From jod@ccat.sas.upenn.edu Thu Feb  1 07:48:08 2001
Received: from mxu2.u.washington.edu (mxu2.u.washington.edu [140.142.32.9])
	by lists.u.washington.edu (8.9.3+UW00.05/8.9.3+UW00.12) with ESMTP id HAA38602
	for <classics@lists.u.washington.edu>; Thu, 1 Feb 2001 07:48:07 -0800
Received: from ccat.sas.upenn.edu (CCAT.SAS.UPENN.EDU [165.123.88.70])
	by mxu2.u.washington.edu (8.9.3+UW00.02/8.9.3+UW99.09) with ESMTP id HAA07557
	for <classics@u.washington.edu>; Thu, 1 Feb 2001 07:48:06 -0800
Received: (from jod@localhost)
	by ccat.sas.upenn.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA06299
	for classics@u.washington.edu; Thu, 1 Feb 2001 10:48:05 -0500 (EST)
From: jod@ccat.sas.upenn.edu (James J. O'Donnell)
Message-Id: <200102011548.KAA06299@ccat.sas.upenn.edu>
Subject: 2-3 languages?
To: classics@u.washington.edu
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 10:48:05 -0500 (EST)
In-Reply-To: <3A79730E.81721550@perseus.tufts.edu> from "Anne Mahoney" at Feb 1, 2001 09:30:39 am
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23-upenn3.3]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


Anne Mahoney wrote:
> 
> > > For the past seven years I have at
> > > various times argued on this list that (a) Classics should include Hebrew
> > > and Sanskrit and (b) students should be required to master 2-3 foreign
> > > languages, as many in Western Europe do, so they can more intimately
> > > understand and enjoy other cultures, not just pipe in the chorus of
> > > theorists who demand instant "celebration" of all nonWestern--expecially
> > > oppressed cultures--without deep knowledge of them.  Chris would I'm sure
> > > agree with this.
> > >
> > 
> > Easy to agree with (a):  for saying a version of that I had the honor of
> > being attacked by name in WKH?  One agrees with (b) on condition that one
> > is prepared to pay some high cultural prices and that one believes that
> > educational goals are best met by managing and increasing requirements. 
> 
> 
> "High cultural prices"?  I'm not sure what this means.  

To get to a successful requirement of 2-3 foreign languages, we would have
to invest a lot of time and money in training, hiring, and managing the
teachers; we would have to fight long political battles; and we would have
to determine what else in the curriculum will be reduced in time.  You
will certainly get a very strong argument that the situation regarding
science is at least as parlous and dangerous as the situation regarding
languages.  Ignorance of how the physical and biological world works has
negative social impact congruent with the impact of ignorance of the
social, cultural, and historical worlds.  Yes, if I could push a button
and at no cost in a frictionless environment young people would suddenly
begin speaking in tongues, I would do it.  You would also have to face,
among more rational arguments, the claim that until we teach *one*
language to a sufficiently high standard (English), we are unwise to put
effort into foreign language teaching.  These are real and serious
arguments that are advanced by responsible people.  (There would also be
silly, irrational, and irresponsible arguments advanced, sometimes quite
forcefully, and one of the costs of getting what we want would be dealing
with thsoe arguments as well.)

Jim O'Donnell
Classics, U. of Penn
jod@ccat.sas.upenn.edu
.