Learning languages at college

phenomenon

Not trying to troll here. I'm looking for a proper debate.

Why would someone choose to waste 4 years of their life studying something in college that they could have learned by themselves in their free time? Even worse, many students are far from fluent after graduation.

When confronted by a foreigner they pathetically claim "I can speak (insert language)" only to be followed with a blank stare as the foreigner attempts to continue the conversation in their native language. It's at this point the student realizes that after spending all that money on university, they just learned how to order a coffee and (ironically) how to proclaim that they are fluent in said language.

In these economic conditions it would be wiser to train yourself with a course in science or computers - learning actual skills. A foreigner will always be able to speak english better than you can speak their language.

Prove me wrong.

PurpleFistMixer

Why would I waste 4 years of my life in college learning maths* when I could just do it at home?

*replace with discipline of your choice.

I don't do a language (thank jesus), but I assume there is more to it than simply gaining an ability to speak. You know, literature and all.

phenomenon

Well, that's partly my point - you can't really learn maths by yourself at home. It requires somebody to teach it to you and explain the steps involved.

This is why people in the poorest countries of the world, who probably never set foot inside a school, are often multilingual whereas they may have no understanding of maths beyond addition and subtraction.

God forbid language students actually hear about this, thus destroying their false belief in their intellectual superiority over the roma gypsy begging on the street.

Running Bing

phenomenon wrote: »

Well, that's partly my point - you can't really learn maths by yourself at home. It requires somebody to teach it to you and explain the steps involved.

This is why people in the poorest countries of the world, who probably never set foot inside a school, are often multilingual whereas they may have no understanding of maths beyond addition and subtraction.

God forbid language students actually hear about this, thus destroying their false belief in their intellectual superiority over the roma gypsy begging on the street.

Any subject that doesnt require specialist equipment can be learned at home. I did economics, I could have easily just read all the books/papers at home.

Maths is no different. It might be easier with somebody teaching you but you can still teach it to yourself. Language is also difficult to learn yourself at home.

I can see where your coming from though. I always felt it was strange for people to do languages at Uni thinking to myself there are better ways to learn a language but I dont think its just about learning a language. It comes down to how the language developed, the culture of the country and how language is used in the countries literature etc. For example somebody might learn to speak English in a year but will they appreciate Joyce or Shakespeare or know anything about how the language was developed?

phenomenon

Babybing wrote: »

For example somebody might learn to speak English in a year but will they appreciate Joyce or Shakespeare or know anything about how the language was developed?

Good point, and the answer to your question is probably no. But I'm talking strictly about learning how to speak a foreign language rather than studying foreign literature.

I did french in secondary and was really frustrated at the pace it was taught at. Often we would spend a whole class just learning one or two verbs or a single grammatical rule. After 5/6 years a lot of the class still struggled to uphold at simple conversation beyond "My name is...I live in...etc".

I'm convinced language learning is something best studied in your own time, at your own pace. College should be reserved for studying something with direct employment prospects waiting after graduation.

tolosenc

phenomenon wrote: »

College should be reserved for studying something with direct employment prospects waiting after graduation.

Like an interpreter?

I study Computer Science, Linguistics and French. Having another language is always going to beneficial. One of the things you seem to be ignoring is the fact that people who struggle at pass French at LC level tend not to make up any proportion of those in the class in University.

A language is very difficult to learn by one's self, unless in an immersed environment. The contact hours with natives are CRUCIAL!

Ravelleman

phenomenon wrote: »

When confronted by a foreigner they pathetically claim "I can speak (insert language)" only to be followed with a blank stare as the foreigner attempts to continue the conversation in their native language. It's at this point the student realizes that after spending all that money on university, they just learned how to order a coffee and (ironically) how to proclaim that they are fluent in said language.

Surely then your problem is with lazy, uninspired people, not language learners as a whole.

To be honest, I'd much rather learn how to talk to people in college than learn how to talk to computers.

And might I ask the OP how much experience he/she has in learning a new language in a native environment?

phenomenon

obl wrote: »

Like an interpreter?

I study Computer Science, Linguistics and French. Having another language is always going to beneficial. One of the things you seem to be ignoring is the fact that people who struggle at pass French at LC level tend not to make up any proportion of those in the class in University.

