legov

We weren't forced to learn any languages other than English and Mandarin Chinese (English as a first language, then a second language depending on your ethnicity). I took French classes for 2 years during my time in secondary school (have forgotten everything now, the longest sentence I can construct in French is "s'il vous plait"*). There were three languages offered - French, German, Japanese. Japanese I can understand, but the usefulness of French is limited at best, and German...well. Point is, that sort of view (i.e. adhering to the outdated idea that French and German are the foreign languages one ought to learn) isn't exclusive to Britain - or the rest of the "West", for that matter. It's common in Singapore as well. * Edit: Hmm, no, actually it's probably "Bonjour, je m'appelle Legov"....but you get the point.

Makes sense. That said, Mandarin is much, much, much, much harder to learn than French is. The percentage of students who will find that some of it "sticks" will be much lower than what it already is. Not that that should deter policy-makers from encouraging people to learn the language, but it's worth keeping in mind. I'll say this again, I think Spanish is a really useful language (and very underrated in this respect, I think) to learn. Certainly useful from an economic perspective, given how widely it's spoken and how rapidly many parts of Latin America are developing economically. It's also far easier to learn for English-speaking Americans than any of the non-Indo-European languages are. I just think that the economic development of Latin America gets a criminal lack of attention* in comparison to China (or India, for that matter), and I think the US, given its geographical proximity to the region as well as the fact that there already exist in America so many ties to Latin American culture, is in a better position to take advantage of that than other Western countries are. *Not always without justification (also, this is my impression...not sure how much attention the economic development of that part of the world gets in America)

Used to think that way as well, but now I'm not so sure. I did a bit of linguistics last semester, and some of the studies I went through suggested that language learning is closely tied to need. In other words, if one does not have a pressing need to learn a language, all governmental efforts (short of changing the working language of the country) will, broadly speaking, be futile. And the current reality is that there is no pressing need for people outside of the Chinese-speaking world to learn Mandarin at all. English is clearly the lingua franca of the world, and so it is the Chinese who will lose out if they do not pick up English, not the other way round - a British MNC can do business in China without any knowledge of Chinese (not that having some workers who are fluent in Mandarin wouldn't help, mind you), but a Chinese MNC would be screwed if it tried to expand outside of China without executives who are fluent in English. The point is that getting people to learn a language isn't as simple as laying down the law and saying that everyone should learn the language. There has to be some sort of economic need for people to persist with the language (the vast majority of people do not learn languages just cos they're cool). Take the state of French education in the UK, for example. Widely taught as a second language, but how many people in Britain can speak more than a smattering of French phrases? And there's no reason you would expect them to - there just isn't any incentive for people to keep up their level of French. (And French is supposed to be one of the easiest languages out there for English speakers to learn! Imagine how much more futile Chinese learning would be) This is in stark contrast to East Asia, where English learning is just an obsession. East Asians know that knowledge of English is the key to international business and getting to the top of the social ladder. English isn't easy - or fun - for them, not by a long shot. But the economic incentives for being able to speak English are so great that they have to persist with it. Widespread knowledge of the English language (fluency is another matter) is not just a product of the English-as-a-second-language policy that is in place in those countries, it is a result of the obsession the general populace has with learning English, which itself is a result of the status of English as the world's undisputed language of business. Of course, there might come a point in the future (not anytime soon though) when China becomes the pre-eminent economic power of the world. Until that time comes, however, I'm not sure how any Western country will be able to institute effective Chinese-language learning on a society-wide level, given the lack of economic incentive for people to pick up the language.

In terms of value-for-effort, Spanish is probably the best language out there for English-speakers to learn. Relatively easy to learn, but gives you access to a culture that (from what I've seen) is wildly different from Anglophonic culture. Also, the business opportunities that (in theory) would abound in the world of what is the world's second-most widely spoken language (by no. of native speakers).

If you have a bus pass, then why the eff not eh? I'm talking about people who I've seen pay, and believe it or not just going down the road around here will cost you a few pounds. And even if you have a pass why not just walk the short distance for sake of not being lazy. why would you walk when you can get transport to take you a 200 metres. i don't get it when people intentionally make life harder for themselves. 1. I don't want to pay 2. I hate waiting for the damn bus.

Check your messages, old man.

No worse than most of the stuff that gets posted on this thread regularly.

Almost hit someone while leaving the bathroom just now. Said "sorry" immediately, but I think he didn't hear me, and so (while I was walking away) he sounded a bit irritated as he went, "watch where you're walking." Not a great day

Surprisingly high figure for Taiwan.

This got brought up in my lecture today, honest to god.

Of course it happened, I just wonder if it happened less (or more).

I mean fornicacion. I find myself how widespread it was in ancient times, especially among females, who were of course required on pain of death by the customs of the time to keep themselves chaste until marriage

Someone really should do a study on the history of, uh, fornication. My gut feeling is that both genders have been doing it since time immemorial, but I'm interested in seeing what scientific and historical analysis have to say about this.

Tumble dryers don't dry clothes out evenly anyway, I've found.

Right, Meath. Damn it!! Still, sunny Ireland? Really?

What, in Britain?

Work, which kept my mind off her The fact that she brought a friend (whom she didn't know very well at all) along Thinking it about it logically (we probably don't have a lot of things in common) Oh, and she's a devout Christian. Not that that should matter but.....

Not sure, but my feelings have completely dissipated.

Well it's certainly evolutionarily disadvantageous.

Meh

Lol, I love you guys

I will probably be back in Oz by early Feb. I'll contact you closer to the date

I'm in Canberra (says so below my avatar...hello! ), which is 3 hours or so away from Sydney, if you drive. When will you be in Sydney?

Will you be visiting Oz anytime soon, by any chance?