The medium of teaching in schools should be English.

(12-29-2011)
English is the language of computers, conversation, and business and most importantly,
the language, the world speaks. The bottom line is that teaching English to kids is vital
for their future and their growth and for that we need to start now.
For- If it is not, the students will find it hard to move around and settle in other states and
countries.
- It enhances the chances of success globally by adding value to ones personality.
- English being a universal language is spoken in every city and part of the world.
- It drives business across the world. It is a language of processing and understanding.
- It is a great asset when competing for business from other countries.
- Lack of fluency in English can be a huge hindrance in the future.
- Ability to Indians to communicate fluently in English is one of the major reasons of IT
being such a successful industry in India.
Against- Language is a direct connection to culture, making English the medium of education
would deteriorate this culture.
- Learning in your mother tongue is the easiest way of understanding and expressing.
- Freedom of speech doesnt allow English to become the official teaching language in
schools.
- Language should not be barrier in ones progress.
- Learning multiple languages not only maintains diversity but also forms a sense of
respect for the language spoken.

Yes, it would benefit everyone.

America is the metropolis of the world. I don't know that there's any other place where
there's such a diverse variety of cultures. Most cultures have a stake in America.
America, sort of, belongs to everyone. And, in America, English is the primary language.
America is not just about physical land. The United States reaches all corners of the
Earth. Just about every culture in the world would be served well if they could
communicate effectively with The United States of America. What better way to
communicate with someone than to learn their language? I think that the benefits would
outweigh the losses if English were to be appointed the worldwide primary language.
Posted by: MohaI0v35
Report Post
LikeReply
0
5

English is already the Worldwide primary language

Business, trade, and the internet are all now primarily in English. If the rest of the world is
to be able to adapt they have to instruct their people in English, which is what they are
already doing. Denying English is just being stubborn and prideful, it's time to adjust to
the 21st century.
Report Post
LikeReply
0
2

Base language for all to understand

Important for all the world to be able to communicate. English is one of the biggest
languages and would be better for people to understand it and be able to speak to
others!! Its not to say that english is better but it is the universal language and should be
taught and spoke especially by people who reside in America. It does not mean you can't

be bilingual or speak what language you choose but when communicating with someone,
its good to have a universal language.
Report Post
LikeReply
0
1

Speaking in English won't make you forget your country.

The English Language won't rob you of your culture. You can still speak your own
language anytime. The only reason why we have English as a universal language is for us
to communicate with each other. This does not mean that French, Filipino, Chinese,
Spanish, etc. languages are less beautiful than English. Speaking in English won't mean
you neglect your own country. Brothers and Sisters you must understand that this world
needs us, the human race, together. Let us not start a World War III just because of an
argument about whose language deserves to be the primary language. We need to
understand each other, that's what matters.
Posted by: Rose_Tyler
Report Post
LikeReplyChallenge
2
1

Be gone with nationalism.

Your linguistic heritage is far less important than the continuity of the world and
humankind (consider the current international relations and technological means that
countries have to destroy one another). English is currently the international standard
and is being learnt by children in school over the entire world. If we are to gain more
understanding of one another, we shall need to move towards one another and a
common language will help us communicate that much easier. I see many people
speaking of pride (please, pride is exactly what causes suffering) and English being hard
to learn. English is actually one of the easiest languages to learn (even for people who do
not speak a language that belongs to the same language group: look it up if you must).
From a non-native speaker.
Posted by: Vryth
Report Post
LikeReplyChallenge
0
0

'The 9D' Our own entry for the debate on Engish as a world language

We think that it is positive to have English as a world language, because people can
understand each other much better. The language is also useful for business and trade.
There are already peple who are talking English as a second language. It is good as a
second language, because everyone can decide on his own if he or she would learn the
language. English is already the language of the internet. But there are also problems.
The minority who does not know the language must learn it by heart. And there could be
also other languages which can be world languages. To have only one world language
can destroy the culture and the identity.
Report Post
LikeReply
0
0

This Is America

If you don't conform, you suck.

