That's not even wrong. Lots of people from smaller countries consume media in other languages, some work behind the border, some have business partners in neighbouring countries, some study elsewhere, some migrate, ...
yeah, it’s also a necessity for most. not just because countries are smaller but because the international language is english. that’s basically two languages guaranteed. if you live right next to france or spain, makes sense to learn those languages.
like, that post is so inoffensive about it. most people in the US don’t need a second language. i think everyone profits from learning one, but it’s not a necessity. the US has a lot of issues and their education system is one of them; but while making fun of them for not knowing x languages is fun, it’s not an actual issue. it’s a symptom of one, but not an issue by itself.
Completely agree, this isn't SAS. I grew up in Scotland, I wasn't fluent in French but could easily have enough to carry on most general conversations in France and could watch French movies and get most of the context, if not all of the dialogue. I have some Russian and some Spanish. I have been to all 3 of those countries and spent time there learning the language and culture.
After living in Australia for the past 25 years I now struggle to understand more than a few words in a conversation in French. I certainly couldn't drop into a conversation in French any more. I can barely read Russian now. Why? Australia is largely monolingual, I never use any other language here. While Australia has over a hundred languages spoken across the country, it is almost exclusively languages spoken at home within a family group.
Is it though?
The linguistic variation within Italy alone can make conversation between someone from Milano and someone from Napoli *more* difficult than a conversation between that same Milanese and someone from España.
Edit: After reading the original post again, I misunderstood the point of both it and the comment you were responding to. I don't disagree American's are painfully monolinguistic. I'm not entirely sure what I was reading into it, but I missed that part completely. But how is this 'ShitAmeircansSay' then? What's the stupid thing being said?!
Have I been there? I live in Europe currently. Moreover, while I don't live in Italy, my spouse is from there and have visited MANY times.
And Americans don't all speak 'one language'. If you live in parts of the SW (where I used to live), you can't really survive without speaking Spanish.
\[The pedantic version of this would be to point out that 'Americans' speak English, French, Portuguese, and (most common by far) Spanish.\]
I would argue the homogeneity of language in the US is largely due to its fairly recent formation from a 'tabula rasa' of sorts (read: settler colonial genocide) and the (often brutal and dangerous) ethno-racial construction that has followed. As evidence, note the most notable dialects in the US are often from population groups that are both ethnically and racially distinct,, as opposed to just the former.
That’s great and all. I’m sure we have someone living in this country that speaks 5 languages fluently.
However, the vast majority only speak one language. And it’s not like 49% to 51%. It’s going to be somewhere in the 75% or more region for English only.
Yeah, I completely misunderstood the post, and thus your assent to a point I agree with.
I'm just confused why this is posted in this subreddit.
I had interpreted the remarks in terms of geography and other trends common in this subreddit; monolingualism is almost guaranteed in the US.
If you live in the US, even if you are able to read or write in another language, your ability to speak it with others is severely limited. Where there are ethnic enclaves, speaking can be easier--though even there, it often requires close familiarity with the speakers, as the assumption is often that defaulting to even broken English is more expedient than trying to deal with someone who learned continental Spanish in their high school.
In short, I did a dumb. I think we agree on almost all points. I just can't read.
It's a factor, but not a full explanation.
The vast majority of people in any given European country don't cross national borders except for occassional leisure trips. Casual mingle isn't enough to learn an entire language in the first place; it requires a lot of active work.
I think the tone of the post dismisses the effort required to learn a language. _"Europeans speak more languages on average because there are more relevant languages to them"_ makes more sense as a shorthand to me.
Most (western) Europeans know at least 2 languages, being their native and English language.
Then you have a not so insignificant number that learns 2 to 3 additional ones for work or for fun (yes people learn languages for fun sometimes).
I know my dad speaks Dutch, German and English fluently because of work and then decided to learn Italian for a while (he never got to a fluent level) because he loves italy
Yes it is wrong, you have a thing called the internet, knowing another countries language was never this easy, americans dont do it, because of ego, plain and simple, if he told me this in the 90's id agree, nowadays? Its not even close to being the case
Then good luck with learning Finnish, Hungarian, Turkish, Korean, Thai, Estonian, any Saami language or Mongolian by only using the internet. Just to mention a few. Let's see how easy it will be.
Im not saying learning a language is easy, im saying it was never as easy as it is now with the internet, learning how to read is also something you can do on the internet
The existence of the internet does not changes anything. Because if someone had a hard time without internet then they also would have a hard time with internet. Because it's mostly comes down to someone's learning SKILLS. And this was my whole point, that the internet not changes anything if the topic is about learning.
But maybe understanding something is not your strong spot, huh?
Honestly I think this person is right on the money. Americans can travel thousands of miles and English is still the main language everywhere, they have little reason to bother learning anything else
21 miles over the sea is not the same as 21 miles over land in terms of ease of travel though.
That said we're pretty bad at learning a second language.
I kind of blame the education system in the UK for that: we start teaching foreign languages far too late in the UK. Most countries start when you're still in primary education, in the UK we wait until you're in secondary, by which time your language aquisition is pretty much locked in - it's a lot harder to learn a second language when you're older (though once you learn one, it becomes easier to acquire additional languages).
