NationStates Jolt Archive

In my province of Alberta (in Canada), there is a move to offer a second language (besides French, which is an official language) in all schools. Students would have to choose a second language to study through Grade 4 - 9. It would be an option to continue in high school.

So, what do you think? It is mandatory to study another language. I for one, am all for it...I am bilingual myself, and think it's a little sad to be monolingual if you have the opportunity to learn another language (for free). My only difficulty with it would be choosing WHICH language to take!

Opinions?

Sure. I had to learn French and English. Although I forgot most of the French I learned since I did not learn it until the end of high school and have not used it ever again.

In my province of Alberta (in Canada), there is a move to offer a second language (besides French, which is an official language) in all schools. Students would have to choose a second language to study through Grade 4 - 9. It would be an option to continue in high school.

So, what do you think? It is mandatory to study another language. I for one, am all for it...I am bilingual myself, and think it's a little sad to be monolingual if you have the opportunity to learn another language (for free). My only difficulty with it would be choosing WHICH language to take!

Opinions?

At that age level, I'd say go for it.

I do believe (and I could be wrong, but) that kids learn things easier when their younger, so teaching them different languages early on would help.

Sure. I had to learn French and English. Although I forgot most of the French I learned since I did not learn it until the end of high school and have not used it ever again.

So was it a valuable experience or not? Would you support mandatory second language instruction? Just clarifying.

Speaking Spanish and English, I find a second and even a third language invaluable. It should be mandatory for students to learn a second language in the U.S. At the same time, English should be the mandatory in all other non-second language clases.

i dont think they should teach you a scond language unless they start early as early as 1st or 2nd grade cuz i started a language in hs and could not remember an of it but studies show that if you tart earlier tht you learn much easier just like studying any thing

My gripe with the British education system is that a second language is not taught early on enough so children have more difficulty learning it later on.
My sister loves to use foreign words; she greets people with nihao, says merci and sometimes says goodbye as vale.
She is 8.

Here we have to study second language from 3rd to 9th grade and third from 7th to 9th (when mandatory education ends...if you go to highschool/college you have to past exams in both) Almost 50% of the students starts 3rd foreign language on 8th year.

Our education system is quite different...for short: 9 years mandatory for everyone, then highschool/college (2-4years) for those who want to get into uni and 2-4 years of
-öh?- "The more vocationally oriented high schools train their students in things such as auto mechanics, hairdressing, etcetera." Vocational schools?
are for those who know what they want to do and are not interested of higher education. Anyway, everybody learns at least the basics of 2 other languages and that's great.

My gripe with the British education system is that a second language is not taught early on enough so children have more difficulty learning it later on.
My sister loves to use foreign words; she greets people with nihao, says merci and sometimes says goodbye as vale.
She is 8.
For everyone who has English as their mother tongue, other anglogerman(anglosax?) languages should be pretty easy as they are so similar. It was really easy to learn English when I already knew some Swedish. (and please no comments about my English...I know I'm terrible writer, believe me, I understand it a lot better than how I write it).

Well, I think it depends from what perspective and position you are looking at the issue. For all non-English speaking nations it makes absolutely sense to make English mandatory as first or second foreign language in their schools since English is the lingua franca of the world.
Aside English another "regional language" could be offered out of the list of the more common languages of the continent. For Europe that would mainly be French, Spanish, German, Italian.

I am bilingual myself, and think it's a little sad to be monolingual if you have the opportunity to learn another language (for free).

There is no such thing as "for free."

I couldn't support this, because I won't endorse taking money off some people unwillingly to force another group of people to do something unwillingly.

Make it an option.

Craig

Aside English another "regional language" could be offered out of the list of the more common languages of the continent. For Europe that would mainly be French, Spanish, German, Italian.
Try to convince our government with that! We have to study Swedish eventhough nearly anybody speaks it (well they do in Sweden, hooray for that!). Most of us choose English as the other mandatory language, but you can also choose German, Russian or France.

Sure, the more you know the better. I study English and used to study French and some German, but I hardly remember them. Pity.

So was it a valuable experience or not? Would you support mandatory second language instruction? Just clarifying.
Yes, I'd support it. Although I did not keep much of the language, I know more about France now than I did before I learned French :)

At that age level, I'd say go for it.

I do believe (and I could be wrong, but) that kids learn things easier when their younger, so teaching them different languages early on would help.

You're bang on with this. The research has shown again and again that early exposure to languages helps keep a kid's mind 'flexible'. Physical connections in the brain are formed by this exposure, and as our minds 'solidify' with age, it is harder and harder for those connections to be made. If you were never exposed to the tonal subtleties of Thai, for example, you are literally unable to discern those sounds as an adult. Kids are like sponges when it comes to language:)

Try to convince our government with that! We have to study Swedish eventhough nearly anybody speaks it (well they do in Sweden, hooray for that!). Most of us choose English as the other mandatory language, but you can also choose German, Russian or France.
But Swedish is the second official language of Finland, isn´t it. Suomi - Finland.
And btw I´m not in the position to convince your goverment from anything. That would rather your job if you wish changes in that respect.

Sure. I had to learn French and English. Although I forgot most of the French I learned since I did not learn it until the end of high school and have not used it ever again.
And I've forgotten all the German I've once learned...A bit sad, but I believe it would be quite easy to remember it all again if I would ever need it again.

There is no such thing as "for free."

I couldn't support this, because I won't endorse taking money off some people unwillingly to force another group of people to do something unwillingly.

Make it an option.

Craig

This initiative is supported with public funds, true...but public funds that were already slated for public education. No tax money was taken from another pot to fund it.

But Swedish is the second official language of Finland, isn´t it. Suomi - Finland.
And btw I´m not in the position to convince your goverment from anything. That would rather your job if you wish changes in that respect.
Yes, it still is an official language. But only 6% speaks it as mother tongue and I, as most of fellow Finns, can't understand why we have to learn a language almost noone can speak. We could spend the time learning Russian or German but no, Swedish. What good does it make?
Oh yes, I certainly know we have been part of Sweden for centuries, but it is almost ancient history now. It would make more sense to me that we have to learn Russian.

Yes, it still is an official language. But only 6% speaks it as mother tongue and I, as most of fellow Finns, can't understand why we have to learn a language almost noone can speak. We could spend the time learning Russian or German but no, Swedish. What good does it make?
Oh yes, I certainly know we have been part of Sweden for centuries, but it is almost ancient history now. It would make more sense to me that we have to learn Russian.
Anyway...
this is a HUGE issue in Finland, so don't wonder the tone in my post...

For everyone who has English as their mother tongue, other anglogerman(anglosax?) languages should be pretty easy as they are so similar. It was really easy to learn English when I already knew some Swedish. (and please no comments about my English...I know I'm terrible writer, believe me, I understand it a lot better than how I write it).

your english isnt perfect but it IS perfectly understandable. what else matters unless you are a translator at the UN?

everyone should learn a second language, its good for your brain.

Anyway...
this is a HUGE issue in Finland, so don't wonder the tone in my post...

Well hey...plenty of schoolkids in Ireland have to learn Gaelic, and I mean...who the heck speaks Gaelic? It's pretty cool though....:)

In today's world, the most widely spoken language is clearly English and I think everyone should learn that. If that is your first language, learning a second language shouldn't be necessary.

I would say the same thing about French in the 1700s.

Nice to see lots of people agree with this. Learning different languages (particularly, as mentioned, at an early age) helps you understand better how languages are built (so even helps you to improve your own language).

After a certain age, of course, all subjects become more optional, so this would be no different, just in case you're thinking that way.

Here's a list about the top 10 languages according to Weber:

http://www2.ignatius.edu/faculty/turner/languages.htm

And no, English is not the most used language. It's Mandarin chinese :)

Anyway...
this is a HUGE issue in Finland, so don't wonder the tone in my post...
But aren´t Finland and Sweden not close with each other -historically and politically. Both are neutral countries after all and nordic states.
And isn´t Sweden the biggest of the nordic countries after all?
I´ve recently spoken with an Estonian who told me that she also learned Swedish.
Swedish seems to be in the position of a kind of regional language.
I could imagine Sweden playing a key role in the baltic sea region. That is of course also a prospect for Swedish foreign policy - also as a counter-balance to Russia.

In the case of Germany I can tell you that there was the political will to promote French - especially after the signing of the Elysee treaty in 1963 which laid the basis for the mysterious Franco-German alliance.
This included student exchange and the promotion of the languages of each other country as foreign language.
Though it is declining. In Germany the number of people learning French is declining and in France the number wasn´t high anyway and has furthernmore declined (from 35% of the students to 15% today).

So, I don´t know about the Swedish dispute in Finland. But I assume it is certainly a highly political issue.

Here's a list about the top 10 languages according to Weber:

http://www2.ignatius.edu/faculty/turner/languages.htm

And no, English is not the most used language. It's Mandarin chinese :)

True...I think their point was that English is more WIDELY spoken...it's the official language in 50 countries. However, it is not the fastest growing language (Spanish). As well, the world wide web, which was intitially very English-based is now more multilingual as countries develop better technology. English is not going to STAY number one...wouldn't it be better to expand your horizons?

Yes, it still is an official language. But only 6% speaks it as mother tongue and I, as most of fellow Finns, can't understand why we have to learn a language almost noone can speak. We could spend the time learning Russian or German but no, Swedish. What good does it make?
I´ve spoken to an Estonian and there the discusion goes the other way around. They refuse to learn Russian and require the Russian minority to learn Estonian. They refuse a billingual state out of the concern that this would mean the end of the Estonian lanuage. Since it is a very small language it needs protection. I can understand their position. Although this is of course leading to a kind of a cultural fight within the country and also about the "borders of Europe" in the east.

Learning a second language should be optional, unless another language is an official language of your country, in which case it should be compulsory. I learned French at school, while I was never taught Maori, which is an official language of New Zealand. I was taught it at Teachers' College, but I think it was a bit beyond me by the time I was 23. I wish I could speak it fluently though.

In today's world, the most widely spoken language is clearly English and I think everyone should learn that. If that is your first language, learning a second language shouldn't be necessary.

I would say the same thing about French in the 1700s.
so wrong.
as gigatron stated english clearly is not the most widely spoken language in the world, not everyone should learn it (because believe it or not, there's plenty of countries in 'todays world' that get along just fine without English) and learning a second (...third...fourth...etc. for that matter) language is quite necessary, if only to show others you're not completely egocentrical.

Italiano, Latin, Inglese!

Italiano, Latin, Inglese!
??

Here's a list about the top 10 languages according to Weber:

http://www2.ignatius.edu/faculty/turner/languages.htm

And no, English is not the most used language. It's Mandarin chinese :)

I agree with Sinuhue. Chinese might have the highest population of speakers in the world, but if I have my Chinese population correct (1.26 billion in 2000), then there are fewer Chinese speakers than there are Chinese in China. Hardly "widely spoken".