A language is very difficult to learn by one's self, unless in an immersed environment. The contact hours with natives are CRUCIAL!

You were smart enough to study computer science along with your french and I'd imagine your future carreer prospects lie more with the former. Honestly, there's not a huge enough demand for interpreters to employ the thousands of language graduates marching out of college every year (that's assuming they're even fluent when they leave). A quick scan of some Irish jobs websites show that any translator jobs require experience with marketing or sales too.

True that most university language classes will consist of students who did well in the LC but surely this means they're equipped well enough to continue building up their fluency on their own. I mean by the time you complete the LC you should know all the grammar rules and it's just a matter of building up your vocab and practicing with natives, rather than sitting in a classroom with other Irish people. You're not going to find a native german learning german in an Irish college classroom, are you?!

phenomenon

Ravelleman wrote: »

And might I ask the OP how much experience he/she has in learning a new language in a native environment?

None because I'm busy studying a science course.
Although I don't want to lose my french so I regularly read the french newspapers online and my Italian girlfriend is currently teaching me Italian. She cannot understand why Irish people spend so long learning a foreign language in college with no other qualification.

My own course provides me with plenty of contact with Erasmus students and I've plenty of European friends. In fact, you've more of a chance of meeting foreigners in a non-language course (besides english) if you think about it. No foreigner is going to come to college in Ireland to learn their own language!

Ravelleman

You may think I'm insulting your intelligence here but there is a massive difference between the ability to understand a language in its written form, like in a newspaper article, and the ability to use it naturally and fluenty to communicate with native speakers orally and in writing, let alone be able to use technical language or appreciate the subtleties of its literature.

As a person who excelled at languages in the leaving cert and who went on to study two languages in university, one of which was from beginner level, I can tell you that the leaving cert is taught at a far, far lower level than anything you'll find in university. To simply say that one should have already covered all the grammar points necessary to train oneself to fluency once they have finished the leaving cert seems incredibly naive to me.

I would contest that, if you are indeed basing your experience of the French language solely on your learning from the leaving certificate, you needn't worry about 'losing' your French - you never really had it.

But then again, if your Italian girlfriend can't understand why, then it must be foolish to study languages in university.

phenomenon

First off I appreciate you taking me seriously and not being patronising or insulting.

Now, I would reject your point that the LC doesn't equip you to carry on self-study of a language to fluency level. As I said I've plenty of European friends and I like to chat to them in French when I can. I don't pretend I'm fully fluent in the language but it's a learning experience and I genuinely believe I'm improving thanks to them. Pehaps I'd reach fluency if I fully immersed myself.

You say you went on to study languages in uni. Was it just languages or was it with something else? And without meaning to sound cheeky, what job did you get out of your degree?

EGaffney

To imagine that there are all that many more job opportunities in science/"computers" than languages is not necessarily valid, considering the massive shift in skills towards the Far East that's going to occur with advances in IT.

University courses in languages tend to involve immersion in the literature as well as a deep understanding of the language. That is why French, German, etc. were included in the old faculty of Arts (Letters) back in the day - they are humanities and should be understood as such. However, with opinions like

College should be reserved for studying something with direct employment prospects waiting after graduation

, I can see why you don't understand the point of language courses. Incidentally, please never, ever, ever enter any branch of academia if you hold opinions like that.

Caoimhe89

I disagree with your logic that languages are best studied by oneself. You yourself mention that your girlfriend is teaching you Italian, and that you learn the rudiments of French at school. Without some human contact to start you off, and give you the basics (at the very least!) to learn a language. And anyway, everybody learns in a different way.

Back to langage courses in college; personally, I do not see them in any way 'inferior' to a degree that will lead directly to a job. A language degree gives you (generally) a good reading, aural and oral ability in said language as well as a background knowledge of the culture and literature of that country. I have several friends who are doing language courses in Trinity, and it is simply unfair to say that their level of these languages are as you describe them in your OP. I'm sure some people come out of a science course with shoddy knowledge of science, but it would be unfair of me to tar everyone with the same brush.