When I was at school, French was only compulsory for the first three years of secondary education, so most people dropped it once it came to choosing their GCSE subjects; you only got three years of French in your entire 12 years of compulsory education.
In fairness, most of the French just look at us disdainfully if we even try.
(Unless you're my aunt. Then they just ask her why she's speaks French so well.)
Yea. I studied applied linguistics and teach foreign languages, and I'm very much against this whole proximity = easier to learn theory. It's partly Americans underestimating the size of European Countries, partly people just thinking you can learn a language accidentally through osmosis or something. Like, "oops! I interacted with some Italians, now I can make low-level small talk in Italian". It takes a conscious, determined effort over a long time, regardless or your proximity to native speakers. I grew up with two parents who are accounting, I didn't learn any of their skills or knowledge by accident.
I used to live in Spain, and I learned German to intermediate-high (B2) level.
1. In a car, German-speaking Switzerland was [over 18 hours away from me](https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Badajoz,+Spain/Bern/@46.7821418,6.0371424,7.94z/data=!4m14!4m13!1m5!1m1!1s0xd16e43eac5f354d:0x688c7e359714a4a9!2m2!1d-6.9706535!2d38.8794495!1m5!1m1!1s0x478e39c0d43a1b77:0xcb555ffe0457659a!2m2!1d7.4474468!2d46.9479739!3e0?entry=ttu)
2. In a car, Mexico is like [21 hours away from my sister](https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Chicago,+Illinois,+USA/Laredo/@33.0395305,-104.9877979,5.02z/data=!4m14!4m13!1m5!1m1!1s0x880e2c3cd0f4cbed:0xafe0a6ad09c0c000!2m2!1d-87.6297982!2d41.8781136!1m5!1m1!1s0x8660c06ca7f93d25:0xb4407a5349567491!2m2!1d-99.5075519!2d27.5035613!3e0?entry=ttu)
3. In a car, French-speaking Canada is [is like 13 hours](https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Chicago,+Illinois,+USA/Mont-Tremblant/@45.5908293,-77.3795149,7.4z/data=!4m14!4m13!1m5!1m1!1s0x880e2c3cd0f4cbed:0xafe0a6ad09c0c000!2m2!1d-87.6297982!2d41.8781136!1m5!1m1!1s0x4ccf760dbc945217:0x5040cadae4d54c0!2m2!1d-74.5961852!2d46.1184616!3e0?entry=ttu) away from my sister
So, if proximity to native speakers makes it easier to learn, why doesn't my sister speak French and Spanish as well as I speak German?
On the other side, open the first map again. For 3 years I lived literally on the border with Portugal. Know how much Portuguese I learned? Like 100 words, maximum.
As a native English speaker, the standard of English education is good enough to have basic conversations in many countries, plus exposure to English language media.
Not just that, but non-native speakers will actively practice their English with you and treat you like a moron if you even attempt conversation with them in their own language. I've seen German speakers use English because the other person had a strong accent (Austria...) even when their English evidently wasn't that good.
I think it’s very subtle but there is somewhat of a fallacy.
Let’s start with the opposite. If you are familiar with people who are polyglots, many don’t really appreciate comments like “oh you are so gifted”. I guess some of them are, but many of them just put a lot of effort in learning a language. It’s hard work, not a gift.
On the other hand, if you were born with English as a mother tongue, explaining the fact that you did not learn anything else with “but I don’t have a neighboring country where something else is spoken” sounds somewhat like an excuse. Also considering that most people in EU learn first of all English, which is literally not spoken in a neighboring country as a first language. It’s simply taught because it’s necessary to know it, otherwise you can’t have access to so many info and media. Same goes with the third language, who learns it often does not go for the one spoken in a neighboring country, you simply go for a useful one in most cases. As I said, it’s subtle. But it might indeed sound a little bit like an excuse.
Personally, it puzzles me how native-English speakers could not want to learn something else (or, better, not push their kids to). You already have one of the most versatile and diffused languages in your pockets from birth, you have your first 15-16 years to learn a couple more at a good level with minimal effort. You also have so many options for teaching material dedicated to native English speakers (want to learn Finnish being native Albanian or Italian? Good luck finding textbooks that cover these combinations. And while yes, you can bridge a third language in between, it’s faster and easier if you have dedicated material for your linguistic background)
>On the other hand, if you were born with English as a mother tongue, explaining the fact that you did not learn anything else with “but I don’t have a neighboring country where something else is spoken” sounds somewhat like an excuse.
I don't think that's an excuse. Why would you learn a second language if you have absolutely no practical use for it? It make sense you would learn more languages if you are exposed to more languages on a regular basis.
>Also considering that most people in EU learn first of all English, which is literally not spoken in a neighboring country as a first language.
English is the most common business language and the "default" in industries such as aviation. I would argue that person living in the EU has far more to gain by learning English than an American or a Brit does to learn Italian.
Well, there is actually more about a language than just a business tool. Mastering a language means opening yourself to the possibility to access all art and literature connected to it. I get it, a lot of people is fine with just a beer and a football match on TV, but I guess it’s also a matter of egg and chicken: if you don’t learn anything besides your language, it becomes harder to develop an interest towards something that sits behind the wall that the language comes to be for you.