I agree with Sinuhue. Chinese might have the highest population of speakers in the world, but if I have my Chinese population correct (1.26 billion in 2000), then there are fewer Chinese speakers than there are Chinese in China. Hardly "widely spoken".
What? if you take chinese to be 'one language' then yes, it is widely spoken. but nobody ever mentions that chinese is made up of many (some mutually not intelligible) dialects.

Here's a list about the top 10 languages according to Weber:

http://www2.ignatius.edu/faculty/turner/languages.htm

And no, English is not the most used language. It's Mandarin chinese :)

No actually its English. Because lots of the people in China are taught to speak english as a secondary language. China has a huge flux of english speaking people every year.

What? if you take chinese to be 'one language' then yes, it is widely spoken. but nobody ever mentions that chinese is made up of many (some mutually not intelligible) dialects.

Uh, actually everybody, including the page Gigatron cited, mentions it.

Uh, actually everybody, including the page Gigatron cited, mentions it.
i might be wrong...especially cause it's late at night, but no (except for that page) nobody mentioned it.
not like it matters that much.
but to your earlier post, you can't judge english as the most widely spoken language, because there are 50+countries that have it as their official language. ever noticed how countries like liechtenstein, monaco and vatican city are...say a tad smaller than others? thus not containing that many speakers of their language.

Here in my school (in California) it is mandatory to take at least one year of a forgein language (naturally, most pick Spanish for societal and geographic reasons), and we must have at LEAST two years of the same forgein language if we want to move onto a University of Calfornia school or a CAL State college.

Three is actually highly recommended now, with the growing intensity. So I'm just taking 4 years of Spanish because I have good reasons.

i might be wrong...especially cause it's late at night, but no (except for that page) nobody mentioned it.
not like it matters that much.
but to your earlier post, you can't judge english as the most widely spoken language, because there are 50+countries that have it as their official language. ever noticed how countries like liechtenstein, monaco and vatican city are...say a tad smaller than others? thus not containing that many speakers of their language.

Oh, I never judged English as the most widely spoken language. Just having a bit of fun with the Chinese.

To find the most widely spoken language, you'd probably have to do some in-depth stat work (and define what you mean by "most widely spoken"). I'm not going to do that maths for two reasons--I'm not a statistician, and I'd like to believe that the answer is something like Manx or Arara or something.

Try to convince our government with that! We have to study Swedish eventhough nearly anybody speaks it (well they do in Sweden, hooray for that!). Most of us choose English as the other mandatory language, but you can also choose German, Russian or France.

I thought Finland had changed the law a few months ago. I read about it in my newspaper I think. It said that the second national language (Swedish for the Finnish-speakers; Finnish for the Swedish-speakers) was no longer compulsory. I think it's a shame that the Finns don't think a knowledge of both their languages is a good thing. And don't forget, learning Swedish means you can understand nearly fluently Norwegian and Danish too.... and we are your next door neighbours :)!

No actually its English. Because lots of the people in China are taught to speak english as a secondary language. China has a huge flux of english speaking people every year.
LOL "a huge flux"? I can tell you never lived in china.

And according to your "sources"...what % of Chinese have actually learned English?

not unless we move to another nation

I don't think we should HAVE to but it think it should be an option.

not unless we move to another nation
Makes sense.

I don't think we should HAVE to but it think it should be an option.I agree...

I speak 3 Languages... But for my Children...I will not force them to learn any...

I think its a waste of Teaching-Time...unless your line of work requires it

I suppose it depends on where you live. I am in Texas, and there's a huge population segment that speaks Spanish. It would be very useful to know it (I'm actually learning it right now).

In the 1700s, the language of diplomacy was French, and it was essential for important figures to learn it (remember what happened with Washington since he couldn't speak French?)

Today the language of business is English. Millions of Chinese people who don't have much contact outside of their village have no need to learn any other language; what good would it do them? However, I think you'll find that if you look at languages spoken amongst business people and diplomats and world leaders, etc., the language used most often is English. If you're not going to travel transnationally, there is no need to learn another language. The only reason I would suggest learning a language besides English is if you were going to travel somewhere where English isn't a widely spoken language, however, if you're trying to learn a language to have a discussion about setting up new factories in part of Asia and then make some sort of deal about the logistics, etc etc etc, you probably need English these days. Oh, and if you're going to live in Little Mexico City, Capital of America's Mexico (Springdale, Ark), you need to know Spanish...

Only one extra? My native language is Dutch, I'm learning French and German (both official languauges of my country) and English and Spanish.
Ow, and I suck in all of them.

I would love to see a mandatory requirement to learn a second language. There are a few enormous barriers to this though, the principle one being most of our kids can't speak English in the first place.

.

IMO, a second language should be a requirement for high school completion.

In my province of Alberta (in Canada), there is a move to offer a second language (besides French, which is an official language) in all schools. Students would have to choose a second language to study through Grade 4 - 9. It would be an option to continue in high school.

So, what do you think? It is mandatory to study another language. I for one, am all for it...I am bilingual myself, and think it's a little sad to be monolingual if you have the opportunity to learn another language (for free). My only difficulty with it would be choosing WHICH language to take!

Opinions?
i don't think it should be mandatory, but parents should be sent a letter detailing some of the advantages of second-language study. the letter should also make it clear what the alternatives are (like, what other classes the student could take instead of language) so they can decide if they feel that there are better things for their kids to be doing.

personally, i think it is ludicrous to NOT take a second language, and i would seriously question the judgment of a parent who wouldn't want their kid learning another language. however, it's not for me to make that decision for them, since i probably disagree with a lot of their other parenting decisions :).

I live in Michigan.
A second Language isnt required but luckily the School my children attend offers it from the begining.
They offer German, Spanish or Arabic.
I am starting my daughters with Spanish(I used to speak it and can still understand a great deal).
As an American Spanish is a must, it is the NUMBER 1 spoken language in the United States. The number of spanish speakers in this country is growing.
Being able to speak multiple languages makes more valuable in the job market.
I think it should absolutely be mandatory to learn a second language.
Three languages if you start early enough.

it might also have to do with showing respect for other cultures, and not being as self-centered as the us is often accused of being.
as it has been said above, there is a huge gap between 'learning a language at school...cause you have to' and really mastering it.

I thought Finland had changed the law a few months ago. I read about it in my newspaper I think. It said that the second national language (Swedish for the Finnish-speakers; Finnish for the Swedish-speakers) was no longer compulsory. I think it's a shame that the Finns don't think a knowledge of both their languages is a good thing. And don't forget, learning Swedish means you can understand nearly fluently Norwegian and Danish too.... and we are your next door neighbours :)!
Naah, still compulsory. But students don't have to choose it in final tests (i gymnasiet) anymore. We used to have 4 mandatory exams and 3 optional (have to do at least 4), now we only have one mandatory and all others are optional.
I have nothing against studing it, I think it was pretty easy and useful. But I understand why people who live in eastern Finland don't like the idea. Most of them never need their Swedish skills. Studying Russian or German would make a lot more sense for them.
I think that's great that we have to study at least 2 foreign languages, don't get me wrong. And if one starts with Swedish (as I did) it's pretty easy to learn English and German later on. How many languages you have to (have the possibility to) study? I grundskolan, menar jag.

I go to a Catholic Jesuit school. I am in the upper level of my grade and so I take two languages: Latin and Old Greek(what they spoke during the Trojan War). I also am semi-fluent in French from my elementary/middle school. I am also learning Russian and Arabic as extracurriculars. I have a gift for languages which I would not have discovered had I not started taking these languages. Everyone should have the oppurtunity to see if they have such gifts. If they don't care for the classes that is their choice but they must given the oppurtunity.
In addition to being able to speak the language you also get the chance to understand the culture of those people who speak the language you are learning-and that is a step to ending prejudice and racism.

From year 7 to year 11 (British education system) I was forced to learn French, poorly. Because I was told I had to do it, I didn't want to.
Now however I'm considering starting learning German (something I couldn't do at school because my French grades weren't good enough but would rather have done) and possibly moving on to a MA in History and Russian.
A second language should be mandatory at school but a choice of languages should be given so that children feel they have a choice, they always work harder if they feel they chose to do it!

Naah, still compulsory. But students don't have to choose it in final tests (i gymnasiet) anymore. We used to have 4 mandatory exams and 3 optional (have to do at least 4), now we only have one mandatory and all others are optional.
I have nothing against studing it, I think it was pretty easy and useful. But I understand why people who live in eastern Finland don't like the idea. Most of them never need their Swedish skills. Studying Russian or German would make a lot more sense for them.
I think that's great that we have to study at least 2 foreign languages, don't get me wrong. And if one starts with Swedish (as I did) it's pretty easy to learn English and German later on. How many languages you have to (have the possibility to) study? I grundskolan, menar jag.

Ok, now I understand; you still have to learn the second-language in the earlier years.

English is a compulsory subject in Swedish schools (or at least it was when I was there...). It was counted as one of the three basic subjects/skills (together with Swedish and matematics). We started studying it in the second year of school. You could also choose to take German or French as well. I did French, but I haven't had much practice since, so nearly have lost it all. Some people took a third foreign language as well, but not me.

Ok, now I understand; you still have to learn the second-language in the earlier years.

English is a compulsory subject in Swedish schools (or at least it was when I was there...). It was counted as one of the three basic subjects/skills (together with Swedish and matematics). We started studying it in the second year of school. You could also choose to take German or French as well. I did French, but I haven't had much practice since, so nearly have lost it all. Some people took a third foreign language as well, but not me.
To enter the discussion. I did French as second foreign language.
In Germany English is the first foreign language one has to learn. Usually starting with grade 5 - sometimes earlier. The second one is usually either French or Latin starting with grade 5 - some schools also give other options but those are the traditional onces. I did French.
You have to learn one language till the school and another for at least 6 years (with the option to go for it till the end of school).
So I needed six years to get rid of French. Difficult language. I forgot most of it since I didn´t practise it.

we already have this in Australia most schools (in my area anyway) offer French
German
Japanese

I'am committed to learn 4 languages at school. English, French, German and Dutch. It's hard for some people to learn that much languages and you forget the most of it. But it is very good for your view on the world and your general development.

- So sorry for my bad english, but I still have 2 schoolyears to go ;)

Only one extra? My native language is Dutch, I'm learning French and German (both official languauges of my country) and English and Spanish.
Ow, and I suck in all of them.

belgian i see. I went through the same, with the exception of spanish. But i did study latin and ancient greek to replace it. And of all those, the only language i 'suck at' is german as i never bothered learning it (causing my scores to drop exponentially from 90%+ to about 50% in 2 years).

I think taking a second (or third, or fourth) language should be optional because if a student wants to be lazy and not learn another language for THEIR benefit, well then that's their loss. If they dont' want to take the time to learn another language, they're screwed for when they have to go on a business trip to another country where english isn't the primary language (or whatever language is your native).