I should probably mention that I am a History/English student and therefore thoroughly object to the 'College should be reserved for studying something with direct employment prospects waiting after graduation' theory.

Ling

Dear OP,

I am one of those people who has ‘chosen to waste 4 years of their life learning languages’ as you say. To reiterate some of the points already made by other posters:

While not entirely impossible, it is very difficult to become fluent in a language if your only instruction comes from a book. I agree, immersion in a culture/language is the best way to become fluent, orally. However, unless you have studied a language, its culture and its literature at 3rd level, you will never be fluent in the true sense of the word. You will not grasp the nuances of the language and you certainly won’t be interculturally competent.

As for the suggestion that after LC you will know all the grammar rules of a language: ehm, have you ever actually seen a French grammar book? If not, then you may be surprised to hear that they generally consist of over 500 pages of rules, and exceptions to rules, and exceptions to exceptions of rules.

What is expected from you at university level is a far higher standard of linguistic ability than you would ever find at secondary school level. As has been said, only the people who do really well at LC level tend to continue language learning at university. Studying a language allows you to the opportunity to live and study in another country. Having spent a year studying history at a German university, I seriously doubt that anyone who has taught themselves a language in their own time would be able for much more than buying a train ticket. I should also point out that I managed exceptionally well writing a 7,000 word essay on Islamic fundamentalism in the 18th century, not to mind being able to ‘order a cup of coffee’.


I wouldn’t expect someone with opinions such as those you express to understand the real reason why people learn languages at university. I can only speak for myself, but growing up (I learned 2 foreign languages in school) I was always fascinated by languages and other cultures. I still am. It might sound incredibly nerdy, but I get a real kick out of being able to identify the meanings of words in languages I have never even studied, simply because I am aware of the roots of languages, the origins of words and the nuance of language.

OP, you also seem to have a very skewed idea of what studying a university degree is all about. If you go back to the very first universities, languages and theology made up the bulk of what was studied. Academia is about the acquisition and sharing of knowledge. Getting a good qualification to help you in finding a job is important too, of course it is, but it certainly isn’t the be all and end all. Anyone who enters university with the sole motive of a high paid job at the end of it, won’t really enjoy the learning experience at all.

Also, interpretation is not the only career available to someone who has a degree in languages. In fact, if you can tell an employer that you lived and studied in another country, through a language that is not your mother tongue, and assimilated into the society and culture, then that says a lot, not just about your academic abilities, but about you as a person and your willingness to adapt. As a final point, let me just say that people who are interculturally competent and are aware of the difficulties that can arise in intercultural communication, are being employed more and more by large corporations, manufacturers etc. to come in and work out why communication is breaking down between offices located in different countries, where the mother tongue is not the same. I can only suspect that these people taught themselves French at home….

Ravelleman

I think Ling has hit the nail on the head here. Just to add to what was said

Ling wrote: »

Dear OP,
While not entirely impossible, it is very difficult to become fluent in a language if your only instruction comes from a book. I agree, immersion in a culture/language is the best way to become fluent, orally. However, unless you have studied a language, its culture and its literature at 3rd level, you will never be fluent in the true sense of the word. You will not grasp the nuances of the language and you certainly won’t be interculturally competent.

Even from my limited observations of total immersion in another language, I could see that this is no way guarantees a good level of fluency. While I was in Spain over the summer, attending a month long course to consolidate the Spanish I had learnt over the previous year, I was immediately struck by the complete lack of knowledge many of my classmates had of grammatical forms and rules. The people in the class came from different backgrounds but all arrived without 3rd level education in Spanish and some had been living in Spain for up to 10 years. While many could speak fluently enough to go about every day life, their Spanish was riddled with mistakes. All of them except one or two had never even heard of the imperfect subjunctive, for example.

A student of a new language needs a mix of contact time with natives and formal direction at a high level.

phenomenon

@Ling: Your post made for an interesting read and it's clear that you're passionate about learning languages.

have you ever actually seen a French grammar book? If not, then you may be surprised to hear that they generally consist of over 500 pages of rules

Ok I've been mistaken. The LC does not teach you all the grammatical aspects of a language, but does it really matter? From your own experience I'm sure you've met many Irish people who make grammatical errors and you'd still consider them fluent in English, eg. apostrophes, their/there/they're etc. Grammar can be trivial eg. the difference between throwing "at" someone and throwing "to" someone :rolleyes: I'd argue that the LC teaches you the important bits of grammar like the main tenses and irregular verbs.