But even sticking to business only, it can be an added value. For Brits learning something like German (and on a smaller scale French and Italian) makes them way more interesting for the Automotive job market for instance. Or Spanish for people living in the US, since more than 10% of the population actually speaks Spanish as a first language. Sure, a lot of people don’t need to use a foreign language on their job (lots of people could even make it without basic math, or even literacy for that matter). But mastering it opens more possibilities. 18 months ago I had to decide between two inters that were equally interesting for me, I just went for the one that had more language skills. We did not need those in the short term, but he was more valuable for the company as a prospect (and we were able to keep him in the end specifically for his skills)
You are placing too much importance on the land border. The UK is very much a neighboring country of many European nations in culture and economic influence. Americans simply do not have the pressure to learn other languages that Europeans do. Its not like Americans are incapable of learning a language or that Europeans are just more linguistically gifted.
I think some people interpreted "European countries are small" as an insult, but it's really a statement of fact. Compared to most countries in the world, European countries tend to be small.
Not to the US. And there are still a lot of natives and people descended from natives in our former territories with the exception of the Caribbean, not to mention how many of Latin America's culture are a blend of Native, Spanish and African cultures, with the prevalent one depending on the admixture of the region
We were still not the foundations of the US.
The US was an Anglo-Saxon settler nation starting in the British territories that used mass migration as a way of expanding and those who resisted were brutally murdered
Parts of what is now the US were Spanish or French settled, and the US bought the territory from them. Spain was literally the first European country to settle in what is now the US.
When California and other states became part of USA, México was already an independent country. It wasn't """your""" lands anymore.
Espero no haber malinterpretado lo que querías decir con "them stealing our land".
Yes, but it wasn't the basis for the US, and the Hispanic and native population of the area basically disappeared after millions of anglos flooded the area en masse.
The only reason those regions are part of the US is because they invaded them and wiped their population out
Isn't that, like.. true? I live in South America and people who speak another language besides Spanish is because they have studied it or travelled very *very* far away. When I travelled through Europe I'd take a 30 min train ride and end up in a different country with a whole different language, culture, etc.
Everyone's like "this is true" ignoring that the cause and effect is completely the wrong way around.
The countries are largely small because of the (approximate) extent of the national identities within. National identities are partially, but not completely informed by language.
It really depends entirely on what country you're coming from. If you're coming from the UK, for example, it's not common to speak another language unless you're a recent immigrant.
I feel like this can be true for some people (if you live close to a bordering country) but I feel like the country being small just doesnt have anything to do with europeans speaking multiple languages.
In germany everyone learns english in school and a second foreign language (be it french, spanish, latin, ... for me it was russian).
Most people probably dont remember much from their school language education unless they spend their adult years building on it. I certainly forgot all my russian.
As an adult I spend 5 years of my life studying japanese at university and now im visiting a chinesw course once a week.
Certainly not because japan and china are so close, just because I have a curious mind and learning another language opens you to explore a whole new culture and set of morals different from your own.
In my opinion we probably have more of a mindset that learning another language is *worth it* because we dont expect everywhere to be accessible with english.
The size of your country doesn’t decide whether you study for another language. But that’s the murican education system for you. Don’t have to learn another language because big.
3 yrs is nothing in school... I had German for 6 yrs, yet apart from Ich spreche kein Deutsch, I don't know anything... But I must admit that our educational system is horrible at best...
This one is very true no? The US + Canada is a vast expanse of (mostly) linguistically homogeneous lands. Europe is a fragmented continent partitioned into a pletora of comparatively small countries speaking different languages. So of course it's more normal in the European context to be exposed to and need to speak more languages.
Nothing contentious there.
For its size, Europe is divided up into so many countries. It has roughly a third the area of Africa, but has only 10 fewer nations at 44, while Asia has only 4 more nations but has 4 times the area.
Guys right, I mean I had an aneurism reading it but he’s still right.
I’m an English guy with a German partner and a multicultural, 2 mother tongued child, and we also spend a lot of free time in Czech. Europe is great like that.
I’m from The Netherlands, and we speak Dutch. Only about half of Belgium, Suriname and 3 islands in the Caribbean speak this language (around 25 million people worldwide)
We learn to speak English at school around the age of 8 to 10, we hear English/American in music, film, television. Our own language is to small to make blockbuster movies (audience is to small to invest big money and make a profit), so subtitles is a great and cheap solution.
At the age of 12 we start to learn other languages at school (mostly German and French), but I don’t speak those languages very well (I can survive if you drop me in the middle of France by using the few words/sentences I know and some handsignals, but don’t ask me to do a conversation or watch a movie in French…..)
Same with info online: Dutch Wikipedia is great for stuff in the Netherlands, if I want to know something about the USA (eg. Yellowstone NP) I switch to the English version, the page is 5 times longer with much more detailed info.
So, yes, the statement is true for the Netherlands: we are a small country and most people speak at least 1 other language depending on age and location.
Using that as an excuse to not even try to learn a foreign language is a bit lazy imo but it’s also true and most ppl in western countries speak conversational English anyways
You all saying it's true and that you only travel half an hour to get to another country, I feel that's only the case for some countries.
I grew up on a big-ass island in the middle of the Mediterranean, with no contact with foreigners outside of those who come to the rich foreign hotels and all, who don't talk to natives. We also have literally everything dubbed and translated. Pretty much no immigration too, only emigration. I actually had a (positive) cultural shock back when I travelled and went to London and saw such diversity and people speaking different languages and all.