I, however, think learning a second language is a great thing. of course it would help if the school actually provided the language you wanted to learn! :sniper: i'm all for learning a 3rd language but my school took away the "german" program some odd years back. luckily my bf knows some so i'm getting some hits off of him :)

we already have this in Australia most schools (in my area anyway) offer French
German
Japanese
And which of those language is mostly chosen - Japanese or French?

To enter the discussion. I did French as second foreign language.
In Germany English is the first foreign language one has to learn. Usually starting with grade 5 - sometimes earlier. The second one is usually either French or Latin starting with grade 5 - some schools also give other options but those are the traditional onces. I did French.
You have to learn one language till the school and another for at least 6 years (with the option to go for it till the end of school).
So I needed six years to get rid of French. Difficult language. I forgot most of it since I didn´t practise it.

Yes, French is harder to keep practicing unfortunately. I hear English everyday, lots of our tv-programmes are from UK or USA (with subtitles, only childrens programmes get dubbed). Also, there is of course the internet! And music. I also speak it at work quite a lot in business when dealing with non-Swedes, as English is so widely undesrstood. I chose French over German as I wanted to learn something completely different, as Swedish, English and German are all quite closely related anyway.
So, in Germany you start foreign languages fairly late on. I think a lot of our schools start it in the first grade these days, but I think they can choose which year to start it, as long as it's by at least the 4th or 5th - I can't remember exactly. We started in the 2nd at my school. It's interesting to see English is also compulsory.

I read that there is controversy in Switzerland, as increasingly the German-speaking areas are ruling that English should be the compulsory foreign language rather than French. Apparently this has annoyed the French-speaking Swiss, as they argue that French should take precedence due to its status in their country. I guess it's a similar debate to the one that the Finns are having with the Swedish language.

I read that there is controversy in Switzerland, as increasingly the German-speaking areas are ruling that English should be the compulsory foreign language rather than French. Apparently this has annoyed the French-speaking Swiss, as they argue that French should take precedence due to its status in their country. I guess it's a similar debate to the one that the Finns are having with the Swedish language.
There are discussions about starting earlier (following the Scandinavian modell). Private schools are usually starting earlier with foreign languages.
I´m not exactly familiar with the situation in Switzerland. I only now Swiss Germans who are annoyed that they had to learn French.
Switzerland is after all trilinugal: Swiss German, French and Italian.
Thus far as I know it was/is common that people have to learn first one of the other national languages before they learn a foreign language.
Given the importance of English that is of course a challenged position.
English is after all internationally more important than French.
Disputes between Swiss Germans and Swiss French are not uncommon by the way. In the 1970s there was a dispute about the establishment of a new cantone - Jura as a french-speaking cantone.
The French speaking people are generally very protective of their own language while their readiness to learn other languages is traditionally very limitted.
As far as I know the Swiss actually have to learn a bit of all of their national languages. I know an Swiss Italian who is speaking Italian, French, German and English.
Due to the fact that not all people are equally gifted in learning other languages it is clear that there are disputes, especially since English is internationally the most important language. If it be French this problem would certainly not exist. But the world is as it is.

And which of those language is mostly chosen - Japanese or French?

Im not 100% sure, but from personal observation, Japanese, german then French. I think there was two French classes, three German and four Japanese, when I was in school anyway. I actually did Japanese for three years and German for two, all I can remember is how to count. An ex-girlfriend tought me alittle French but ive fogotten it all. Basically I dont believe our education system teaches English well enough, to be worried about teaching multiple languages.

Yes, French is harder to keep practicing unfortunately. I hear English everyday, lots of our tv-programmes are from UK or USA (with subtitles, only childrens programmes get dubbed). Also, there is of course the internet! And music. I also speak it at work quite a lot in business when dealing with non-Swedes, as English is so widely undesrstood. I chose French over German as I wanted to learn something completely different, as Swedish, English and German are all quite closely related anyway.
Probably you would have had an easier time if you had chosen German, though.
I chose French over Latin because I thought it is more useful due to the fact that it is a living language. Well, and Latin is difficult as well.
But after six years (which you have to take here for the second foreign language) I had enough of it.
In France some people actually learn Spanish or German as first foreign language and English only as second foreign language. They also start fairly late as far as I know - grade 5 and grade seven - while we start both at latest with grade 5. Some schools earlier as I´ve mentioned.
It is discussed to start with grade three or two. But since it is a state issue - and not an issue of the central government - this is of course handeld according the disgracion of the state.

Im not 100% sure, but from personal observation, Japanese, german then French. I think there was two French classes, three German and four Japanese, when I was in school anyway. I actually did Japanese for three years and German for two, all I can remember is how to count. An ex-girlfriend tought me alittle French but ive fogotten it all. Basically I dont believe our education system teaches English well enough, to be worried about teaching multiple languages.
Well, two years or three years is a very short time actually. I did French for six years and I don´t remember much actually.
But eight years of school English - and the intensive course in the last two years (five hours a week) as one of the two main subject for Abitur (A-level) is pretty helpful. Especially if you have a native speaker (an American) as a teacher.

Im not 100% sure, but from personal observation, Japanese, german then French. I think there was two French classes, three German and four Japanese, when I was in school anyway. I actually did Japanese for three years and German for two, all I can remember is how to count. An ex-girlfriend tought me alittle French but ive fogotten it all.
To stress another point. It is noticable that girls are better at languages than boys. A fact that can be seen in language classes and schools were it is remarkable that girls are more chosing languages as main subject.
Research suggests that this may have to do with a different brain structure. That makes girls on average more talented in the area of languages and boys more in the area of abstract and technical thinking (especially shown in the quality of orientation).
Well on average. I´m male. Though aside English I´m not fluent in any other foreign language. Otherwise I would need to doubt my sex actually, hehe.
Well: just kidding.

Basically I dont believe our education system teaches English well enough, to be worried about teaching multiple languages.
The same can be said for German schools in respect to teaching German. It is a difficult language even for native speakers. And the rules which were partly changed by a three-state commission of Switzerland, Austria and Germany in 1996 and supposedly implemented since 1998 (transitional period till 2005) have even caused more confusion about how to write things correctly. Although the reform was of course made to reduce that confusion.

Probably you would have had an easier time if you had chosen German, though.
I chose French over Latin because I thought it is more useful due to the fact that it is a living language. Well, and Latin is difficult as well.
But after six years (which you have to take here for the second foreign language) I had enough of it.
In France some people actually learn Spanish or German as first foreign language and English only as second foreign language. They also start fairly late as far as I know - grade 5 and grade seven - while we start both at latest with grade 5. Some schools earlier as I´ve mentioned.
It is discussed to start with grade three or two. But since it is a state issue - and not an issue of the central government - this is of course handeld according the disgracion of the state.

Absolutely, it would have definately have been easier to learn German due to its relative similarity to Swedish and to English; actually, sometimes if I hear German being spoken I can get the idea of what is being said. I'm sure you could with Swedish too sometimes. But, that's the reason I chose French, to do a non-Germanic language. But, yes, much harder to learn! It does sound much more attractive than either Swedish, English or German though... :) !

Starting earlier would be a good idea, it's so much easier learning languages young - when you aren't so concious that you are even learning... it almost seems natural.

I know what you mean about the French and their protectionist stance towards their language; you can see that in the fact that the Academie Francaise (sp?) is always decreeing new words to replace English-influenced ones. Plus, I believe in France there's a law that makes sure a minimum amount of French-language songs have to be played on radio stations etc. So, it doesn't surprise me about the French-speaking Swiss getting annoyed about this.

I know what you mean about the French and their protectionist stance towards their language; you can see that in the fact that the Academie Francaise (sp?) is always decreeing new words to replace English-influenced ones. Plus, I believe in France there's a law that makes sure a minimum amount of French-language songs have to be played on radio stations etc. So, it doesn't surprise me about the French-speaking Swiss getting annoyed about this.
You are right about that. It is I think 50%. There are actually simular protectionists ideas here by some music producers. But they have no chance in pushing such an agenda. I consider such ideas ridiculous. Our language was strong enough to survive the French influence in the past without such protectionism and it is going to survive the English influence.
Actually foreign vocabulary can even enriche a language if it is integrated into it (germanized as we would say and which usually happens). An example for such new Denglish vocabulary would be the word Handy (which means mobile phone). Though the English don´t understand that Denglish, hehe.
Regarding the Swiss French: they are just 20% of the population and the Swiss Italians about 6%. I think it is clear that their rights need to be protected and that everone should learn a bit of the two other languages of the country (and at least one of the other languages fluently).
However I think the dispute is also about setting priorities. Thus far the two other national languages had priority about a foreign language (English). That in the time of globalisation that is challenged is inevitable.
After all: Switzerland is a federalists country. If you live in a French Swiss cantone you need to speak French. You don´t need any German to life there however. It is of no use actually. The same is the case if you live in an Italian cantone or in a Swiss German cantone.
So I think the dispute is more about the priorities in schooling. And Switzerland needs to do more in teaching English. In that respect they have to improve. And that of course leads to a discussion about the priorities - national languages first or English first.

A question: When did you start learning foreign languages? Grade 2?
And when are you starting the second one?

And one question about Finland: What is actually the status of Swedish. Is it taught a second language like a foreign language outside the Swedish areas?
And is it the first other language?
Has it the same status as the languages of Switzerland (three equal national languages also spoken in parliament) or is it only a regional language like Katalan in Spain or German in South Tirol in Italy?

In my province of Alberta (in Canada), there is a move to offer a second language (besides French, which is an official language) in all schools. Students would have to choose a second language to study through Grade 4 - 9. It would be an option to continue in high school.

So, what do you think? It is mandatory to study another language. I for one, am all for it...I am bilingual myself, and think it's a little sad to be monolingual if you have the opportunity to learn another language (for free). My only difficulty with it would be choosing WHICH language to take!

Opinions?

They should be forced to up to a point. Introduce them to it at say 10-11, and force them to do it for three years. if after that they want to drop it then fair enough.

Otherwise we are going to become a nation of people who don't speak another language because nobody will take it up initially, and so nobody will find out if they are good at it or if they enjoy it.

They should be forced to up to a point. Introduce them to it at say 10-11, and force them to do it for three years. if after that they want to drop it then fair enough.

Otherwise we are going to become a nation of people who don't speak another language because nobody will take it up initially, and so nobody will find out if they are good at it or if they enjoy it.
I find the move of Canada interesting. I think it in principal right to learn one foreign language through the entire school time (for all none English-nations English makes mostly the most sense) and to offer a second one. And I also think it should be forced for a few years in order to give people the opportunity to find out whether they want and can work with it. If not they can then still concentrate on the first foreign language.
English-speaking nations are in that respect in a privileged position since English is the lingua franca of the world. But to encourage students to at least learn one foreign language would be a good thing. For the US Spanish certainly makes the most sense since Latin America is the natural playing field for the US and has a lot of prospect in future business relations for the US.