I managed exceptionally well writing a 7,000 word essay on Islamic fundamentalism in the 18th century

Well done. I'm sure many native Germans would be unable to write such an essay.

people who are interculturally competent and are aware of the difficulties that can arise in intercultural communication, are being employed more and more by large corporations, manufacturers etc. to come in and work out why communication is breaking down between offices located in different countries

I'm sure they would be allocated some vague job title like "intercultural communications officer" and tossed around from one MNC to the next, whenever needed.

shay_562

phenomenon wrote:

But I'm talking strictly about learning how to speak a foreign language rather than studying foreign literature.

...in which case, you're not really talking about any language course offered at University level, or at least not in Trinity. They don't just sit you down and list off vocab, you know. There's actual cultural learning involved in getting a degree in French.

phenomenon wrote:

A quick scan of some Irish jobs websites show that any translator jobs require experience with marketing or sales too.

And conversely, I can't apply for some of the marketing jobs I'd like to apply for after college because of my lack of a third European language. So yes, irrespective of cultural or literary stuff pure fluency is enough to increase your job prospects. And beyond that...

phenomenon wrote:

I'm sure they would be allocated some vague job title like "intercultural communications officer" and tossed around from one MNC to the next, whenever needed.

So now we've moved from you asking for evidence that studying languages will help with post-college employment opportunities to you looking for evidence that those opportunities will be in a job that you respect in a field that you think is 'worthwhile'? Right. Naturally. Look, I'm fine with people being dogmatic and opinionated, but don't start a topic with the claim that you're only interested in having a debate about something and then change the parameters of the discussion every time it looks like you're about to be proved wrong. You didn't come here to see what other people thought, you came here to express your own views, repeatedly, even in the face of being show why your initial stance wasn't right.

mental07

I studied French and another language in university, I'm currently at work in France and just hung up the phone after speaking French to someone...

gaybitch

Learning a language at university is nothing at all like learning a language in secondary school.

For one thing, the French course at Trinity is split into three pieces - written language (which incorporates grammar lectures and has two tutorials a week), oral classes (which incorporate work in computer language labs), and then literature tutorials and lectures, on modern and old French poetry, drama and fiction.
Learning the fundamentals and also the artistry of a language is valuable, and something that isn't really offered by just living in a country - total immersion may only offer you what an oral class can. The written and literature aspects must be taught.

However, that said, I am currently in the process of dropping French. I've realised that I can learn French any time, and not just at university. However, the main reason I've dropped is because I don't enjoy it as much as I enjoy my other TSM subject by any stretch of the imagination, and luckily I can study that on its own so I'm going to! Also, the French Dept has some lovely people in it, but it's very disorganised and shoddy at doing the basic things it's supposed to do. The bungling of giving out information and also of our Socrates year was sort of the final straw.

Peleus

phenomenon wrote: »

College should be reserved for studying something with direct employment prospects waiting after graduation.

college is not just about learning how to do a certain job. If people wanna learn something, they should, even if it has no obvious employment prospects. Life's not all about jobs and money. :P

JC 2K3

phenomenon wrote: »

College should be reserved for studying something with direct employment prospects waiting after graduation.

No it shouldn't...

djcervi

Language study is most definitely a relevant subject to study in college. Whatever language you are studying you encounter writers, philosophers and other cultural figures, who have contributed to their societies with their own minds and in their own languages. University Students would be one of the main people, in my opinion, who would carry the knowledge of these people like Baudelaire, Voltaire or Cervantes on, which would keep these 'legends of their own time' alive in the world, in theory.

Maybe it might not benefit you on a wide scale for employment. Then again, even though I'm in 6th year and have not experienced college yet, what I understand college to be is education which allows you to develop as a person. That might lead to a job or perhaps closer to completing whatever goals we have in life (if not already).

On that note I'm hoping to study French and Spanish in Trinity, as part of my desire to learn languages, and also to experience the joys, etc of college life.