I find that people who know another language generally sound smarter. A knowledge of another language opens you to another culture, which expands your worldview and ameliorates your thought process.
What languages should a well-educated individual speak?
Its possible but by no means a certainty, I have travelled to lots of places and experienced many cultures without bcoming proficient in another language. It is possible to expand your "worldview" without learning new languages.
But reluctance to learn another language shows just the kind of stupid stubbornness that limits one's mind. Language quite often is the basis of an advanced culture, and is therefore required to understand it.
Blanca, I find your attitude to be a bit hostile. I am not reluctant, I just have no desire to do it. I have experinced a great many interesting things in my travels. Is it better to speak 5 languages and never actually go anywhere?
<<I find that people who know another language generally sound smarter.>>
It is possible, but it is also very likely that they sound more pretentious. And it is also possible that if they learn the other language too well it will interfere with their native language and hence rather than sounding smarter, they will sound dumber.
<<A knowledge of another language opens you to another culture,>>
Possible, but not necessarily. Just because you can communicate with them doesn't mean you can fit in with them. I can communicate very well with Indians who speak perfect English and yet I don't really get their culture and don't enjoy it very much at all. The same even with countries like Australia, NZ, Ireland, etc. I know nothing about these cultures, in spite the fact that I speak English. I don't know what their culture is like. I'd have to live there to find out, and maybe not even then. Who knows, maybe Irony knows more about Chinese culture from living there for 6 months than some student studying Chinese for years somewhere in America who's never been there? Very likely. So if you want to understand a culture, maybe language is not the best way? That is, if their culture is actually any different or special at all... Which leads me on to the following: the idea of "other cultures" is vastly overstated.
That is, learning a language from afar often gives not real understanding, but the illusion of understanding. You create an idealised image of the country you claim to understand which doesn't correspond to reality. You watch classical films, read great literature, and then you go to the country and to your dismay find out that those people have never heard of the classical film you love, and are reading Dan Brown rather than your beloved great literature. It turns out the culture you wanted to understand hardly exists any more (if it ever did exist) and you understand nothing. It turns out the people there are the same, they are just like most people in your country. It turns out the idea of a "different culture" was vastly overrated. It turns out there wasn't much to "understand" in the first place.
<<which expands your worldview and ameliorates your thought process. >>
A typical fallacy. Yes, yes, it's not impossible. But ANYTHING can do that. ANYTHING! Learning mathematics, sprinting, gardening etc... Can a person who doesn't understand the laws of physics which govern his daily life be considered to have an impressive world-view? Can a person who doesn't know the capabilities of the human body and hasn't pushed theirs to the limit be considered to be experienced in the meaning of being human? Can a person who hasn't overseen and nurtured the growth of a garden and developed techniques to enhance it be considered to be at one with the universe?
<<But reluctance to learn another language shows just the kind of stupid stubbornness that limits one's mind.>>
Reluctance? Can it be called reluctance or rather just different priorities? Not all of us have time to dedicate to learning languages which are absolutely useless for the most part. Just like I'm sure you're not reluctant to learn mathematics, sprinting or gardening. More likely, you just don't have those subjects at the top of your list of priorities. The scope of human knowledge and experience is vast indeed. No one man can even hope to scratch the surface.
<<Language quite often is the basis of an advanced culture, and is therefore required to understand it. >>
Maybe it is required to understand it, but it not sufficient to understand it. As I pointed out above, I don't understand Irish culture despite speaking English. And why the necessity to understand an "advanced culture"? What comes of this "understanding" and how is this understanding more important than understanding the fundamentals of logical deduction, the subtleties of developing thick muscle fibres, or the optimal amount of sunlight and nutrients required to grow a top-quality orchid?
It is possible, but it is also very likely that they sound more pretentious. And it is also possible that if they learn the other language too well it will interfere with their native language and hence rather than sounding smarter, they will sound dumber.
<<A knowledge of another language opens you to another culture,>>
Possible, but not necessarily. Just because you can communicate with them doesn't mean you can fit in with them. I can communicate very well with Indians who speak perfect English and yet I don't really get their culture and don't enjoy it very much at all. The same even with countries like Australia, NZ, Ireland, etc. I know nothing about these cultures, in spite the fact that I speak English. I don't know what their culture is like. I'd have to live there to find out, and maybe not even then. Who knows, maybe Irony knows more about Chinese culture from living there for 6 months than some student studying Chinese for years somewhere in America who's never been there? Very likely. So if you want to understand a culture, maybe language is not the best way? That is, if their culture is actually any different or special at all... Which leads me on to the following: the idea of "other cultures" is vastly overstated.
That is, learning a language from afar often gives not real understanding, but the illusion of understanding. You create an idealised image of the country you claim to understand which doesn't correspond to reality. You watch classical films, read great literature, and then you go to the country and to your dismay find out that those people have never heard of the classical film you love, and are reading Dan Brown rather than your beloved great literature. It turns out the culture you wanted to understand hardly exists any more (if it ever did exist) and you understand nothing. It turns out the people there are the same, they are just like most people in your country. It turns out the idea of a "different culture" was vastly overrated. It turns out there wasn't much to "understand" in the first place.