A question: When did you start learning foreign languages? Grade 2?
And when are you starting the second one?

And one question about Finland: What is actually the status of Swedish. Is it taught a second language like a foreign language outside the Swedish areas?
And is it the first other language?
Has it the same status as the languages of Switzerland (three equal national languages also spoken in parliament) or is it only a regional language like Katalan in Spain or German in South Tirol in Italy?

When you start learning English (which is the compulsory foreign language) varies from school to school here. Increasingly, it's in the first grade these days. But I started in the 2nd grade. By law, I think it has to be at least by the 4th or the 5th (sorry, I am vague on this, as I can't remember!)... but almost all schools start long before this.

I can't be totally clear on Finland, we will have to wait for a Finn to answer. But, as I understand it, Swedish is an official language in Finland, like Finnish. I think about 6-7% of the population has Swedish as their mother tongue (the Swedish they speak ("finlandssvenska" - "Finland's Swedish") is a little different to the Swedish here (rikssvenska - "national" Swedish) - it sounds a bit old-fashioned to Swedes and doesn't have the same melody as Swedish here. Most of the Swedish-speaking Finns live along the south coast and west coast of Finland (and also on Åland, which is 100% Swedish-speaking and has autonomy - actually it's one of the few success stories of the old League of Nations, as the local population wanted to join Sweden originally, but that's another story!). Anyway, I think if a Finnish town/municipality has a significant number of Swedish speakers, Swedish is used on road signs as well as Finnish (if there are more Swedish speakers, the Swedish text comes above the Finnish and vice versa). People are also entitled to have services (school, health etc) in Swedish in these areas. I think that they are also entitled to Swedish services from the national government. Certainly, the Finnish national broadcaster has services in Swedish, as they are available on their website (www.yle.fi/svenska).
I believe that all Finnish school children have to learn the other national language (so the Finnish speakers have to learn Swedish, and the Swedish speakers have to learn Finnish). Until recently they had to take the other language (so Swedish for most) at the matriculation exam at the end of school, but I understand this is no longer compulsory. There's also a Swedish language university in Åbo (Turku in Finnish), as I had a friend who went there for a semester.

But, as I said, we need to hear from a Finn for confirmation!!

I´ve read now 5,63% of Fins speak Swedish as their native tongue.
As I take from your description Swedish has a very big status in Finland although it is only the native tongue of a small minority.
That is certainly convenient for Swedes to be able to communicate with Fins in Swedish. But how many Swedes speak Finish for that matter?
Well: I could also ask myself how many Germans speak Polish compared to the other way around. The answer is of course: almost none.

I think learning a second language should be compulsory, but I like someone else's suggestion that there should be a few languages to choose from.

In my school, everyone learnt French from the ages of 11-16. Those that showed an aptitude for it after the first year (well, the third that showed the most) learned another language for the next two years. When we chose our GCSEs, everyone HAD to do one language, and for most that meant French. The others, and this included me, could choose to do French, the other language we had chosen (Spanish, German or Latin) or both. Now, the great majority of people hated French, and I think a lot of this had to do with the fact that they had no choice. This could be remedied by giving a choice to everyone, as said before. I also think we should start learning a different language much earlier. States schools rarely (if ever) teach a foreign language before 11, and private schools often specifially advertise 'French taught from age 6' or whatever.

Apart from being an invaluable skill, learning another language demonstrates (again, as has been said) a lack of ethnocentricity- something the US in particular is often accused of. Living in England, and therefore speaking English as a first language makes it all too easy to dimiss learning a second language as unnecessary. I despise this attitude, and am frequently ashamed when I see the quality of the written English by non native speakers on NS. I have forgotten much of the French and Spanish I learned at school, despite leaving less than 2 years ago, and I'd love to be able to speak another language fluently.

When you start learning English (which is the compulsory foreign language) varies from school to school here. Increasingly, it's in the first grade these days. But I started in the 2nd grade. By law, I think it has to be at least by the 4th or the 5th (sorry, I am vague on this, as I can't remember!)... but almost all schools start long before this.
My personal experience is that people from Scandinavian or nordic countries are very good at foreign languages. In that sense I see Scandinavian countries as example for the rest of Europe. Also generally they are good in education - especially Finland (Pisa study).
I´ve spoken with an Estonian student who is living here in Germany. She is speaking Estonian, Swedish, English and German. I think that is quite impressive if people speak so many languages. On the other hand I don´t think we are all capable to speak that many. So we are going to see a kind of rivalry between our languages. She for example told me that Russian is on the decline and that Estonia forces the Russian minority to learn Estonian as precondition to get the citizenship. Though they want to. However it is for Estonians a non-starter to have a billingual country since they fear that would lead to the end of their language.
As for regional languages and trade language I see that Swedish has the prospect to become a kind of regional language at the Baltic sea (aside in Sweden itself it is after all common in Finland and has prospects in the baltic states). On the other hand: Swedish is rivaling with other languages for that position: English, German, French, Russian.
And not all are going to "survive" this language race in the region. Russian thus far is on the decline. French has a lot of difficulties to get a food in the region. German is thus far doing pretty well, though as I´ve heard recently it is also begining to decline again. English is undoubtably and unchallenged of course the winner.
I don´t know how Swedish is developing in this "race" recently. But you may be able to tell me about it.

I´ve read now 5,63% of Fins speak Swedish as their native tongue.
As I take from your description Swedish has a very big status in Finland although it is only the native tongue of a small minority.
That is certainly convenient for Swedes to be able to communicate with Fins in Swedish. But how many Swedes speak Finish for that matter?
Well: I could also ask myself how many Germans speak Polish compared to the other way around. The answer is of course: almost none.

Sometimes they don't seem to like to speak Swedish though, especially if they are from areas that don't have any Swedish-speakers. They prefer to speak English; I am not sure this is always to do with ability, I think some Finnish speakers resent having to learn Swedish. But, yes, it is convenient - Finnish is after all completely different / not related to the Scandinavian languages, so it's not like we can understand them like our other neighbours.

Yes, the number of Swedish-speakers in Finland has been falling for years. Some have moved to Sweden, others have married Finnish speakers, and then their children have been registered in census etc as being Finnish speakers (even though they probably speak both), making the number appear to fall even more than it really has.

You are right, virtually no Swedes speak Finnish. There are Finnish-speaking minorities in the north and there are Finnish people that have moved to Sweden. Swedish Radio now produces a digital radio channel for them, and there is a tv-news bulletin (Uutiset) on SVT2 daily in Finnish for the minority. I believe that a Finnish tv channel (from YLE in Helsingfors, oops.. Helsinki) can be received in the north through regular aerials, in the same way as SVT Europa (Swedish tv's international channel) can be received in the Swedish-speaking areas of Finland.

I think learning a second language should be compulsory, but I like someone else's suggestion that there should be a few languages to choose from.
I think that is a good suggestion. In case of non-English speaking countries there should be more choice in respect to the second foreign language. That English should be the first one is in my view no doubt. But the second one is. And I think there should be more choice then the one between French and Latin I had. Probably Spanish, Turkish, Polish and Russian could be added to the list. Would at least be in our business interests and would also serve the migrant community actually.

My personal experience is that people from Scandinavian or nordic countries are very good at foreign languages. In that sense I see Scandinavian countries as example for the rest of Europe. Also generally they are good in education - especially Finland (Pisa study).
I´ve spoken with an Estonian student who is living here in Germany. She is speaking Estonian, Swedish, English and German. I think that is quite impressive if people speak so many languages. On the other hand I don´t think we are all capable to speak that many. So we are going to see a kind of rivalry between our languages. She for example told me that Russian is on the decline and that Estonia forces the Russian minority to learn Estonian as precondition to get the citizenship. Though they want to. However it is for Estonians a non-starter to have a billingual country since they fear that would lead to the end of their language.
As for regional languages and trade language I see that Swedish has the prospect to become a kind of regional language at the Baltic sea (aside in Sweden itself it is after all common in Finland and has prospects in the baltic states). On the other hand: Swedish is rivaling with other languages for that position: English, German, French, Russian.
And not all are going to "survive" this language race in the region. Russian thus far is on the decline. French has a lot of difficulties to get a food in the region. German is thus far doing pretty well, though as I´ve heard recently it is also begining to decline again. English is undoubtably and unchallenged of course the winner.
I don´t know how Swedish is developing in this "race" recently. But you may be able to tell me about it.

I would doubt it if Swedish or any other language other than English is the regional language. If I want to speak to, for example, an Estonian, or a Latvian, and increasingly even a Finn and even a Norwegian or a Dane, I use English. I think it's unusal for an Estonian to learn Swedish - although before the Sovjets occupied Estonia there was a Swedish minority in Estonia, but they all fled to Sweden at the time of the occupation.

Sometimes they don't seem to like to speak Swedish though, especially if they are from areas that don't have any Swedish-speakers. They prefer to speak English; I am not sure this is always to do with ability, I think some Finnish speakers resent having to learn Swedish. But, yes, it is convenient - Finnish is after all completely different / not related to the Scandinavian languages, so it's not like we can understand them like our other neighbours.
I know: it is a finno-ugrian (sp?) language closely related to Estonian and (not that close) to Hungarian.
That makes it even more necessary for them to learn foreign languages. And more difficult of course since neither the germanic, romanic or slavic languages are closely related to it.
The resentment towards Swedish may even have historic reasons. After all: Finland is not a part of Sweden anymore.
The importance of languages also depends on the importance of the countries which are having them as native tongue. So up to a degree the decline of Swedish can be seen as a negative sign for Sweden in that respect.
Also the fall of the iron curtain has opened also new opportunities for Finland (Baltic states, Russia). Finland is very close with Estonia.
So the connection with Sweden maybe weakening. On the other hand: for Sweden the enlargement is also an opportunity to strengthen its position in the nordic region.
I see simular prospects for Germany. We are already the biggest trading partner of Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Romania and also of Russia.
However Sweden and Finland have positioned themself very good in the baltic states. In that sense there is certainly also a little rivalry between your two countries. And the UK is of course also engaging itself a lot in the baltic sea region.
Well: it is going to be interesting to see how "New" Europe (the new EU members) are developing and what economic model they are following (Scandinavian model, anglo-saxon model or german model). And how they position themself. Thus far it seems to be that they are more following the anglo-saxon model.

