It's the truth, but too few Australians are willing to accept it.

Many people around the world do business in English, but they often fraternise and build strong personal networks in their mother tongue. If you don't make an effort to join that circle, you won't stand out from the crowd.

Revel in monolingual complacency if you want - you're writing your childrens' ticket to 21st century poverty. Don't say you weren't warned.

The good news is, it only takes a few years to catch up. Just 5 years of decent language support in secondary school is enough to equip the next generation with the essential extra-linguistic capacity they will need - the benefits will last 50+ years.

Mercurious

You have contradicted yourself. You say that many do business in English but socialise in their mother tongue. That is because they can express feelings in their mother tongue which they cannot in English - no matter how technically fluent they are in it.

No matter how long you studied Chinese, you would never gain the abilty to socialise as a native-born Chinese.

The point you have made does not hold water.

Healthwatcher, if you misrepresent what I say then it's easy to refute my position. But all you demonstrate by doing so is your ability to misrepresent an argument, not to address one honestly.

Nowhere have I claimed that it is possible or necessary to converse in the same depth as a native speaker. All I said is that we have to make the effort, we have to try and join the circle - there is nothing whatsoever contradictory about that.

Just the other day I was conversing in Japanese with a friend of mine saying how nervous I am speaking in Japanese. I said it poorly, in halting Japanese. It doesn't matter. What matters to my friend is that I made the effort.

And I have non-native speaking Chinese and Japanese friends who are perfectly capable of discussing their dreams, goals and aspirations with me in English. They cannot do so with the same proficiency as a native speaker, but it is not necessary that they do so - it is still possible to build a personal multilingual network.

Moreover, many empirical studies have demonstrated that learning other languages increases one's overall level of language proficiency including in your mother tongue.

I emphatically reject the view that we shouldn't bother at all because we can't attain native-like proficiency. It is a defeatist attitude that condemns us to mediocrity.

I repeat: Revel in monolingual complacency if you want - you're writing your childrens' ticket to 21st century poverty. Don't say you weren't warned.

I believe that all these surveys of what language people speak is deeply flawed.

For years, whenever I am asked on a form what language I speak at home, I always put down: "Bad"

I know many friends that do the same thing, but it never shows in the published percentages.

The language issue is IRRELEvANT.

Computer technology WILL obviate language barriers for commercial transactions within a decade.

The problem we really face is women's need to have children against the backdrop a an unsustainable world population approaching 8.5 billion by 2025.

Not only will language barriers be irrelevant but so too will women and megalomaniac contributors in the media, politics, business, property development taxpayer ripoffs and gambling enterprises who foolishly see population growth as a personal route to gold, glory and personal pleasure.

These imbeciles, are currently leading and lobbying world governments for ridiculous end-of-world Greenspanian-economic-growth rates. But PEAKOIL, laziness, the intrinsic viciousness of individualistic aspects of human nature and CHAOS arising from all manner of emerging global resource shortages are going to kill off some 6 billion people by 2025. There is no guarantee that those forcing this scenario will be spared. They, as tall poppies will be the first and easiest targets.

As PEAKOIL worsens, you won't need to be multilingual to survive. Rwanda showed us all you need is just a gun and a hammer to save ammo.

Its time to talk population stabilisation and if langugae is a barrier to getting that message across then computer literacy will be the mode of choice, not learning 100's of soon to be irrelevant languages.

KAEP

Even though there seems to be something loose in your brain, you have made a valid point.

People who like opera think I am missing out on something essential in life. But – they don’t try to manipulate the school system into forcing a love of opera into children captured within that system. Many of those who love language are doing just that.

The basis of all understanding is communication. It is incomprehensible that Britain, the USA, Canada, NZ or Oz ever go to war against each other. We need one world language because we have some enormous global issues looming up ahead requiring the maximum cooperation possible.

The teaching of language is a waste of a school student’s time. He or she can learn one as a hobby later in life. The fact that children are leaving school with no idea about what science has revealed about the essential nature of existence is evidence of the influence that the arty types are having on our education system.

Healthwatcher, as someone who has learnt two foreign languages in adulthood, I can assure you that it is possible for a non-native speaker to fully participate in foreign-language social settings. In fact, until you actually make the effort to learn a foreign language, the cultural riches which it reveals are simply unimaginable.

Still, I’m not sure that injecting languages into school curriculum is going to open up these riches for younger Australians. Mercurius, I’d be really interested to see the basis for your claim that “just 5 years of decent language support in secondary school is enough to equip the next generation with the essential extra-linguistic capacity they will need.” I suspect that we simply don’t have a culture that values languages, and expending huge efforts on secondary-school language won’t get it for us.

The need simply isn’t there. Compared to Europeans or South-east Asians, few Australians depend on language skills for their livelihood. In this country, a foreign language is something you speak with your mother, or that you learn out of interest, rather than need. Maintaining a foreign language is also very difficult in Australia, unless you have family members or very close friends who (a) speak it, and (b) have the patience to use it with a non-native speaker.