<<which expands your worldview and ameliorates your thought process. >>
A typical fallacy. Yes, yes, it's not impossible. But ANYTHING can do that. ANYTHING! Learning mathematics, sprinting, gardening etc... Can a person who doesn't understand the laws of physics which govern his daily life be considered to have an impressive world-view? Can a person who doesn't know the capabilities of the human body and hasn't pushed theirs to the limit be considered to be experienced in the meaning of being human? Can a person who hasn't overseen and nurtured the growth of a garden and developed techniques to enhance it be considered to be at one with the universe?
<<But reluctance to learn another language shows just the kind of stupid stubbornness that limits one's mind.>>
Reluctance? Can it be called reluctance or rather just different priorities? Not all of us have time to dedicate to learning languages which are absolutely useless for the most part. Just like I'm sure you're not reluctant to learn mathematics, sprinting or gardening. More likely, you just don't have those subjects at the top of your list of priorities. The scope of human knowledge and experience is vast indeed. No one man can even hope to scratch the surface.
<<Language quite often is the basis of an advanced culture, and is therefore required to understand it. >>
Maybe it is required to understand it, but it not sufficient to understand it. As I pointed out above, I don't understand Irish culture despite speaking English. And why the necessity to understand an "advanced culture"? What comes of this "understanding" and how is this understanding more important than understanding the fundamentals of logical deduction, the subtleties of developing thick muscle fibres, or the optimal amount of sunlight and nutrients required to grow a top-quality orchid?
>>>"That is, learning a language from afar often gives not real understanding, but the illusion of understanding. You create an idealised image of the country you claim to understand which doesn't correspond to reality. You watch classical films, read great literature, and then you go to the country and to your dismay find out that those people have never heard of the classical film you love, and are reading Dan Brown rather than your beloved great literature. It turns out the culture you wanted to understand hardly exists any more (if it ever did exist) and you understand nothing. It turns out the people there are the same, they are just like most people in your country. It turns out the idea of a "different culture" was vastly overrated. It turns out there wasn't much to "understand" in the first place."<<<
I agree with Blanca... I'm Russian, and to understand Russian culture, Russian is absolutely essential. Educated Russians strongly identify with their literary tradition; people quote Pushkin and Tolstoy to this day. They are a minority, but everyone has the freedom to surround himself with people he likes, so it doesn't matter if they're not in the majority.
I hear of the same strong attachment to literature in France. Even in the United States, which everyone is so quick to belittle, there are many, many people who are simply obsessed with books. From what I understand, Jane Austen has a bigger following in America than in Britain!
Yes, the France that most people imagine, especially those who never been there, is a country that perhaps never existed, not even during France's heyday. A mere collage of stereotypes and marketing, a fantasy of days long passed. But that doesn't remove the fact that a wealth of information and thought is to be gained by reading French due to its cultural merit.
Much is lost in translation. There are Russian authors that simply can't be translated into English. People do it, embellish it with well-researched introductions and footnotes, but the result leaves much to be desired.
I agree with Blanca... I'm Russian, and to understand Russian culture, Russian is absolutely essential. Educated Russians strongly identify with their literary tradition; people quote Pushkin and Tolstoy to this day. They are a minority, but everyone has the freedom to surround himself with people he likes, so it doesn't matter if they're not in the majority.
I hear of the same strong attachment to literature in France. Even in the United States, which everyone is so quick to belittle, there are many, many people who are simply obsessed with books. From what I understand, Jane Austen has a bigger following in America than in Britain!
Yes, the France that most people imagine, especially those who never been there, is a country that perhaps never existed, not even during France's heyday. A mere collage of stereotypes and marketing, a fantasy of days long passed. But that doesn't remove the fact that a wealth of information and thought is to be gained by reading French due to its cultural merit.
Much is lost in translation. There are Russian authors that simply can't be translated into English. People do it, embellish it with well-researched introductions and footnotes, but the result leaves much to be desired.
I've met people from many European nationalities and the Italians are not precissely the best educated ones, also their manners leave a lot to be desired sometimes. Then if speaking Italian natively does not make you well-educated how come if you speak Italian as a foreign language makes you well-educated? It does not make much sense.
Franco how do you dare compare Italy and Spain?? Stay in you shitty country and shut up de una vez!
I think a demotivator is crunch. Similar cynical kind of posting style, and no real interest in other languages. Doesn't seem like Irony really cares about them either, even though this is, ironically, a language forum.
Franco, sincerely speaking, do you really think that the average spaniard is more cultured than the average italian? Put aside your propaganda and be sincere!
There is a lot of illiteracy in Southern Italy. Mafia groups prefer illiterate people so they can continue controlling them.
In Rome there are mafia groups too like the Vatican that spread illiteracy and childish beliefs.
I am from Rome, I am catholic and highly literate too. either Franco is wrong, or I am estremely clever and brilliant.