I would doubt it if Swedish or any other language other than English is the regional language. If I want to speak to, for example, an Estonian, or a Latvian, and increasingly even a Finn and even a Norwegian or a Dane, I use English. I think it's unusal for an Estonian to learn Swedish - although before the Sovjets occupied Estonia there was a Swedish minority in Estonia, but they all fled to Sweden at the time of the occupation.
Well; for me it was often possible to speak German with Poles and Czechs. Many young people are speaking that actually.
Of course: no language can rival English. But the open question is: Is it possible for another language aside English to establish itself as second regional language.
In Africa French has still this position (also in the Arab countries of North Africa)- however it is declining and losing ground towards English.
For Eastern Europe English has replaced Russian in that position.
I think the question is really open. In many parts of Asia for example Japanese has played a certain role when the Japanese began to invest in South East Asia. However today it is more and more brushed away by Chinese.
So: at the end of the day it depends on the economic strength of the nations. That either makes them and their languages atractive or unatractive.
Since Germany is today the sick of Europe it is no surprise that German is declining. The same can be said for France.
If it be different the situation would be different. It is as easy as that.

I would doubt it if Swedish or any other language other than English is the regional language. If I want to speak to, for example, an Estonian, or a Latvian, and increasingly even a Finn and even a Norwegian or a Dane, I use English. I think it's unusal for an Estonian to learn Swedish - although before the Sovjets occupied Estonia there was a Swedish minority in Estonia, but they all fled to Sweden at the time of the occupation.
I´m going to ask her about it. Though there were Estonians here on the forum who spoke about learning Swedish or German as second foreign language. Today it is more unusal for an Estonian to learn Russian actually.
You are right in your description of the rise of English. It also gets more and more common that French and Germans communicate in English although it was once aimed to promote the language of each other country (Elysee treaty of 1963). But German is on the decline in France and French in Germany.
Well - I´ve also to blame myself for that development since I´m part of this decline.

Well; for me it was often possible to speak German with Poles and Czechs. Many young people are speaking that actually.
Of course: no language can rival English. But the open question is: Is it possible for another language aside English to establish itself as second regional language.
In Africa French has still this position (also in the Arab countries of North Africa)- however it is declining and losing ground towards English.
For Eastern Europe English has replaced Russian in that position.
I think the question is really open. In many parts of Asia for example Japanese has played a certain role when the Japanese began to invest in South East Asia. However today it is more and more brushed away by Chinese.
So: at the end of the day it depends on the economic strength of the nations. That either makes them and their languages atractive or unatractive.
Since Germany is today the sick of Europe it is no surprise that German is declining. The same can be said for France.
If it be different the situation would be different. It is as easy as that.

I think if we were speaking in the past, then yes, there would be a chance for a language other than English to become the language of choice for business in the Baltic region. But today, English is so dominant, that it's going to be English; the internet and technology in general is dominated by English, as is popular culture. It's worth remembering that unlike eg Germany and France, television programmes and films and not dubbed (they just have subtitles/text) in Sweden, or in the other Nordic countries, or in Estonia ( I lived there for 3 months in Tallinn), and I'm sure that's probably true for Lithuania and Latvia as well, so English is widely understood to a high standard because of this, as well as the education systems. Swedish is a language with barely over 10 million native speakers, it's hardly going to be a good choice to learn for a Baltic country citizen hoping to engage in business with the rest of the world. It's a shame for me, but it's reality.

For the same reasons, I expect that in the future many Germans and Poles will have to resort to English to understand each other. (Although I'm sure German will be a popular language choice in Poland's schools for some time yet).

In Belgium, we are obligued (sp?) to learn 3 extra languages!
So don't go complaining about a second language, we have 3 extra languages...

If it weren't for Spanish, I'd have a 4.1 GPA.

With it, I get a 3.7 :/

God I hate foreign languages. SPEAK ENGLISH OR GET THE **** OUT OF THE COUNTRY.

For the same reasons, I expect that in the future many Germans and Poles will have to resort to English to understand each other. (Although I'm sure German will be a popular language choice in Poland's schools for some time yet).
Well actually in my view a sad development. Most analysts believe that most of the several thousand languages in our world are going to die in the 21 rst century. Well, at least we can assume that Swedish and German are not one of them.
But looing to that on a gobal level it would mean that any of the current regional languages aside English (like French, Suaheli, Russian or Chinese) would loose that position. Well probably not Chinese as China is still growing rapidly. But if we follow your logic it would also would loose relevance since you point out that you only believe that one regional language can exists and no second is going to remain.
Given that prospect the decline of Swedish in Finland is as inevitable as the melting snow in spring.

If it weren't for Spanish, I'd have a 4.1 GPA.

With it, I get a 3.7 :/

God I hate foreign languages. SPEAK ENGLISH OR GET THE **** OUT OF THE COUNTRY.

Which country?

Well actually in my view a sad development. Most analysts believe that most of the several thousand languages in our world are going to die in the 21 rst century. Well, at least we can assume that Swedish and German are not one of them.
But looing to that on a gobal level it would mean that any of the current regional languages aside English (like French, Suaheli, Russian or Chinese) would loose that position. Well probably not Chinese as China is still growing rapidly. But if we follow your logic it would also would loose relevance since you point out that you only believe that one regional language can exists and no second is going to remain.
Given that prospect the decline of Swedish in Finland is as inevitable as the melting snow in spring.

Swedish is declining in Finland, due to the migration of the Swedish-speaking Finns to Sweden and due to the increased intermarriage between Swedish-speakers and Finnish-speakers. I don't think it will ever disappear, there are still some communes in Finland that only have Swedish as a language.
But yes, I think that Swedish will decline in importance as a method of communication between Finns (although not amongst those with Swedish as their mother-tongue of course) and Swedes, it already has.

Which country?
United States I assume. In the US the Spanish speaking population is on the increase. Even President Bush sometimes is speaking Spanish. It is going to be interesting to see the development in the US. The US could become a billingual nation in the 21 rst century (English/Spanish). We are going to see.
And that´s why I say we should not take a too static view on the importance of languages. Every flows. We need to be flexible.
And there are in my view opportunities for other languages aside English to establish a position as regional languages also in the future. Though that gets more and more difficult.

United States I assume. In the US the Spanish speaking population is on the increase. Even President Bush sometimes is speaking Spanish. It is going to be interesting to see the development in the US. The US could become a billingual nation in the 21 rst century (English/Spanish). We are going to see.
And that´s why I say we should not take a too static view on the importance of languages. Every flows. We need to be flexible.
And there are in my view opportunities for other languages aside English to establish a position as regional languages also in the future. Though that gets more and more difficult.

:D Yeah, I know it was a comment from an American... an isolationist, arrogant one at that. That's why I wanted to wind him up in an ironic way.

Swedish is declining in Finland, due to the migration of the Swedish-speaking Finns to Sweden and due to the increased intermarriage between Swedish-speakers and Finnish-speakers. I don't think it will ever disappear, there are still some communes in Finland that only have Swedish as a language.
But yes, I think that Swedish will decline in importance as a method of communication between Finns (although not amongst those with Swedish as their mother-tongue of course) and Swedes, it already has.
Ok, lets say disappear among the non-native Swedish speakers of Finland.

:D Yeah, I know it was a comment from an American... an isolationist, arrogant one at that. That's why I wanted to wind him up in an ironic way.
Sorry I´m German, I don´t have humour, hehe.
But coming to the isolationists part: America is criticized for being to interventionists and/or for being to isolationists. They are in a difficult position. I don´t want to change with them.

Why should people even learn a first?

Ok, lets say disappear among the non-native Swedish speakers of Finland.
well, they still have to learn it at school, so they won't be totally unexposed. And those that live in areas with Swedish-speakers will also be exposed. But, yes, now that they don't have to do it in the final exam at school, I would imagine that many finns (especially in areas of the country with no Swedish-speaking Finns, eg the east, miuch of the interior, and the north) will have a lower understanding of Swedish than in the past. So, yes, you are probably right.

In my school it is mandatory for grades 6-8 to take a second language, but optional for the higher grades. A second language elective isnt available for the lower classes. However do I think it is necessary to take a second language...I dont really know. I honestly think it depends on what type of career and environment you plan on going into. However, at the college level, a second language normally isnt free, due to the fact that you pay for each credit hour, and a second language would be considered credit hours. :p
So since you have the option of choosing most anything that comes your way, the same should be true of a second language. :cool: :cool:

Why should people even learn a first?
If you hadn't, you wouldn't have been able to ask that question!

If you hadn't, you wouldn't have been able to ask that question!
Do you expect me to believe your lies?

Do you expect me to believe your lies?

It's not a lie in my opinion. But I don't expect you to either believe or disbelieve it - that's your choice.

well, they still have to learn it at school, so they won't be totally unexposed. And those that live in areas with Swedish-speakers will also be exposed. But, yes, now that they don't have to do it in the final exam at school, I would imagine that many finns (especially in areas of the country with no Swedish-speaking Finns, eg the east, miuch of the interior, and the north) will have a lower understanding of Swedish than in the past. So, yes, you are probably right.
And is this development unavoidable? Or is it at the end a question of rationality. English clearly is in the position of the lingua franca.
Most other potential or actual regional languages are on the decline (except Chinese in Asia). The only way which could change that would be that other countries would be able to boost their economies and to strengthen their positions on the international arena.
But since that is rather unlikely I see it as pretty likely that there languages are furthernmore declining. Well as long as many countries force people to learn a second foreign language languages like French, Japanese, Spanish, German or even Swedish have a role to play in that respect.
But if they become irrelevant for any international communication and are not able to maintain a minimum importance in that respect I think that in the long-run more and more countries may decide to get rid of the requirement to learn a second foreign language. What purpose does that have after all if everything is done in English in future. That is then only a waste of time and energy. Uneconomic and irrational. Waste of resources.
I know I´m a bit provocative. But that is the logic which is implied by your position.

If you hadn't, you wouldn't have been able to ask that question!
Well, not everybody understands your humour. He of course meant why it is necessary to learn a first foreign language. For an English speaker a legitimate question. Since you pointed out that English is more and more used in the communication even between people from non-English speaking countries who communicate with each other (like us two here) the answer would be that there is no special reason for learning another language.

Well, not everybody understands your humour. He of course meant why it is necessary to learn a first foreign language. For an English speaker a legitimate question. Since you pointed out that English is more and more used in the communication even between people from non-English speaking countries who communicate with each other (like us two here) the answer would be that there is no special reason for learning another language.

Hmm. That's true to an extent. I can't help thinking that the Americans would benefit from learning Spanish, with Latin America being so close. I think it depends to a certain extent where you live. For instance, I would say it would be in the interest of a Brazilian to study Spanish as his first foreign language, rather than English, due to his geographic location.

Even though I currently have no love for being forced to learn German and French besides the normal Dutch (and I love learning English, so I'm not mentioning that one ;)) at high school, I most definitely see the value in it.
My French is not good enough by school standards, but when I speak French, I can make myself clear and be polite about it too... German I'm better at than French, but that's cause it's very close to Dutch, I guess...
Put curtly, I definitely think there's value in it. Our primary schools start with just Dutch and English in the last few grades, and then in high school French and German become obligatory too. Really useful....

