Almost a year ago, I wrote the following post.
Given recent developments, documented in an article by Robert Winnett in the Telegraph of December 28, it seems germane to reissue that post of 1/22/08 once again.
A Silver Bullet? Latin, Modern Languages, and UK National Literacy
'[earlier this year] I commented on the sentiments expressed by the authors of The National Curriculum regarding modern languages.
This is That Post, Part II, Paragraph II of Modern Languages:
"Learning languages gives pupils opportunities to develop their listening, speaking, reading and writing skills and to express themselves with increasing confidence, independence and creativity. They explore the similarities and differences between other languages and English and learn how language can be manipulated and applied in different ways. The development of communication skills, together with understanding of the structure of language, lay the foundations for future study of other languages and support the development of literacy skills in a pupil's own language.
I'm a Latinist/Classicist/linguist.
I agree with the sentiments of this paragraph wholeheartedly.
The question is how to effectively achieve its purposes.
Here is my response:
Learn Latin.
"But Latin isn't a modern language."
"True."
"It's also dead."
"Also true."
"So?"
"So, word one: Frisp."
"Frisp? Never heard of it."'
"French
Romanian
Italian
Spanish
Portuguese
Which are all recognized languages of the European Union.
We also refer to them as Romance Languages."
"So?"
"So the structural basis of these languages is Latin.
Learn Latin, and you exponentially increase your capability of learning a Romance Language."
"Okay, but what about the other EU languages? Latin can't help with those, can it?"
"Actually, it can."
"How?"
"Many of the languages of the EU are inflected."
"Infected?"
"No, 'inflected'. A language that is inflected establishes meaning by changing the forms of its words, particularly nouns, pronouns, adjectives, and verbs. The form of the words shows their function in a sentence."
"And?"
"And Latin is also inflected.
Learn Latin, and you exponentially increase your capability of learning a non-Romance language."
"But it's still not spoken, right?"
"Right."
"So how does that address the "listening, speaking, reading, and writing" part of the paragraph?"
"In terms of listening and speaking, it doesn't."
"But isn't that a problem?"
"Actually, it's a solution in conundrum's clothing."
"You'd better explain."
"Sure. When students learn a foreign language, it often happens that their proficiencies - speaking and listening - mask their deficiencies - reading and writing."
"So they can't read or write."
"And how would you rate the literacy of someone who can't read or write?"
"Low?"
"There is a technical term for it. A person who cannot read or write his own language is 'illiterate'."
"So much for national literacy."
"You said it."
"But how does Latin help deal with this problem?"
"Which problem?"
"The literacy problem."
"With which language?"
"Better start with foreign languages."
"Fair enough. You have to ask why students find reading and writing difficult in the first instance."
"Okay, consider it asked."
"They find reading and writing difficult because they have done very little of those exercises with their own language. To really read and to really write, you have to more than inherently know a language; you have to understand it. You have to understand how words relate, how they fit together to make sentences, ideas, concepts, etc. You have to have done time, so to speak, working with the nuts and bolts of language - its grammar, its syntax, its vocabulary. To write it out long-hand, type it, chant it, play with it. Become friends with it. Writing is the tactile recording of literacy. Reading allows you to see how others go through that experience. Literacy is, in effect, the expertise with which you deliberately handle your own language. So if you are going to master another language, you will have to spend some serious time with your own."
"But why Latin then?"
"Because when students learn Latin, they cannot hide behind a good ear and convincing accent. They must focus on the other two aspects: reading and writing. Latin forces them to account for everything. That, in turn, forces them to account for everything in English. Which reenforces what they are doing with language in Latin. It becomes a benevolent cycle, feeding on itself."
"So, you're saying that Latin is good because it addresses reading and writing almost exclusively?"
"Basically, yes."
"So it makes students hyper-aware of their choice of words, and why they are saying what they are saying?"
"Yes. It turns a potentially passive exercise into an active one. It requires that they develop critical tools of linguistic discernment."
"And the student who takes Latin will be ready to study a modern language in all aspects?"
"Yes. They will be happy to be speaking a foreign language, but it will not be so completely different in terms of vocabulary or structure. They will have already been there. They will be jazzed up about going forward in their study of language."
"And this same student will have done a tremendous amount with the building blocks of English, too? All that grammar and vocabulary?"
"Yes."
"But doesn't that take care of two major concerns of the government?"
"What do you mean?"
"Well, there's the national literacy recommendations, and there's the modern language entitlement, too."
"Right."
"Wouldn't a serious study of Latin help students, particularly at Key Stage 2, make significant strides in both these areas?"
"Let me get this straight. You're saying that you think that the study of Latin at...?"
"Key Stage 2."
"What's that mean in American English?"
"Ages 7 to 11."
"Oh, right. Okay, so you're saying that you think that the study of Latin, particularly CAGSE's Latin, at Key Stage 2 will facilitate both a growing mastery of English and set the stage for the thorough learning of Modern Languages? As required by the UK government?"
"Yes."
"I couldn't have said it any better. Thank you."
"You're welcome."
drg'