<p>My position about synonyms vs. foreign is one of attitude, not literalness. Many kids who see things as foreign do struggle, but acceptance that these words just mean the same thing as they do in English makes it easier to learn. As to people who learn as an adult, something happened that kept that center open. There are many who have difficulties, learn phrases, can be proficient, but never fluent. Why do you think that kids are taught other languages as younger children in other countries? They are more accepting of them. The center is still open. Again, it doesn't close for everyone. Certain things happening will keep it open. If the proper stimulation is not there, it won't allow fluency.</p>
<p>I have a European mother and have studied French, German, Swedish, and Latin, and have some exposure to Italian and Spanish. I can tell you that Latin is not at all like studying a foreign language (felt more like a math class to me) and seems well suited to kids who don't take to other foreign languages. Obviously there is not much focus on the speaking.</p>
<p>I also believe it should be required, as many private high schools do. It will absolutely lock down English grammar for your child after a semester or two. My second and third have/will take it in high school. My first took Spanish in high school but will take Latin to fulfill his foreign language requirement in college. (Yes--there was a tiny bit of prodding from his mother on that one.)</p>
<p>ingerp, since you have experience in so many languages, could you possibly rank them in order of "easiness" of learning?</p>
<p>This won't quite be the answer you requested, but a few (maybe kinda random) comments. It's difficult to argue against the relevance of learning some Spanish in today's USA. It is easy to pick up and you already know more than you realize! I've heard it argued that French is no longer relevant, although have been assured by DoD officials that it is still highly sought after and supported (by DoD scholarships!). German is a very structured language (although I guess no languages have the maddening exceptions that English does) with a grammar that is not intuitive to native English speakers. Italian seemed very easy to pick up to me, although the vocabulary is close to Latin, and would be made easier by any prior Spanish studies. I know a woman (native Hungarian) who spoke eight foreign languages fluently and said Swedish was the easiest to learn. Very simple grammar (verb second position--that's pretty much it). I doubt many colleges offer it, though!</p>
<p>In summary, I am a huge believer in Latin and I do think it's easier for some kids who aren't adept at foreign languages. After that, my best guess is Spanish/Italian might be easiest, followed by French (only the two genders for their nouns!), then maybe German. If a kid has a particular interest in a country/culture (has always wanted to visit, is planning a semester abroad, has family/history there, . . . ?), that's something to consider too.</p>
<p>In response to lkf725's issue from yesterday:</p>
<p>Americans are the only people in the world who could possibly ask the question "Why are foreign languages required?" For everyone else, having some degree of proficiency in something other than their native language is an essential component of even the most basic education. (Even Brits, who would seem to be exempt, too, really have to be able to function in other European languages in order to keep their educational and employment options open. Maybe some ambitious native Mandarin or Arabic speakers could get by without learning another language, but I doubt many do.)</p>
<p>In addition to all the utilitarian "global economy" arguments (for which Latin won't do a whole lot), I think there is high moral value in the experience of learning another system of expression, living with the reality that the mode of expression and communication that's most familiar to you is not the only mode available, and understanding that you CAN learn another language.</p>
<p>I also think that "fluency" is tremendously overrated. I am pretty good at learning languages, but I don't have a great ear. It would take enormous effort for me to learn to speak (and write) "fluently" in another language, and enormous effort to maintain that fluency. Once upon a time I was probably fluent in Spanish, but I am fairly awkward speaking it today, and I can write well in it only with difficulty. (And phonetically Spanish is extraordinarily easy -- it has many fewer sounds in it than English, and if you know how a word is spelled you know how it is pronounced.) But I get a lot of personal pleasure and enrichment -- and some business advantage, at times -- out of my Spanish . . . and my French, Italian, and Catalan which are nowhere near as good as my Spanish. At least for Western languages, it doesn't take anywhere near two years of college study to get good comprehension. I never studied any language in college, other than taking literature courses. Most universities offer one-semester reading comprehension courses for grad students; that, plus travel and practice, is plenty to create a solid base.</p>
<p>Ingerp, thanks for your opinion on which language might be easiest to learn.</p>
<p>JHS, I beg to differ, but I don't think that learning to speak and write in a foreign language has higher "moral value" than learning about other people's customs, beliefs and values...probably the actual language is even less relevant to understanding different cultures. Just mho, of course.</p>
<p>Let me reiterate that I am not against foreign language study. I was decent at French and pretty fluent in German at one time, and both of my kids study with different degrees of interest and success. I just don't think that it is essential to force all students into it.</p>
<p><strong><em>Thanks ingerp, that is actually a very helpful response!</em></strong></p>
<p>I think it's important to learn about more customs, beliefs, and values than you can learn languages. But I think you have a different experience of different "customs, beliefs, and values" if you are dealing with them directly, and you need to engage with at least one foreign language to do that. Do you think someone's view of America is different if they know English, or only Arabic or Chinese?</p>
<p>By the way, I don't think it's "essential" to force all students into it, either. But I think its an essential component of all elite educations, and of lots of non-elite educations, too. It has roughly the same status as math, for me: inexhaustible for a few, but everyone who claims to be educated should have some basic familiarity with what it's like.</p>
<p>I think the experience of traveling in a country speaking the native tongue vs. talking to everyone in English is very, very different. I really don't think you can get the same experience of the customs, beliefs and values just by reading about a country in English or doing tourist type traveling. I really think speaking one foreign language is a basic part of being educated.</p>
<p>I don't disagree. The truth is, however, that only a small percentage of people will immerse themselves in foreign travel and an even smaller percentage will use their language skills in their careers. Truthfully, how many of us remember much 10 or 20 years out? </p>
<p>Sure, let foreign language be a part of "elite" educations, but relative to other disciplines, I think it has less application. How many students scour the math department looking for a course that isn't "too mathy"? How many are relieved to find that a public speaking course fulfills an english requirement? How many students are clueless about the history of their own country? How many students leave college to live in the real world without ever taking an economics course - a discipline that touches every life every day?</p>
<p>While I like the idea of studying a foreign language and encourage my kids to become fluent, I still think that <em>in practicality</em> most people would feel that their time is better spent elsewhere, whether in exploring other cultures or simply becoming competent in basic math, writing, or economic principles. </p>
<p>Please don't slam me - I like languages and took them in college until I no longer had time to read novels and write papers. But it is just my two cents that the importance for the general population is inflated. (If it was so important, we wouldn't have to have bilingual signs or need to press one for english and two for spanish. We seem eager to accommodate non-english speakers in schools, stores, restaurants, etc.)</p>
<p>Sorry, I got off-topic from the original question of language difficulty! :)</p>
<p>The fact that kids look for easy ways out of distribution requirements is not an argument that those distribution requirements should not exist.</p>
<p>I'd argue also that kids should take foreign languages because it exercises parts of the brain that don't get addressed in other courses.</p>