Regards,
Nutty.

I'm taking Spanish right now, i'm in my fourth year of it...and i'm going to continue to take it in college, along with Japanese, which i am teaching to myself for the moment, as my school does not offer it...which is a shame. Teach kids more than one language. soon, we're gonna need to know how to speak spanish, or french, or any other language other than our native tongue. that's the way the world's shaping up.

Hmm. That's true to an extent. I can't help thinking that the Americans would benefit from learning Spanish, with Latin America being so close. I think it depends to a certain extent where you live. For instance, I would say it would be in the interest of a Brazilian to study Spanish as his first foreign language, rather than English, due to his geographic location.
Maybe.
But if the Americans would learn Spanish that would decrease the pressure on the Latin Americans to learn English.
So we have to understand: Language questions are - or can be - political questions. The Estonian language dispute - anti-Russian pro-Estonian - is of course a point where the Estonians prove their independence from Russia. The refusal of the Estonians today to learn Russian (although it is their biggest neighbour and it would make sense in many respects for them to learn it) and their position to demand from the Russian minority to learn Estonian as a condition to get the citizenship of the country is a very important point for this country to get back its national identity.
So: language issues are - or can be - closely related to national identities. Thats why the French are so mad about their language. Other countries are not that "extreme" about it but also put some protections on their national languages.
The new immigration law of the Federal Republic of Germany for example demands migrants to learn German. For me there is no doubt about the point that a foreign national who applies for citizenship has to prove that s/he speaks German of course. We are not a multi-lingual country. I´ve nothing against multi-lingualism. But in our country every citizen needs to be able to communicate in the national language: and that is German and nothing else.

A simular approach is actually tried in the US. However we see now that some areas begin to accept Spanish as second official language. You can say that this is a critical development, since it decreases the pressure for people to learn English. It could lead to a biligual US in the future.
And if the US is billingual the position of English as lingua franca of the world is questioned.
So you actually say to a certain degree that the refusal of English-speaking people to learn other languages and the willingness (out of many reasons) of others to learn English is keeping and securing the position of English as number one language of the world. And that also helps of course the United States to keep its position culturally as leading power of the world - aside of course from its economic and military strength.

But a super power has always two sides (like the Romans for that matter): to be the strongest economically and politically and to be "arrogant" enough to stick to oneself so that others have to adapt and not oneself.
In that sense it would harmful for the US to give up English as only language and it would harmful if more Americans would learn other languages.
That would undermine the position of the US as only super power and as leader of the world. Leaders must lead - which means that other have to follow and to adapt and not the other way around.
A bit of a hawkish thinking - but it makes sense from an US perspective.

At my High School, a second language is optional but greatly encouraged.

I can't be totally clear on Finland, we will have to wait for a Finn to answer. But, as I understand it, Swedish is an official language in Finland, like Finnish. I think about 6-7% of the population has Swedish as their mother tongue (the Swedish they speak ("finlandssvenska" - "Finland's Swedish") is a little different to the Swedish here (rikssvenska - "national" Swedish) - it sounds a bit old-fashioned to Swedes and doesn't have the same melody as Swedish here. Most of the Swedish-speaking Finns live along the south coast and west coast of Finland (and also on Åland, which is 100% Swedish-speaking and has autonomy - actually it's one of the few success stories of the old League of Nations, as the local population wanted to join Sweden originally, but that's another story!). Anyway, I think if a Finnish town/municipality has a significant number of Swedish speakers, Swedish is used on road signs as well as Finnish (if there are more Swedish speakers, the Swedish text comes above the Finnish and vice versa). People are also entitled to have services (school, health etc) in Swedish in these areas. I think that they are also entitled to Swedish services from the national government. Certainly, the Finnish national broadcaster has services in Swedish, as they are available on their website (www.yle.fi/svenska).
I believe that all Finnish school children have to learn the other national language (so the Finnish speakers have to learn Swedish, and the Swedish speakers have to learn Finnish). Until recently they had to take the other language (so Swedish for most) at the matriculation exam at the end of school, but I understand this is no longer compulsory. There's also a Swedish language university in Åbo (Turku in Finnish), as I had a friend who went there for a semester.

But, as I said, we need to hear from a Finn for confirmation!!
Everything is correct, your knowledge is impressive.
Sami has an official status too, but we don't have to study it.

Learning other languages helps to understand other cultures better than just learning about their history.

Everything is correct, your knowledge is impressive.
Sami has an official status too, but we don't have to study it.
And what do you think about the status of Swedish in Finland. Too big or not?

Here in the US, well at least in Ohio, you must take a foreign language in order to graduate highschool. I think its good. Many American youths are ignorant of other cultures and it disgusts me. Absolutely it should be mandatory. If everyone could speak one other language, at least, it would help everyone. Just my stance on the idea.

Learning other languages helps to understand other cultures better than just learning about their history.

My point exactly.

And what do you think about the status of Swedish in Finland. Too big or not?
Yes and no. I think it's great that we have to study foreign languages (First from 3rd grade and second from 7th grade, otpional 3rd and 4th from 8th grade). But should one of them be Swedish? I think not. I've noticed you know quite a lot of our history and I assume that you understand that why we have had to study it. But I believe it would be much more useful to us to study e.g. Russian, German or France. Of course we can study those already, but about 85% chooses English as the second compulsory language. Even if Swedish wouldn't be compulsory, I believe that quite many would still choose it. At least those who live on the coastal area where Swedish is more common.
Estonians (btw) study Swedish because of the tourism industry between those countries. Or that's what I've been told.

Learning other languages helps to understand other cultures better than just learning about their history.
That goes out from the assumption that if you learn a language you learn automatically about the culture of the other country. But that is not automaticly the case.
Lets take for example English. There are many countries who speak this language. My lsat English teacher was an American. So I learned a bit about the United States. And a bit about South African literature actually. Earlier we learnt a bit about the UK.
But that doesn´t mean that I know anything about Australia or New Zealand for that matter.
I had to learn French. But I wouldn´t say that I´m familiar with French cutlure aside of the fact that I know that it is very different.
So, I would say the assumption that learning a language leads you to know another culture is far-fetched to say the least.
That is like saying I know another culture because I made two weeks holiday over there. You may get a look at the culture but not more.

That goes out from the assumption that if you learn a language you learn automatically about the culture of the other country. But that is not automaticly the case.

I agree. But I meant that learning the language helps you understand the culture better than JUST learning the history. It also makes travelling in foreign countries much easier. People are often friendlier and more helpful if you at least try to communicate in their mother language. English is pretty useless e.g. in Eastern Europe. Of course most of young people in bigger towns know some English, but it can be pretty hard to get a taxi to right place if English is the only language you can speak.

. I've noticed you know quite a lot of our history and I assume that you understand that why we have had to study it..
You overestimate my historic knowledge. Though I know that Finland belonged to Sweden before it was taken over by Russia till 1917. Aside of the Swedish minority in Finland.

But I believe it would be much more useful to us to study e.g. Russian, German or France. Of course we can study those already, but about 85% chooses English as the second compulsory language. Even if Swedish wouldn't be compulsory, I believe that quite many would still choose it. At least those who live on the coastal area where Swedish is more common.
This questions are partly also debated in Switzerland - should English be the first foreign language or another of the other national languages. So I understand your point.
Estonians (btw) study Swedish because of the tourism industry between those countries. Or that's what I've been told.
That would make sense actually. I assume that Finish and Estonian are that close that Estonians can more or less understand Finish actually?
Well, most Dutch understand German since both languages are very close.
And when I went to holiday in southern Turkey there was not a language problem either. They are speaking German since there are mostly German tourists.
The tourists are determining the language, hehe. Well - at least the second foreign language if available.

I agree. But I meant that learning the language helps you understand the culture better than JUST learning the history. It also makes travelling in foreign countries much easier. People are often friendlier and more helpful if you at least try to communicate in their mother language. English is pretty useless e.g. in Eastern Europe. Of course most of young people in bigger towns know some English, but it can be pretty hard to get a taxi to right place if English is the only language you can speak.
In Russia it is certainly useful to know Russian.
But nobody can learn all languages of the world - not even all languages in Eastern Europe. There just are so many of them.
And thats why it is historically pretty common to have a lingua franca - historically in Europe Latin and later French and today English.
On the other hand Europe is so diverse that of course many would like to see another main language or a second main language.
At the EU for example traditionally the main language was French. It was only in the 1990s English took over the position of the main language at the EU bureaucracy. The reason was of course that the old EEC (of 1957) was dominated by romanic countries and by France. Britain only became member in 1973. But still the romanic countries remained in the majority till the northern enlargement in the 1990s and finally the Eastern enlargement.
The EU has today all official languages of its members as its official languages but three working languages: English, French and German.
It is of course interesting to see the development of those three languages on the arena. German only became part of the group in the 1990s. However it is only used in about 5% of the working papers. French is on the decline and English on the increase.
So if we see that development English may end up as the only de-facto working language of the EU.
But that is another "cultural fight" mainly between the UK and France since the French are pretty though on this issue. One reason why Barroso became finally commission president was the fact that he speaks also French as a matter of fact.

That would make sense actually. I assume that Finish and Estonian are that close that Estonians can more or less understand Finish actually?

Not really. It sounds weird as both languages sound and look (in written of course) very similar. Estonians can Finnish much better than Finns can Estonian, but again that's because of the tourism and because several Estonians work short periods in Finland (higher wages). Norweigian, Danish and Swedish are much more similar than Finnish and Estonian.
By the way, do you believe your mother tonque affects on the way you think? Finnish is one of the rare languages where there are no feminine or masculine words. Only one word for third person, no Dies or Ders etc. I remember I read a study on the issue, it was pretty interesting. I'll check if I can find one to post here.

Talking for EU citizens only, it wouldn't be a bad thing if every EU citizen spoke 3 EU languages, his own and two others.
It's definitely fun when you, without speaking all of these languages, can read and roughly understand websites in English, German, Dutch, Scandinavian (without Finnish), Italian, Spanish, and French.
It is said Slavs can read and understand texts in almost any other Slavic language. I'm envious.

English makes sense for everybody, since it is de facto the lingua franca.

For Anglo-Americans, it's Spanish, I think. English and Spanish (plus Portuguese and some French) would (almost) cover the whole continent.

Not sure about Asia or Africa. But most people there are multilingual by nature, anyway. Depends on the region.

But nobody can learn all languages of the world - not even all languages in Eastern Europe. There just are so many of them.

Of course not, but maybe you've notices you can understand a little bit of languages you never studied. If you can Swedish, you'll manage in Norway and Denmark too, learning Spanish helps you to understand Italian, Portuguese, even French and Greek (or learning which ever of these...). I'm not saying you would be able to speak it or follow a conversation, but you now what you're ordering for meal and yo're able to find the railway station or ask a shop assistant to find a bigger size of a sweater for you.