Report Post
LikeReply
0
0

Yes, because a primary worldwide language would be beneficial for international

communication and commerce.

English is already the de facto language of the Internet, and many foreign countries
teach English as a second language as a mandatory subject. Also, because of the
influence of Hollywood with respect to television and movies, many people learn how to
speak English anyway. An international language is important to facilitate communication
and trade. And as one that is frequently used already, English is the most appropriate
choice.
Posted by: SlyHymie
Report Post
LikeReply
0
0

English should be global lanuage

If a member from India goes to Europe and France, it becomes difficult for them to
communicate with each other. So, if English would be the universal language it would be
easy to communicate and there will be no religious fighting and everybody will stay in
happy and harmony. Let's make English the common language
Report Post
LikeReply
0
0

English is the universal language

Everyone should all know a language and English is the universal language. We need one
to be able to communicate and its used for business deals etc. It is not to say English is
better and people cannot speak their own language but it is good that people can
communicate and understand one another easily!
Report Post
LikeReply
0
0

Unfair & disrespectful

Why should English speaking people learn to speak other languages? Why even ask this
question? Considering English is not the most widely spoken language in the world. That
one is actually Mandarin, Spanish comes second. Why don't you almighty English
speaking people get out of your ivory tower and learn Mandarin, in exchange, Mandarin
speaking people will learn to speak to you in your language. Respect is a two way road.
There is no respect in and demanding the world to speak your language to your
convenience, while you pay zero effort in trying to communicate in other people's
convenience.
Posted by: crazyfffan
Report Post
LikeReplyChallenge
0
2

Standardizing a language worldwide is an impossible task given the fact that

language are constantly changing.

Despite the normalizing effects of modern media such as the internet and television,
language is always changing. Any attempt to standardize a language worldwide will fail
because languages will diversify to mutually unintelligible dialects over time. This is
shown by the fact that many separate varieties of English exist in the world, which over
time may drift further apart in similarity.
Posted by: eclair910
Report Post
LikeReply
0
1

We would all be the same.

If we are all speaking English then our own way of speaking is taken away from us. We
would all know what each other are taking about and then you would have no identity. It
would also be impossible as there are so many different languages. So thats my reason.
Report Post
LikeReply
0
1

There should be a primary worldwide language but it doesn't need to be English.

The benefits of having a worldwide language are evident:

-No Language Barrier
-Easier international exchange
-Wider variety of information (right now I can only learn stuff from those who write in
English, but if the greatest Finance book in the world is in Chinese, how do I learn from
it?)
-International Business could grow faster than ever
-Information management could be maximized in both effectivity and efficiency
However, why English?
The best way to go about such a large change would be to study the subject for years,
and ask questions such as:
-Which language is easiest to learn?
-Which language allows for the most efficient ways of communication (easy to speak,
easy to write & read, etc)
-Which language allows for the greatest linguistic variety whilst maintaining a "standard"
language which can be understood by all humanity?
Report Post
LikeReply

0
0

Native English speakers would be at a disadvantage.

As a native English speaker surrounded by others, I know I will always be at a

disadvantage in terms of languages in my life. Schools in other countries already strive to
deliver English to their students better than my country delivers other languages to our
students. If I were to learn a language that wasn't deemed as popular, for example,
Japanese (which I have an interest in learning), a big reason for not learning that
language is that people don't need it as the younger citizens are educated to learn
English at school and will have a better knowledge of the English language than I would
of the Japanese language.
If native English speaking people were more exposed to other languages and at a rate
where it would give them a good understanding of it, then it would be more beneficial as
then, at least two people who know English, but one who is a native speaker and another
who is not, they would be more equal in terms of languages as they would know the
minimum of two, and have both worked to learn the other.
Report Post
LikeReply
0
0

Standard Language is a Bad Idea

Cultures throughout the world use language as not only a functional part of day to day
life, but as a reminder to owns heritage. If we were to standardize English as the
universal language, then many people throughout the world would lose that valuable link
to their past and be alienated.
Report Post
LikeReply
0
0

Languages are equally as important.