And yet, I went to school and chose to learn three foreign languages there, and without ever having contact with people who actually speak those languages.
Meanwhile in the US it's such a huge melting pot. There's people there who speak all sorts of languages, all within US borders. Nevermind all the languages of actual natives. They literally have access to all the languages they want without having to travel abroad. Don't they always brag that everybody wants to live there and moves there?
It’s insane how insular this take is, I’m not sure if they even realise that quite a few of the northern states share a border with Quebec, a French speaking province.
So you have California, Arizona, New Mexico all bordering Spanish speaking Mexico.
Plus New York, Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine all bordering a French speaking province.
The US is not isolated geographically at all compared to places like Australia or New Zealand, it’s more of an isolationist mentality.
Some European countries used to be America-sized, cause of colonialism and shit, and America is a lot of the reason that isn’t true anymore. Is it just okay to be a huge oppressive empire if you’re one contiguous landmass and not a bunch of spread out chunks on a map?
White Anglophone settler countries have the so-called "linguistic exorbitant privileges" where they don't need to learn foreign languages at an early grade level because the rest of the world will communicate with them in English.
it’s true though. the netherlands doesn’t have a large enough market for dubbed shows and movies, so everything is subtitled, which means more people speak good english. a lot of dutch people speak at least some french and german because they're our neighbours
Yeah... in some ways, this can be true. But it just doesn't sit well because Americans also act hostile towards anyone speaking a foreign language. Countries that teach many languages in their schools means they have a good education, but I acknowledge that languages are only taught because it's necessary in a crowded continent like Europe. There isn't a reason to be against learning a new language though, who would want their communication with the world to be limited?
That’s actually pretty accurate. The US is a huge country by landmass. So is Brazil and Mexico and I believe less than 5% speak another (foreign) language (not indigenous) in those countries also. The USA has one of the larger rates of bilingualism out of the American (continental) countries, but its largest in the metros and the southern states.
In Southern California, Arizona, New Mexico, and counties in the south of Texas, like 20-35% of us speak Spanish. These states were all colonized by Spain first or influenced by Spain colonization heavily. Miami might speak even more than that. The crops that are sold, architecture, languages spoken, cuisine is all vastly differently from the rest of the United States. It’s very Spanish-indigenous. New Mexico is one of the only places in the United States that has its own dialect (or “accent”depending on what you prefer in your language) of Spanish, distinct from Mexican heritage speakers in the US and native mexican accents.
There also used to be a heavy French influence in Louisiana but with the heavy assimilation efforts from the east coast/genocide of indigenous it kind of faded out from language. There’s patches of French creole communities but not much left.
The Southwest is really different from the rest of the United States in terms of both climate, culture, cuisine, and linguistics. It’s just kind of burdened by being linked federally. But it’s actually accurate in terms of languages spoken. Other large metro areas are similar because they have entire communities of other languages, but they’re little pockets of land- whereas Texas/California/Arizona is like split between like up to 60% Hispanic in the southern counties and the typical 10-20 in the northern.
There would be a lot more languages here also…. If it wasn’t on account of the genocide and everyone.
That's not even wrong. Lots of people from smaller countries consume media in other languages, some work behind the border, some have business partners in neighbouring countries, some study elsewhere, some migrate, ...
yeah, it’s also a necessity for most. not just because countries are smaller but because the international language is english. that’s basically two languages guaranteed. if you live right next to france or spain, makes sense to learn those languages. like, that post is so inoffensive about it. most people in the US don’t need a second language. i think everyone profits from learning one, but it’s not a necessity. the US has a lot of issues and their education system is one of them; but while making fun of them for not knowing x languages is fun, it’s not an actual issue. it’s a symptom of one, but not an issue by itself.
I think the problem is some of them don't even know their own language
again, this would be a symptom of the larger issue, a defunct and defunded education system. i'm also not sure what exactly you're referring to.
Kinda true. I live in a city about 10km from German border and many people here know at least basic German
Completely agree, this isn't SAS. I grew up in Scotland, I wasn't fluent in French but could easily have enough to carry on most general conversations in France and could watch French movies and get most of the context, if not all of the dialogue. I have some Russian and some Spanish. I have been to all 3 of those countries and spent time there learning the language and culture. After living in Australia for the past 25 years I now struggle to understand more than a few words in a conversation in French. I certainly couldn't drop into a conversation in French any more. I can barely read Russian now. Why? Australia is largely monolingual, I never use any other language here. While Australia has over a hundred languages spoken across the country, it is almost exclusively languages spoken at home within a family group.
Yeah, I'm failing to understand the point of this post. Its accurate.
Is it though? The linguistic variation within Italy alone can make conversation between someone from Milano and someone from Napoli *more* difficult than a conversation between that same Milanese and someone from España.
Have you actually been to Europe? I have several times. Americans are the weird ones who only speak one language. "Is it though?" Yes, yes it is.