Not really. It sounds weird as both languages sound and look (in written of course) very similar. Estonians can Finnish much better than Finns can Estonian, but again that's because of the tourism and because several Estonians work short periods in Finland (higher wages). Norweigian, Danish and Swedish are much more similar than Finnish and Estonian.
By the way, do you believe your mother tonque affects on the way you think? Finnish is one of the rare languages where there are no feminine or masculine words. Only one word for third person, no Dies or Ders etc. I remember I read a study on the issue, it was pretty interesting. I'll check if I can find one to post here.
Well: Dutch can much better German than Germans Dutch. Well, we actually never try since we are the bigger one honestly spoken.
You ask here a very interesting question. First of all I´m currently thinking in English so I would try to switch now.
In German you have lots of femine and masculin words. And their after all the articles which are giving everything a "sex". The English "the" would be der (male), die (female), das (neutral).
So, when I refer to the sun I think of it (English) as she. In French I would think about it as he.
That is interesting and a bit funny. But I think that there is certainly an influence in the way I think by my mother tongue. I associate things in a certain way due to my native tongue. And that is different than if I had another tongue.
That doesn´t mean that I think that the sun is a woman or something. But I would associate it rather as a female thing and not as a male thing (like the French) or neutral as the English. So: Mother sun.
I don´t know how far the language itself stands behind such associations or/and old legends or myths. But after all- the language itself might be influenced by them. So at the end I would say that language has an influence in the way I think.

Everything is correct, your knowledge is impressive.
Sami has an official status too, but we don't have to study it.

Kiitos.
I have to admit, I know a few Finns and have been to Åbo/Turku and Helsingfors/Helsinki quite a few time.

At that age level, I'd say go for it.

I do believe (and I could be wrong, but) that kids learn things easier when their younger, so teaching them different languages early on would help.
No, you're right, its a proven fact. Thats why so many little kids have to suffer through such,"enlightening," activities such as piano lessons, (like I did....groan).

Of course not, but maybe you've notices you can understand a little bit of languages you never studied. If you can Swedish, you'll manage in Norway and Denmark too, learning Spanish helps you to understand Italian, Portuguese, even French and Greek (or learning which ever of these...). I'm not saying you would be able to speak it or follow a conversation, but you now what you're ordering for meal and yo're able to find the railway station or ask a shop assistant to find a bigger size of a sweater for you.
Well, I´m noticing it a bit when I look at the Dutch thread here. I partly understand them due to the fact that Dutch and German are pretty close. I stress the world partly. But you are not in the position to really understand it or even the other germanic languages. But you are in a position to understand something.
The same is the case for the romanic languages. As a matter of fact: if you know English you find already a lot of vocabulary of French since English has pretty often a simular vocabulary (although it is a germanic language).
All European languages are somehow related especially due to the Latin influence on all languages - even more or less on the germanic onces. Well: Finish, Estonian and Hungarian maybe most distant away actually. And Turkish if we consider Turkey part of Europe.

There is no such thing as "for free."

I couldn't support this, because I won't endorse taking money off some people unwillingly to force another group of people to do something unwillingly.

Make it an option.

Craig

Agreed.

i dont think they should teach you a scond language unless they start early as early as 1st or 2nd grade cuz i started a language in hs and could not remember an of it but studies show that if you tart earlier tht you learn much easier just like studying any thing

Yes, I can see you had enough trouble mastering writing the first one.


Anyways, I think learning more languages is a great thing, but I don't really think it should be mandatory. I say give them choices, but at least you got the choice of which language.

In German you have lots of femine and masculin words. And their after all the articles which are giving everything a "sex". The English "the" would be der (male), die (female), das (neutral).

Do you think that referring to sex (when talking about persons: he/she) has any affect on how one thinks? You always have to know is the person in question he or she eventhough it doesn't have any meaning.
Or like in Spanish, if there's one 300 females and one male, you would say "ellos", not "ellas".

Kiitos.
I have to admit, I know a few Finns and have been to Åbo/Turku and Helsingfors/Helsinki quite a few time.
Var så god.
I've never been to Uppsala, only Stockholm, Kalmar (drove through Southern Sweden from Stockholm to Denmark, stayed overnight in those) and in several towns on Västerbottningen.

What I admire is people who are REALLY bilingual, that is, speaking a second language as well as their mother tongue. I know a guy who can switch from German to English to French as if per mouseclick. Incredible. Educated Turks in Germany can switch like that, too.

I thought I could do it with English, but then I moved to England. Hähähä.
No way. Leider nicht.

Do you think that referring to sex (when talking about persons: he/she) has any affect on how one thinks? You always have to know is the person in question he or she eventhough it doesn't have any meaning.
Or like in Spanish, if there's one 300 females and one male, you would say "ellos", not "ellas".
That the same in French and German. If there is one male it is male. Male is dominant. Sorry, not political correct, but that is the way the language works. And you can not change it artifically in order to suit a certain view on policital correctness. Also I´ve to say that it is not seen the way you present it here. For example you could look at it that way: If you use female plural you know that you have an only female group. But if you have a male plural you don´t know whether it is a complete male group or a mixed group ore even a predominantly female group with one man in it. So the female plural actually is the exception in that respect. It is for an only women group. If you don´t know or it doesn´t matter it is the "male" form - which is in that sense the neutral form.
In German you are actually were often making the singular with the male article and the plural with the female article: Police man - der Polizist /female die Polizistin. The plural would be: die Polizisten (neutral; which could stand for a male or a mixed group) or (as exception) die Polizistinnen (assuming that there are ONLY female police woman).
So the issue about sex would actually only be important if you are talking about the singular: der Polizist, die Polizistin.
But if you speaking about one person and not about a group I assume that you usually now the sex of the person. So for me it used to be strange that you pretend that this person has no sex - that it is just a neutral person and not a human - which is either female or male, girl or boy. Well - I chose a bad example I know since there this is actually a case where you do distinguish also in English: police man, police woman.
But lets take another example: The chair person - instead of saying the chairman or the chair woman. What is the problem with saying the sex?

Hmm, just a random comment.

I dont have the time to read through the entire thread but if it hasnt been mentioned yet then here it is. Now a days one can choose spanish as well as other languages as a 3rd language in Sweden. I myself, however, went with german, which I had a hard time learning. And by now its mostly gone (I am 16 by the way), although I do tend to understand some of it, at least..

But I would rather had had the option of learning finish, I even asked a teacher but that couldnt be arranged, so...

How about "Polizeipersonen?"
Not seriously. It's ugly.

How about "Polizeipersonen?"
Not seriously. It's ugly.
That would be the political correct way: Like chair person instead of chairman or chair woman.
I don´t take this seriously.
But some are complaining after all that in the German constituition we speak about the president (Präsident but not Präsidentin).
However the male form is intended to be neutral and to include of course the female option.
The female form is as we know only used if a female would actually be in office but not as the "neutral form" which is the "male" form.

For single persons, there's no problem. Vorstandsvorsitzende (chairwoman), Kauffrau (businesswoman), Präsidentin (one word in English).

For plural words, there's no solution in sight. The capital I is so ugly. (GewichtheberInnen).

And then, why are Personen feminine? "Die Person" ?? I protest! :D:D

That the same in French and German. If there is one male it is male. Male is dominant. Sorry, not political correct, but that is the way the language works. And you can not change it artifically in order to suit a certain view on policital correctness. Also I´ve to say that it is not seen the way you present it here. For example you could look at it that way: If you use female plural you know that you have an only female group. But if you have a male plural you don´t know whether it is a complete male group or a mixed group ore even a predominantly female group with one man in it.

I really don't care about the political correctness, chairman makes a lot more sense than a chair person. I was just curious. I find it hard that I have to think about sexes when I write/speak foreign languages as I'm not used to it. I make mistakes every once in a while when I speak English, keep saying his instead of hers etc. Of course I know how those should be used, but in my own mind I only have one word for a third person (hän).

For single persons, there's no problem. Vorstandsvorsitzende (chairwoman), Kauffrau (businesswoman), Präsidentin (one word in English).
Well: in newspaper employers are abliged to ask for jobs in a neutral fashion or to include both sexes like: Sekretär/Sekretärin (secretary), e.g. If they don´t comply they violate the law and can be punished. You can sue and claim: I wanted to get the job but the didn´t ask for my sex. If you were the most qualified candidate and are rejected because of that you can even claim damages (three month wague) otherwise the company still gets a fine if one sues it.
But the question is whether every law in our country should be changed to that: from the constituition to the other laws. Most laws actually use things like - die Person - but also - der Käufer (the buyer) but not - die Käuferin or der/die Käufer/in.
And the argument for that is that although the male form is used it implies of course all.
If we would change all that to suit the political correctness well you can imagine how it would look.

For plural words, there's no solution in sight. The capital I is so ugly. (GewichtheberInnen).).
Well, the plural is actually less problematic. Because if it is not an 100% woman group you use the male plural: die Gewichtheber (which can include female and male once).
So, it is actually the singular which is causing more problems in that respect.

And then, why are Personen feminine? "Die Person" ?? I protest! :D:D
The best way to deal with it is not to think about it. Btw: Person as a word has no sex. The article has. And that can change through context: Like: Der Hut der Person.

But I would rather had had the option of learning finish, I even asked a teacher but that couldnt be arranged, so...
Seriously? Finnish is really hard.

I'm learning french in school, and loving it. I will be graduating with only French 3(Im in 2 right now), but I hope to take classes at the naval academy, or france, depending where I go when im 18(Well, not classes in france... I will just learn it).

I think everyone should learn at least a romance language, french or spanish preferably. If you know one of those and english, there is little you can't do in the world.

I really don't care about the political correctness, chairman makes a lot more sense than a chair person. I was just curious. I find it hard that I have to think about sexes when I write/speak foreign languages as I'm not used to it. I make mistakes every once in a while when I speak English, keep saying his instead of hers etc. Of course I know how those should be used, but in my own mind I only have one word for a third person (hän).
Well, we look to English from a different perspective. For me English has much less reference to sex while for you it has much more.
I you say in English: I was at the hair dresser I don´t know whether it was a male or a female. Or if you say: I spoke with the teacher.
In German you would usualy use the male form. And then it gets a bit unlogical. If you are refering to the hair dresser you may refer to the person or the shop. So, it is actually not clear whether you where by a male hairdresser or not although you use the male form, since you statement could be interpreted as I was at the shop. In respect to the teacher it however implies that you spoke with a male teacher. Otherwise you would say Lehrerin (female techer) instead of Lehrer. Or Proffessorin (f) instead of Proffessor (m). In English you are actually less using the sex than in German or other languages (like French or Spanish). There are only a few excpetions like waiter/waitress or police man or police woman or chairman or chair woman.