My life is greatly enriched by my language skills, and I know that my multilingual friends feel the same way. However this is no basis for arguing that everyone should learn two or three foreign languages.

I could just as easily have chosen to enrich my life by learning to play the cello.

I agree with jpw2040, you can’t compare the linguistic needs of Australians with Europeans. It’s a different ball game.

Also, is the author confusing multilingualism and multiculturalism? At least the former is a little easier to define.

Though I speak three languages, I cannot muster enthusiasm to support multiculturalism. I don’t even know what that would mean. When it comes to strictly or scientifically defining a race or culture, there is only one race, the human race.

And, try as hard as you like, you cannot socially engineer people to speak a language they don’t want to, or don’t feel a need to speak. It doesn’t work like that.

Let’s be grateful we already speak one of the world’s most upwardly mobile languages. Learning another language can have great value, but mainly for those who wish to travel outside of the Australian context.

On another point, did you see where the author refers to a statistic of 0.0044% ? (Alert the statistics Gestapo!)

While his point is valid, that the number is ridiculously small, why couldn’t he just say 11 students out of 250,000? For that is what 0.0044 % actually is, but in a form a lot simpler to understand.

This is perhaps an example of what happens when letting loose arty types among the sciences

Australian students are missing out on an essential component of education. The learning of language.

Amongst the world's peoples, only English speakers are mainly monolingual. Most other peoples are bi or multi lingual.

Learning another language, regardless whether it is used later in life, improves skills in the use of your main language. Both in spelling and in grammar.

Even if you only ever engage in science, language will remain an essential method of exchanging information.

And anybody who thinks that computers will eliminate the necessity of the knowledge of languages has absolutely no understanding of information technology, how a computer 'speaks' and 'understands' commands.

English monolinguists have little idea of the wealth of information, literary, scientifically or philosophically that is out there. You will always have to wait for a translator and then be limited to that translator's particular choices of what to translate and how.

The use of language is essentially what makes humans humans. How is it possible that anybody can think that as our world is shrinking it is becoming less important to learn another language.

And as for Peak oil and overpopulation. Let's spread the word in as many languages as possible! You might be surprised by what a non English speaking person has to offer in the way of solutions.

Q: What do you call someone who speaks several languages?
A: Mulitingual

Q: What do you call someone who speaks two languages?
A: Bilingual

Q: What do you call someone who speaks one language?
A: Aussie

I'm glad to be able to report that I speak and read 4 languages, and have been enriched beyond measure by that. Going to Malaysia or Indonesia and understanding...but also being able to engage people 'like a local' is really liberating.

Language is a gateway.. an open door... and a freeway into others ways and lives.

Everyone who comes here should know and speak English if not sooner, then later.. but those of us who only know English, would benefit greatly be learning another.

Being monolingual does not unfortunately refer to being able to communicate in only one language, which the monolingual English speaker retains to be sufficient. It means rather to have a tunnel visioned one sided view of the world, to view everyone's culture, way of doing and being from a single minded viewpoint, without the benefit provided by additional language learning of reflection of self and other. " Wad the Lord the gift but gie us tae see ourselves as others see us! "
Come on Australia, you may well be a very big Island but sooner or later in this shrinking world, you will surely need to understand more than Imperial English.

I studied two languages other than English in high school, one until Year 12. And, while I did extremely well in German, it hasn't enriched my life a great deal apart from on trips to Europe. Even there, it isn't much use outside of German-speaking countries because European nations seem to dislike each other more than they dislike arrogant English-speaking foreigners. I would be interested to know how many of the European students who learn two languages in school learn English - I'm guessing the figure would be huge. Surely that emphasises the value of English? It doesn't represent a failure of the rest of the world to keep up as much as it represents Europe's progress towards closing the gap in international commerce.

That said, on my last trip to France I learnt a valuable lesson. I tried to buy a set of nail clippers (try finding that one in a phrase book) and, until I attempted to ask in pitiful halting French, the lady behind the counter ignored me. The second I tried, she came to understand English and dodgy sign language quite well and helped me. Should I be annoyed at the 'arrogant' and 'unhelpful' French for this? Probably not. Instead, I should take away from this the lesson that, by putting a bit of effort into my cultural experience, and trying to communicate with the locals in their own language, I got a long way.

So there you have it. I haven't really argued either way here, just presented observations.

Otokonoko, next time pretend you do not speak any English, or very poorly and see how helpful English speaking people are. Especially in London. Makes the French look positively falling over themselves with friendliness. I lived for 2 years in London and couldn't get over the shocking treatment non-English speaking people receive, though tourism is a big source of income.

English speakers generally refuse to even try to communicate in another language with a foreigner. At least the French shopgirl attempted communicating with you in English. Wouldn't have happened across the channel if the situation was reversed. English speakers are the most arrogant.

Learning a foreign language actually improves the command you have over your native language, whether you realize it or not.

You certainly have a point. And I was ashamed at my lack of foresight and, dare I say it, arrogance at going to France without a reasonable grasp of the language. But at least I tried. Of course, my efforts were pathetic compared to those of the backpackers I see every day around Townsville, who speak better English than many Australians.