Edit: After reading the original post again, I misunderstood the point of both it and the comment you were responding to. I don't disagree American's are painfully monolinguistic. I'm not entirely sure what I was reading into it, but I missed that part completely. But how is this 'ShitAmeircansSay' then? What's the stupid thing being said?! Have I been there? I live in Europe currently. Moreover, while I don't live in Italy, my spouse is from there and have visited MANY times. And Americans don't all speak 'one language'. If you live in parts of the SW (where I used to live), you can't really survive without speaking Spanish. \[The pedantic version of this would be to point out that 'Americans' speak English, French, Portuguese, and (most common by far) Spanish.\] I would argue the homogeneity of language in the US is largely due to its fairly recent formation from a 'tabula rasa' of sorts (read: settler colonial genocide) and the (often brutal and dangerous) ethno-racial construction that has followed. As evidence, note the most notable dialects in the US are often from population groups that are both ethnically and racially distinct,, as opposed to just the former.
That’s great and all. I’m sure we have someone living in this country that speaks 5 languages fluently. However, the vast majority only speak one language. And it’s not like 49% to 51%. It’s going to be somewhere in the 75% or more region for English only.
Yeah, I completely misunderstood the post, and thus your assent to a point I agree with. I'm just confused why this is posted in this subreddit. I had interpreted the remarks in terms of geography and other trends common in this subreddit; monolingualism is almost guaranteed in the US. If you live in the US, even if you are able to read or write in another language, your ability to speak it with others is severely limited. Where there are ethnic enclaves, speaking can be easier--though even there, it often requires close familiarity with the speakers, as the assumption is often that defaulting to even broken English is more expedient than trying to deal with someone who learned continental Spanish in their high school. In short, I did a dumb. I think we agree on almost all points. I just can't read.
Ah man, its all good. I've put up my fair share of post/comments that are non sequitur.
It's a factor, but not a full explanation. The vast majority of people in any given European country don't cross national borders except for occassional leisure trips. Casual mingle isn't enough to learn an entire language in the first place; it requires a lot of active work. I think the tone of the post dismisses the effort required to learn a language. _"Europeans speak more languages on average because there are more relevant languages to them"_ makes more sense as a shorthand to me.
Most (western) Europeans know at least 2 languages, being their native and English language. Then you have a not so insignificant number that learns 2 to 3 additional ones for work or for fun (yes people learn languages for fun sometimes). I know my dad speaks Dutch, German and English fluently because of work and then decided to learn Italian for a while (he never got to a fluent level) because he loves italy
[удалено]
Where did the person being quoted say anything about this occurrence being shit?
My post was a summary of all the shit we are reading here every day. Don't take this too serious.
Big strawman here, that's not what this post is about
I heard you guys. I deleted it.
Yes it is wrong, you have a thing called the internet, knowing another countries language was never this easy, americans dont do it, because of ego, plain and simple, if he told me this in the 90's id agree, nowadays? Its not even close to being the case
Then good luck with learning Finnish, Hungarian, Turkish, Korean, Thai, Estonian, any Saami language or Mongolian by only using the internet. Just to mention a few. Let's see how easy it will be.
Im not saying learning a language is easy, im saying it was never as easy as it is now with the internet, learning how to read is also something you can do on the internet
The existence of the internet does not changes anything. Because if someone had a hard time without internet then they also would have a hard time with internet. Because it's mostly comes down to someone's learning SKILLS. And this was my whole point, that the internet not changes anything if the topic is about learning. But maybe understanding something is not your strong spot, huh?
Now it makes sense, pronouns in your profile, degen behavior
Judging someone's profile when you feel like you lost? Very typical low IQ people behaviour.
Honestly I think this person is right on the money. Americans can travel thousands of miles and English is still the main language everywhere, they have little reason to bother learning anything else
English people can travel 21 miles and still can't speak French.
21 miles over the sea is not the same as 21 miles over land in terms of ease of travel though. That said we're pretty bad at learning a second language.
How about 50.45km _under_ the sea?
Go to Wales then!
Even in Wales only a small portion of us actually speak welsh. Most of us can speak at least a bit, but not that many are fluent.
I kind of blame the education system in the UK for that: we start teaching foreign languages far too late in the UK. Most countries start when you're still in primary education, in the UK we wait until you're in secondary, by which time your language aquisition is pretty much locked in - it's a lot harder to learn a second language when you're older (though once you learn one, it becomes easier to acquire additional languages). When I was at school, French was only compulsory for the first three years of secondary education, so most people dropped it once it came to choosing their GCSE subjects; you only got three years of French in your entire 12 years of compulsory education.
Monge too Rodders, monge too. /Delboy
Yeah well lot of french doesn't speak french that well. And tbh if I wasn't french myself, french is not the language that I would choose to learn.
In fairness, most of the French just look at us disdainfully if we even try. (Unless you're my aunt. Then they just ask her why she's speaks French so well.)