I find it interesting that you don´t refer to his or her in Finish but are using one word for it: hän.
So you don´t differentiate at all? That is rather strange for me.
So you need to explicitly point out the sex of a person if you want to tell it and you can´t tell it automaticly while telling things?
That is of course entirely a different concept than we use.

Seriously? Finnish is really hard.
German is also hard: You see it when we are talking about the sexes and the articles and the endings, which stand for singular, and plural and sexes or not. Well complicated.
English for example is much more simplified in that respect. Only different endings for plural and for he/she/it. Well: not everything different like for example in French or in German for that matter.
The problem with English are rather the many tenses (just to many), the if-clauses and the phrasal verbs.
But otherwise I think its easier than other languages which I know a bit at least - like French.

... Otherwise you would say Lehrerin (female techer) instead of Lehrer. Or Proffessorin (f) instead of Proffessor (m). In English you are actually less using the sex than in German or other languages (like French or Spanish). There are only a few excpetions like waiter/waitress or police man or police woman or chairman or chair woman.

I find it interesting that you don´t refer to his or her in Finish but are using one word for it: hän.
So you don´t differentiate at all? That is rather strange for me.
So you need to explicitly point out the sex of a person if you want to tell it and you can´t tell it automaticly while telling things?
That is of course entirely a different concept than we use.
We have these "feminine endings" like opettaja/opettajatar (Lehrer/Lehrerin) too but we don't use them at all (elderly people may still use them). I think it's a bit silly to use those endings as we almost never refer to gender.
The fact that we don't differentiate at all, is the reason why asked you about this in the first place. I believe it's very rare. At least I don't know any other language which doesn't have two words for third person regarding which gender the third person is.

German is also hard: You see it when we are talking about the sexes and the articles and the endings, which stand for singular, and plural and sexes or not. Well complicated.
English for example is much more simplified in that respect. Only different endings for plural and for he/she/it. Well: not everything different like for example in French or in German for that matter.
The problem with English are rather the many tenses (just to many), the if-clauses and the phrasal verbs.
But otherwise I think its easier than other languages which I know a bit at least - like French.
In the beginning German is quite easy (was for me), as it's quite similar to Swedish. Die, das, der is still easy enough, but then you have to study Akkusativ and Dativ...
But you only have those, we have 15 different Kasusformen. (We don't have prepositions at all)
But sauna is hot, got to go.

We have these "feminine endings" like opettaja/opettajatar (Lehrer/Lehrerin) too but we don't use them at all (elderly people may still use them). I think it's a bit silly to use those endings as we almost never refer to gender.
The fact that we don't differentiate at all, is the reason why asked you about this in the first place. I believe it's very rare. At least I don't know any other language which doesn't have two words for third person regarding which gender the third person is.
So, what do you say then? opettaja or opettajatar.

I don´t know a language which has only one word for the third person and not at least three (he/she/it - er/sie/es - his/her - sein/ihr) or two (il/elle - French) but only one word.
What does it actualy mean: hän - sounds like her, but it must be a neutral form.

I think knowlege of a foreign language is important. There should, however, be options as to which one.

In the beginning German is quite easy (was for me), as it's quite similar to Swedish. Die, das, der is still easy enough, but then you have to study Akkusativ and Dativ...
But you only have those, we have 15 different Kasusformen. (We don't have prepositions at all)
But sauna is hot, got to go.
My goodness - but therefore you have no prepositions. Difficult for me to imagine. But at the end every language has its difficulties. English after all has 21 tenses - as I´ve heard. I couldn´t even name all of them admittedly.
And the phrasal verbs.
Well, enjoy your sauna.
I´ve caught a cold here. So, I follow you in thoughts. Probably that helps.

Really, in mordern civilization, knowing at least one other language tan your native language is good advice. We are teaching our sons three languages.

Really, in mordern civilization, knowing at least one other language tan your native language is good advice. We are teaching our sons three languages.
Agreed. And in spanish: Quiero su firma. (I like your sig).

Really, in mordern civilization, knowing at least one other language tan your native language is good advice. We are teaching our sons three languages.
Which one aside English if I may ask?

i was raised trilingually (Swissgerman, German, French) and it worked out just fine :)

i was raised trilingually (Swissgerman, German, French) and it worked out just fine :)
You count that as three languages. As a German I would actually agree with you but technically it is not considered a different language though.
Switzerland, Austria and Germany have agreed to form "one language" with differences though. And that Swiss German is much different is a thing you don´t need to tell me.

You count that as three languages. As a German I would actually agree with you but technically it is not considered a different language though.
Switzerland, Austria and Germany have agreed to form "one language" with differences though. And that Swiss German is much different is a thing you don´t need to tell me.
you're right. i consider it a different language, because that's the way it is treated here. but as you said, it's not officially a language in its own right.

Seriously? Finnish is really hard.


Sure, why not?

I mean, as you you fins have to learn swedish, so why shouldnt we too at least try and understand you? :D

I do realize its hard, but hey, all the more fun! ^^

And if I knew finnish then i could atleast understand them damn Finnish Pagan Metal bands instead of having to look at the translation in the booklet, :P

While we are on it, could you translate a short piece for me? If yes then here it is, now I am not sure I will spell it correctly since I dont have the actual paper where its written here so I am just typing this from memory;

Hakka Pelle Pojhan Poika

I was told once, by a guy claiming to know finnish that it was something along the lines of "Hit the north boy", but I am not satisfied with that translation so perhaps you can tell me the exact translation? Pretty please, for this goldenbrown long haired boy, :D

So, what do you say then? opettaja or opettajatar.

I don´t know a language which has only one word for the third person and not at least three (he/she/it - er/sie/es - his/her - sein/ihr) or two (il/elle - French) but only one word.
What does it actualy mean: hän - sounds like her, but it must be a neutral form.
Opettaja
she and he=hän, person
But it=se, object, other animals etc

Oh, sauna was really nice. Maybe you should try some hot blackcurrantjuice?
Can't leave the internet...We had elections (communal) today and I can't wait to get the results...

I think that learning a second language in school would be great as long as there's as choice of which language. I had to take French from first grade to eighth grade and sort of developed and distaste for the language because I HAD to take it (even though I was rather good at it). The bonus from taking French early on was making Spanish easier to learn in university. Though after taking Spanish, I'm finding German hard to pick up.

Opettaja
she and he=hän, person
But it=se, object, other animals etc

Oh, sauna was really nice. Maybe you should try some hot blackcurrantjuice?
Can't leave the internet...We had elections (communal) today and I can't wait to get the results...

Did you vote for SFP ;-) j/k

Sure, why not?

Hakka Pelle Pojhan Poika

I was told once, by a guy claiming to know finnish that it was something along the lines of "Hit the north boy", but I am not satisfied with that translation so perhaps you can tell me the exact translation? Pretty please, for this goldenbrown long haired boy, :D
I belive you mean
Hakkaa päälle pohjan poika?
hakkaa=hack, cut, here hit
päälle=over, on (something)
Pohja (n=genetiv)=refers to north, nordic
poika=son
It could be translated "Cut them down" It's been passed down from the Finnish cavalry of Gustavus Adolphus in the 17th century to the Finnish infantry during the Russo-Finn Winter War in the 20th century.
Finnish soldiers/who-ever-fighting used to yell Hakkaa päälle! while attacking the enemy.

Did you vote for SFP ;-) j/k
Svenska Folk Partiet? (They generally use RP Ruotsalainen Kansanpuolue)
No I didn't ;)
It seems my guy didn't make it :(
They never do...

I belive you mean
Hakkaa päälle pohjan poika?
hakkaa=hack, cut, here hit
päälle=over, on (something)
Pohja (n=genetiv)=refers to north, nordic
poika=son
It could be translated "Cut them down" It's been passed down from the Finnish cavalry of Gustavus Adolphus in the 17th century to the Finnish infantry during the Russo-Finn Winter War in the 20th century.
Finnish soldiers/who-ever-fighting used to yell Hakkaa päälle! while attacking the enemy.


So true!

The song is about about exactly that event, thank you! Thanks alot!

Kisses! (Though girls tend to run away..) :D

Damn it, Ill even play a tune for all... ^^ Afraid to shoot strangers by Iron Maiden perhaps? :P

Anyways, thanks again,

The Finnish cavalrymen swam their ponies over the Vistula the Danube and the Rhine like to a fiest, in going to meet their opponents. And under the heavy sabres of these brawny, broad shouldered bears of the North, nothing could stand. "Hakkaa päälle," (strike on), was the Finnish command for a charge and in the churches of their opponents were prayed "God deliver us from Hakkaa päälles."

http://gamma.nic.fi/~wirmaila/english/wirmhist/wirmhisten.doc - August 17, 2004

During the military operations in Germany, Heikki Pietarinpoika Wirmala rose to become a corporal, and thus had about 50 men under his command. He evidently fought in the cavalry commanded by Torsten Stahlhandske and called "The Hakkapelites" (from the Finnish words "hakkaa päälle", which means attack and hit ).

A bit more accurate after little searching

Svenska Folk Partiet? (They generally use RP Ruotsalainen Kansanpuolue)
No I didn't ;)
It seems my guy didn't make it :(
They never do...

Oh dear, bad luck. SVT says that the Social democrats have done the best. Where abouts are you in Suomi?

Ok, cool, if anyone is interested in what band I was talking about then the URL to it would be; www.turisas.com (WARNING! Some VERY bloody pictures on the site, not suitable for children under 15!)

And oh, if I am not mistaken then Turisas is the finnish pagan word for their wargod, no?

See, I know stuff too! :D

Please dont hate me, ^^

Which one aside English if I may ask?
Spanish , my second language, and a very basic Arabic, my wife's second language.

Oh dear, bad luck. SVT says that the Social democrats have done the best. Where abouts are you in Suomi?
Yep, Here's the present situation (In Finnish though kesk=central, sdp=sdp, kok=right, vas=left )
http://www.yle.fi/vaalit/tulospalvelu/
here news in swedish
http://val.yle.fi/
I live in Jyväskylä, central Finland, a university town too

I think that learning a second language in school would be great as long as there's as choice of which language. I had to take French from first grade to eighth grade and sort of developed and distaste for the language because I HAD to take it (even though I was rather good at it). The bonus from taking French early on was making Spanish easier to learn in university. Though after taking Spanish, I'm finding German hard to pick up.
I was sure you would be Finnish, obviously not. A very misleading name: Kanteletar...

Ok, cool, if anyone is interested in what band I was talking about then the URL to it would be; www.turisas.com (WARNING! Some VERY bloody pictures on the site, not suitable for children under 15!)

And oh, if I am not mistaken then Turisas is the finnish pagan word for their wargod, no?

See, I know stuff too! :D

Please dont hate me, ^^
Yes you're right. The band is unknown to me anyway. I only know Impaled Nazarene, Morbid Angel and Tunrida...