Korea: Fluency in English Is a Must, by Kim Dae-joong

[Harold Schiffman]

Fluency in English Is a Must, by Kim Dae-joong

With ever more families separated for educational reasons, mothers
living in the U.S. to look after their children also have growing
regrets. The mothers, who are anything but fluent in English despite
having studied the language for six to eight years in public
education, acutely feel the shortcomings in our language education.
The problem is not confined to them. It is shared by students studying
abroad. Corporate employees engaged in transactions with foreign
firms, emigrants, and scientists and engineers who have to acquire
top-notch technologies and advanced know-how. There is no way of
accessing the individual losses and the national waste caused by our
lack of fluency in English.

Language is a tool and means of communication. Though some may say
that language incorporates a people's culture and history, culture and
history are after all premised on communication, and language is
merely their means. We live in an information society. How do we get
information? Information is conveyed and received from what you know
and think. Without the tool of language, it's impossible to exchange
information. It's common sense that the language of the country that
has the upper hand in communication and exchange is dominant. Why deny
that the U.S. has more advantages than us? What matters is not the
fact that America is important, but that countries which share its
national interests, deal with or strongly influenced by it communicate
in English. There is no need to attach any further significance to
English.

The singer Shin Hae-chul, not an expert on language culture, has
criticized the presidential Transition Committee's English public
education reform policy, talking about Korea becoming the ¡°51st
state¡± of the U.S. But it is anachronistic to suggest that we would
become a vassal state of a country whose language we learn for our own
needs. Some may complain if we teach English even to those who don't
need it "by force" and so-called immersion. But we don't study every
subject we learn and take exams in because they are necessary for our
daily lives. And unless by learning English we somehow eradicate our
own language, this ultra-nationalism in language is extremely harmful.

Some parents worry that stronger English public education will affect
the subjects of the college entrance examinations and consequently
boost the need for extra-curricular English classes. Quite possibly.
Crammers have long been a blight on our society. But think of it
another way: it will be an investment in language, especially English,
that is the most effective and practical in terms of cram school
costs. Sure, we will have to reduce the side effects. But if we are to
catch a lot of big fish in the oceans, we have to pay something. Some
side effects and excesses will arise, but we have to go out to the
oceans looking for the big fish.

The world is opening. Borders are being eliminated and distance
between countries is shrinking. We cannot close our doors. No, we have
to take the lead in advancing to every corner of the globe. If we are
bound by Northeast Asia, we'll eventually become a prey of the
hegemony of China and Japan. The weapons we can give to our children
are the spirit of challenge and language skills. Only those who are
better at languages can survive in this world. We cannot send our
children out into that world tongue-tied.

Traveling around the world, of course, we may feel that fluency in
English alone is not enough. With English proficiency alone, it's hard
to catch up with young talents who command three of four foreign
languages. English is a basic requirement, and you have to speak at
least another foreign language, like Chinese, Japanese, Spanish or
French, to catch up. Look at the singer Park Jin-young. Had he stayed
at home, bound by language barriers, where would his talents be buried
now? But because he went to New York and learned from world musicians,
he is contributing to the improvement of Korean pop music. I don¡¯t
mean to compare the two musicians in terms of talent. But should we
choose the way of Park Jin-young or Shin Hae-chul? This is the
question all our parents and the country as a whole must answer.


http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200802/200802110016.html
-- 
**************************************
N.b.: Listing on the lgpolicy-list is merely intended as a service to
its members
and implies neither approval, confirmation nor agreement by the owner
or sponsor of
the list as to the veracity of a message's contents. Members who
disagree with a
message are encouraged to post a rebuttal. (H. Schiffman, Moderator)
*******************************************