Yea. I studied applied linguistics and teach foreign languages, and I'm very much against this whole proximity = easier to learn theory. It's partly Americans underestimating the size of European Countries, partly people just thinking you can learn a language accidentally through osmosis or something. Like, "oops! I interacted with some Italians, now I can make low-level small talk in Italian". It takes a conscious, determined effort over a long time, regardless or your proximity to native speakers. I grew up with two parents who are accounting, I didn't learn any of their skills or knowledge by accident. I used to live in Spain, and I learned German to intermediate-high (B2) level. 1. In a car, German-speaking Switzerland was [over 18 hours away from me](https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Badajoz,+Spain/Bern/@46.7821418,6.0371424,7.94z/data=!4m14!4m13!1m5!1m1!1s0xd16e43eac5f354d:0x688c7e359714a4a9!2m2!1d-6.9706535!2d38.8794495!1m5!1m1!1s0x478e39c0d43a1b77:0xcb555ffe0457659a!2m2!1d7.4474468!2d46.9479739!3e0?entry=ttu) 2. In a car, Mexico is like [21 hours away from my sister](https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Chicago,+Illinois,+USA/Laredo/@33.0395305,-104.9877979,5.02z/data=!4m14!4m13!1m5!1m1!1s0x880e2c3cd0f4cbed:0xafe0a6ad09c0c000!2m2!1d-87.6297982!2d41.8781136!1m5!1m1!1s0x8660c06ca7f93d25:0xb4407a5349567491!2m2!1d-99.5075519!2d27.5035613!3e0?entry=ttu) 3. In a car, French-speaking Canada is [is like 13 hours](https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Chicago,+Illinois,+USA/Mont-Tremblant/@45.5908293,-77.3795149,7.4z/data=!4m14!4m13!1m5!1m1!1s0x880e2c3cd0f4cbed:0xafe0a6ad09c0c000!2m2!1d-87.6297982!2d41.8781136!1m5!1m1!1s0x4ccf760dbc945217:0x5040cadae4d54c0!2m2!1d-74.5961852!2d46.1184616!3e0?entry=ttu) away from my sister So, if proximity to native speakers makes it easier to learn, why doesn't my sister speak French and Spanish as well as I speak German? On the other side, open the first map again. For 3 years I lived literally on the border with Portugal. Know how much Portuguese I learned? Like 100 words, maximum.
French people can travel 21 miles and still REFUSE to speak English even though it's the world's lingua franca that everyone should know.
Lingua Franca 😁
Which is Italian, and literally means "Language of the Franks", who were a Germanic peoples.
As a native English speaker, the standard of English education is good enough to have basic conversations in many countries, plus exposure to English language media. Not just that, but non-native speakers will actively practice their English with you and treat you like a moron if you even attempt conversation with them in their own language. I've seen German speakers use English because the other person had a strong accent (Austria...) even when their English evidently wasn't that good.
Not to parrot everyone else here, but I don't see the issue...
I think it’s very subtle but there is somewhat of a fallacy. Let’s start with the opposite. If you are familiar with people who are polyglots, many don’t really appreciate comments like “oh you are so gifted”. I guess some of them are, but many of them just put a lot of effort in learning a language. It’s hard work, not a gift. On the other hand, if you were born with English as a mother tongue, explaining the fact that you did not learn anything else with “but I don’t have a neighboring country where something else is spoken” sounds somewhat like an excuse. Also considering that most people in EU learn first of all English, which is literally not spoken in a neighboring country as a first language. It’s simply taught because it’s necessary to know it, otherwise you can’t have access to so many info and media. Same goes with the third language, who learns it often does not go for the one spoken in a neighboring country, you simply go for a useful one in most cases. As I said, it’s subtle. But it might indeed sound a little bit like an excuse. Personally, it puzzles me how native-English speakers could not want to learn something else (or, better, not push their kids to). You already have one of the most versatile and diffused languages in your pockets from birth, you have your first 15-16 years to learn a couple more at a good level with minimal effort. You also have so many options for teaching material dedicated to native English speakers (want to learn Finnish being native Albanian or Italian? Good luck finding textbooks that cover these combinations. And while yes, you can bridge a third language in between, it’s faster and easier if you have dedicated material for your linguistic background)
>On the other hand, if you were born with English as a mother tongue, explaining the fact that you did not learn anything else with “but I don’t have a neighboring country where something else is spoken” sounds somewhat like an excuse. I don't think that's an excuse. Why would you learn a second language if you have absolutely no practical use for it? It make sense you would learn more languages if you are exposed to more languages on a regular basis. >Also considering that most people in EU learn first of all English, which is literally not spoken in a neighboring country as a first language. English is the most common business language and the "default" in industries such as aviation. I would argue that person living in the EU has far more to gain by learning English than an American or a Brit does to learn Italian.
Well, there is actually more about a language than just a business tool. Mastering a language means opening yourself to the possibility to access all art and literature connected to it. I get it, a lot of people is fine with just a beer and a football match on TV, but I guess it’s also a matter of egg and chicken: if you don’t learn anything besides your language, it becomes harder to develop an interest towards something that sits behind the wall that the language comes to be for you. But even sticking to business only, it can be an added value. For Brits learning something like German (and on a smaller scale French and Italian) makes them way more interesting for the Automotive job market for instance. Or Spanish for people living in the US, since more than 10% of the population actually speaks Spanish as a first language. Sure, a lot of people don’t need to use a foreign language on their job (lots of people could even make it without basic math, or even literacy for that matter). But mastering it opens more possibilities. 18 months ago I had to decide between two inters that were equally interesting for me, I just went for the one that had more language skills. We did not need those in the short term, but he was more valuable for the company as a prospect (and we were able to keep him in the end specifically for his skills)
You are placing too much importance on the land border. The UK is very much a neighboring country of many European nations in culture and economic influence. Americans simply do not have the pressure to learn other languages that Europeans do. Its not like Americans are incapable of learning a language or that Europeans are just more linguistically gifted.