All countries should be free to speak their own languages and not just learn one common
language. If you wish to do business with a country you should learn their language and I
see this as just an easy way out for English speakers as most of us are famously lazy at

learning other languages and this should change. Languages are a product of a countries
culture and people and these languages should be studied, all languages are of equal
importance and English will soon stop being a dominant language as other countries
expand and grow. So simply NO English absolutely should not be the sole language.
Report Post
LikeReply
1
0

The basic knowledge (8 school-years) can be learned effectively only in the fistlanguage-medium of instruction (not necessarily mother-tongue, but one,
acquired before age of five).

English should be standardized as one of two (equally treated!) media of 50:50 bilingual
(in some countries 33:33:33 trilingual) models of global uniform primary (8 years)
education. In this way the following (and many others, equally desired) purposes will be
served:
1. Maximum effectiveness of English as a language of human civilization development.
2. Upholding and further development of all currently existent indigenous cultures (which
again is a powerful factor of diversity, therefore creativeness, therefore research skills,
and, finally, human society development at its highest potential).
3. Obtaining all range of recently discovered benefits of multilingualism - from enhanced
memory capacity and inhibition to prevention of dementia in old age.
4. Peaceful and tolerant multicultural society, as multilingualism entails multiculturalism.
A firm but solvable obstacle for globally standardized multilingual education is a low level
of English language skills of the teachers in developing countries.
Posted by: O.Rosca
Report Post
LikeReplyChallenge
0
0

The English language should not be officially globalised

I strongly disagree with the question. Languages represent the growth of a certain culture
and its development over centuries and centuries of a certain place's history. There are
small events that can be pinned down to large numbers of nuances in for every
language. For example, Old English began to deviate from other Germanic dialects due to
the Anglo Saxon invasion of England, or the intense transitional period from Old to Middle
to modern English which can be pinned down to the Norman invasion, something which
completely changed the vocabulary, grammar and phonology of the english language.
However, I digress, this is but an example to serve my full point-which is that destroying

languages, or replacing them with english means destroying cultures, forcing English or
more likely American culture upon others with it. Having said that, even if we were to to
utilise english in that way, I believe it would be an impractical choice. English is a
language susceptible to change, and I don't mean modernisation. Looking back on my
example before, think about how much English changed just because of those French
invasion, something which wasn't exactly uncommon in medieval Europe (invasions and
occupations). This is not the only example, think about the way the internet has begun to
take its toll on English, 'y do u wnt to do tht' can be used instead of 'why do you want to
to do that', something which is starting to spread outside of the internet, ellipses being
used for speed has moved into everyday speech 'get out (of) the way' is now a common
phrase. Where I am going with all this is that even if we were going to standardise a
world language, which i am strongly, STRONGLY against, I think English would be possibly
the least practical of choices, its susceptibility to influence being all too real. If English
was used in that way, it would quickly begin to grow in different ways and start the
process all over again, but with a strange mix of French and Anglo Saxon was roots,
rather than naturally occurring language development, along with 2013 years of history
being destroyed. Language individuality almost defines a culture, what it stands for, and
how it works, it is the underlying definition of all that the certain culture has experienced,
it is a record of history.
Report Post
LikeReply
0
0

Our beautiful world bereft of all its diversity ... I don't think so !

It would be unfair towards the majority of the world population (which is non-anglophone)
and would cause a huge cultural loss. Like many people have - correctly - stated here:
language is not just an (artificial) means of communication: it is bound to ones way of
thinking, ones history, ones culture, ones deepest feelings and vice versa. I despise
people who seek to impose English on everyone, and quite ironically: mostly these
people are no native speakers, but ignorant foreigners who somehow believe that their
smattering of English makes them cosmopolitan and international. Besides, there are far
more logical and consistent languages than English ...
Report Post
LikeReply
0
0