness, and certainly not limited to a particular language.
Those who talk logically does not necessarily have to be very fluent in the language that is being used. In fact, the most logical speakers tend to string together the most widely understood, "simple" words, avoiding professional and academic jargons that exclude people from outside a small community of those with professional training in the subject being talked about. Instead of attempting to piece together the most complex sentences available to their repertoire, they focus more on using the simplest ways to express the most in-depth and complex ideas.
Even so, they do not need to say very much to make themselves and their ideas understood. Perhaps they are not too familiar with what is grammatically correct in the foreign languages that they are using to express themselves. But by sticking to a very logical process of making a simple argument, following it up with easily comprehensible evidence as support, and then concluding by revisiting the argument, they manage to have their arguments understood by others even if what is uttered are nothing more than a string of words pieced together haphazardly to express an idea.
Yet, by focusing not on the words used and the grammatical clarity, but instead on the idea being expressed and the evidence used to support it, logical speakers can impress native speakers even when their skills in the language is truly mediocre. In having the conversation, native speakers are so intrigued by the powerful ideas being exchanged that they easily overlook the fact that their conversation partners are using the wrong words and not following correct grammar to express those very ideas. The logic supersedes linguistic limitations.
The reality is that, more often than not, and particularly in foreign settings, good communication is "good" not because the language being used has a top-notch vocabulary set and is grammatically impeccable. Good communication is "good" because the communicators can gain immensely from the act of communication, through the exchange of ideas, the buildup of fraternity, and mutual understanding of deliverables. Perfect understanding of a language helps but is not necessary. Those who like learning languages understand this point, and that is perhaps why they enjoy learning new languages, despite all the frustrations and anxieties of learning.
Comments
Post a Comment