That’s basically the point I highlighted: it’s not a metter of geography or talent. Just interest and effort.
I think some people interpreted "European countries are small" as an insult, but it's really a statement of fact. Compared to most countries in the world, European countries tend to be small.
This is true. Sometimes the Americans are also right.
A broken clock is right twice a day.
It only seems unusual because this isn't r/ReasonableThingsAmericansSay.
You used to have that in the US too, until you arrived and wiped all those nations out
In all fairness, it was YOU who arrived
Not to the US. And there are still a lot of natives and people descended from natives in our former territories with the exception of the Caribbean, not to mention how many of Latin America's culture are a blend of Native, Spanish and African cultures, with the prevalent one depending on the admixture of the region
Eh, ya, the US as well. Florida, for one, was settled by the Spanish.
We were still not the foundations of the US. The US was an Anglo-Saxon settler nation starting in the British territories that used mass migration as a way of expanding and those who resisted were brutally murdered
Parts of what is now the US were Spanish or French settled, and the US bought the territory from them. Spain was literally the first European country to settle in what is now the US.
Them stealing our land doesn't make us guilty of that nation existing
When California and other states became part of USA, México was already an independent country. It wasn't """your""" lands anymore. Espero no haber malinterpretado lo que querías decir con "them stealing our land".
By our I mean both Spanish and Hispanic Also I see the rest of the comment hasn't been addressed
Stealing ‘our land’?? How’d the Spanish get that land in the first place then? By asking nicely?
Well, we didn't get them by mass migrating there and paying the previous owners off to shut them up Also Florida was Spanish when they stole it
[удалено]
And?
Actually we did arrive to a large chunk of the US, have you seen the full extent of the virreinato de Nueva España when it was the largest?
Yes, but it wasn't the basis for the US, and the Hispanic and native population of the area basically disappeared after millions of anglos flooded the area en masse. The only reason those regions are part of the US is because they invaded them and wiped their population out
I'm answering only to the fact that we arrived.
Yeah, but that's like saying Rome created England because they were once there, when in reality it was Anglo-Saxons that created it
Americans say shit like this, then go on to talk about how the differences between each US state are bigger than those between all European states.
Isn't that, like.. true? I live in South America and people who speak another language besides Spanish is because they have studied it or travelled very *very* far away. When I travelled through Europe I'd take a 30 min train ride and end up in a different country with a whole different language, culture, etc.
Everyone's like "this is true" ignoring that the cause and effect is completely the wrong way around. The countries are largely small because of the (approximate) extent of the national identities within. National identities are partially, but not completely informed by language.
For once that's not shit American say
Wait until he hears about regional dialects and languages
It really depends entirely on what country you're coming from. If you're coming from the UK, for example, it's not common to speak another language unless you're a recent immigrant.
I feel like this can be true for some people (if you live close to a bordering country) but I feel like the country being small just doesnt have anything to do with europeans speaking multiple languages. In germany everyone learns english in school and a second foreign language (be it french, spanish, latin, ... for me it was russian). Most people probably dont remember much from their school language education unless they spend their adult years building on it. I certainly forgot all my russian. As an adult I spend 5 years of my life studying japanese at university and now im visiting a chinesw course once a week. Certainly not because japan and china are so close, just because I have a curious mind and learning another language opens you to explore a whole new culture and set of morals different from your own. In my opinion we probably have more of a mindset that learning another language is *worth it* because we dont expect everywhere to be accessible with english.
I actually think it's because Europeans learn more than 1 language during their time in school...
Used to have that, but then you killed them and marchem into shitty reservations.
Yeah, that's true, isn't it? Americans only speak English because they're stuck in their little bubble the way their government wants it.
The size of your country doesn’t decide whether you study for another language. But that’s the murican education system for you. Don’t have to learn another language because big.
[удалено]
3 yrs is nothing in school... I had German for 6 yrs, yet apart from Ich spreche kein Deutsch, I don't know anything... But I must admit that our educational system is horrible at best...
Is it possible that you learned a language that requires a twelve hour flight to actually speak locally?
Yeah, I come from South America. Almost all our neighbors speak Spanish, and I still speak 3 languages, so....
This one is very true no? The US + Canada is a vast expanse of (mostly) linguistically homogeneous lands. Europe is a fragmented continent partitioned into a pletora of comparatively small countries speaking different languages. So of course it's more normal in the European context to be exposed to and need to speak more languages.
As... opposed to the multiple big countries in the US... which don't have their own languages? And aren't easy to access?
I mean, they're not wrong. Our countries are small, so we travel a few hundred km and there's another language.
Nothing contentious there. For its size, Europe is divided up into so many countries. It has roughly a third the area of Africa, but has only 10 fewer nations at 44, while Asia has only 4 more nations but has 4 times the area.
i live in finland and the only languages i know are finnish and english, absolutely no surprise there :/
These are the same people who refuse to travel because "we have every culture in the US"
Guys right, I mean I had an aneurism reading it but he’s still right. I’m an English guy with a German partner and a multicultural, 2 mother tongued child, and we also spend a lot of free time in Czech. Europe is great like that.
Are Americans aware that Europe in part contains Russia?
Today in r/shitamericanssay, the truth
This guy would short circuit his brain if he goes to India. Or even SE Asia for that matter.
