Original source (on modern site) | Article images: [1]
As the new school year begins, the number of students choosing Taiwan Sign Language (TSL) for their local-language classes has continued to rise. In some schools, more than 40 percent of students have reportedly chosen TSL. In elementary schools, students can choose to study other languages such as Vietnamese and Indonesian. The overall proportion of students choosing these languages remains low, but the growing number of options might risk obscuring the purpose of local-language education all in the name of respecting diversity. Local-language classes are distinct from general language courses; they are intended to revitalize the languages of Taiwan that declined as a result of the Mandarin-only language policy implemented by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) regime. The current system seems to have lost sight of that goal. Taiwan is linguistically diverse, but its languages have different roles and functions. Taiwanese served as a lingua franca across ethnic groups and regions, while Hakka and indigenous languages are associated with particular communities and geographic areas. They should not all be treated under the same system. Today, sign language and the heritage languages of immigrant families have been placed in the same pool of language electives as local languages, from which students can choose. Does this really serve the revitalization of Taiwan's local languages, or is it just creating a language buffet under the thinking that more options equals more progress? Sign language and the languages spoken at home for children from immigrant families should be protected, but this should be planned independently and according to their respective communication needs and educational objectives. More students are choosing to study sign language not out of a practical need, which is not the point of local language revitalization. The Southeast Asian languages offered as options are already official languages of their respective countries; they are not endangered, nor are they languages of Taiwan. The need to offer them should be assessed in light of Taiwan's broader needs and they should be incorporated as part of a foreign-language education distinct from local-language classes. Local-language education originally sought to restore Taiwan's multilingual environment, but the dominance of Mandarin remains unchanged. Those languages whose place in the education system is being "diversified" are precisely those that are most vulnerable. Given that these languages are the only ones designated as "local," would the Ministry of Education be willing to acknowledge Mandarin Chinese to be a foreign language? Or to answer why a foreign language enjoys such an advantage in teaching hours and assessment? Taiwan's language education system is in need of a comprehensive review. Languages should be classified according to their status, geographic use and revitalization needs as common languages, regional languages, foreign languages or second foreign languages, with curricula then designed accordingly. Otherwise, we might end up with an increasingly rich list of language choices, but with the Taiwanese languages in genuine need of being passed on disappearing even more rapidly under a system of "diversification." Khoo Hui-lu is a professor and chair of the Department of Taiwan Culture, Languages and Literature at National Taiwan Normal University. Translated by Gilda Knox Streader
![[1]](image.php?loc=TW&i=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.taipeitimes.com%2Fassets%2Fimages%2FTaipeiTimesLogo-1200X1200px_new.jpg){kind=link}