Americans speak only one language (poorly) because their brains are small.
Most of us speak multiple languages because.... EDUCATION
But this is actually true.
Isn't this true, though?
Pretty accurate yes.
My country is so small and borders with so many other small countries, I speak 12 languages
Idk about you, but the reason I speak a very few languages is because I learnt them.
Wait until he finds out that 41.3 million Americans (13.3%) are native Spanish speakers, and 21.7% of all Americans doesn't speak English at home.
I’m from The Netherlands, and we speak Dutch. Only about half of Belgium, Suriname and 3 islands in the Caribbean speak this language (around 25 million people worldwide) We learn to speak English at school around the age of 8 to 10, we hear English/American in music, film, television. Our own language is to small to make blockbuster movies (audience is to small to invest big money and make a profit), so subtitles is a great and cheap solution. At the age of 12 we start to learn other languages at school (mostly German and French), but I don’t speak those languages very well (I can survive if you drop me in the middle of France by using the few words/sentences I know and some handsignals, but don’t ask me to do a conversation or watch a movie in French…..) Same with info online: Dutch Wikipedia is great for stuff in the Netherlands, if I want to know something about the USA (eg. Yellowstone NP) I switch to the English version, the page is 5 times longer with much more detailed info. So, yes, the statement is true for the Netherlands: we are a small country and most people speak at least 1 other language depending on age and location.
Amercians calling other countries small is like shaq calling other people short
Using that as an excuse to not even try to learn a foreign language is a bit lazy imo but it’s also true and most ppl in western countries speak conversational English anyways
but isn't he right ?
You all saying it's true and that you only travel half an hour to get to another country, I feel that's only the case for some countries. I grew up on a big-ass island in the middle of the Mediterranean, with no contact with foreigners outside of those who come to the rich foreign hotels and all, who don't talk to natives. We also have literally everything dubbed and translated. Pretty much no immigration too, only emigration. I actually had a (positive) cultural shock back when I travelled and went to London and saw such diversity and people speaking different languages and all. And yet, I went to school and chose to learn three foreign languages there, and without ever having contact with people who actually speak those languages. Meanwhile in the US it's such a huge melting pot. There's people there who speak all sorts of languages, all within US borders. Nevermind all the languages of actual natives. They literally have access to all the languages they want without having to travel abroad. Don't they always brag that everybody wants to live there and moves there?
Bitch, you don’t even have an official language
It’s insane how insular this take is, I’m not sure if they even realise that quite a few of the northern states share a border with Quebec, a French speaking province. So you have California, Arizona, New Mexico all bordering Spanish speaking Mexico. Plus New York, Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine all bordering a French speaking province. The US is not isolated geographically at all compared to places like Australia or New Zealand, it’s more of an isolationist mentality.
Some European countries used to be America-sized, cause of colonialism and shit, and America is a lot of the reason that isn’t true anymore. Is it just okay to be a huge oppressive empire if you’re one contiguous landmass and not a bunch of spread out chunks on a map?
White Anglophone settler countries have the so-called "linguistic exorbitant privileges" where they don't need to learn foreign languages at an early grade level because the rest of the world will communicate with them in English.
He is right
it’s true though. the netherlands doesn’t have a large enough market for dubbed shows and movies, so everything is subtitled, which means more people speak good english. a lot of dutch people speak at least some french and german because they're our neighbours
He’s not wrong though.
Yeah... in some ways, this can be true. But it just doesn't sit well because Americans also act hostile towards anyone speaking a foreign language. Countries that teach many languages in their schools means they have a good education, but I acknowledge that languages are only taught because it's necessary in a crowded continent like Europe. There isn't a reason to be against learning a new language though, who would want their communication with the world to be limited?
It's more the fact that we are mostly not ignorant, xenophobic assholes.
He's not wrong to be fair.
I mean, dude has a point
OP do you feel silly?
That’s actually pretty accurate. The US is a huge country by landmass. So is Brazil and Mexico and I believe less than 5% speak another (foreign) language (not indigenous) in those countries also. The USA has one of the larger rates of bilingualism out of the American (continental) countries, but its largest in the metros and the southern states. In Southern California, Arizona, New Mexico, and counties in the south of Texas, like 20-35% of us speak Spanish. These states were all colonized by Spain first or influenced by Spain colonization heavily. Miami might speak even more than that. The crops that are sold, architecture, languages spoken, cuisine is all vastly differently from the rest of the United States. It’s very Spanish-indigenous. New Mexico is one of the only places in the United States that has its own dialect (or “accent”depending on what you prefer in your language) of Spanish, distinct from Mexican heritage speakers in the US and native mexican accents. There also used to be a heavy French influence in Louisiana but with the heavy assimilation efforts from the east coast/genocide of indigenous it kind of faded out from language. There’s patches of French creole communities but not much left. The Southwest is really different from the rest of the United States in terms of both climate, culture, cuisine, and linguistics. It’s just kind of burdened by being linked federally. But it’s actually accurate in terms of languages spoken. Other large metro areas are similar because they have entire communities of other languages, but they’re little pockets of land- whereas Texas/California/Arizona is like split between like up to 60% Hispanic in the southern counties and the typical 10-20 in the northern. There would be a lot more languages here also…. If it wasn’t on account of the genocide and everyone.