Should we not be learning Arabic as part of the Church of England's embrace Islam initiative?

Tony, croydon, uk

It is difficult to stimulate people to learn a foreign language. Here in Belgium where two languages are spoken, the knowledge of Flemish (Dutch) and French as a second language, depending on the linguistic region where one lives, is very poor. There is much less aversion towards English as it apparently coincides more with the idea of modernity and particularly with the cultural interests most young people favour.

Ray Massart, Hombeek, Belgium

Many English people don’t see the cultural insularity resulting from their monolingualism. Speaking other languages is no big deal. Listen to uneducated Indian kids speaking three or four languages fluently. They just do it.
When you are a linguistic colonialist, as native English and Americans speakers are, you feel superior to other cultures. There was talk of winning the hearts and minds of Iraqis. How can you do this if you do not show enough respect to master the rudiments of their language. How many GIs could say ‘Hello’ to the population they were protecting? How offensive.
English will not remain the lingua franca as China and India overtake the West. Were any Western statesman to go now to China and deliver a speech in Chinese, however bad, would it not show an enormous respect for a culture that will dominate the world within the next century. What about having a go at Hindi? What a mark of respect towards a former colony we regarded as quaintly inferior for so long.

Mike Hughes, Copenhagen,

Britain is in the unfortunate position that English has allegedly become the Lingua Franca of the globalised world, hence many of the disheartening comments here. Two points touched upon I feel are worth reiterating. Firstly, the study of languages not only gives the practical ability to converse in another tongue, but also allows one to think differently. Languages are often seen as the bridge between the scientific (grammar and syntax) and the artistic (semantics). Such thought processes can enrich a child's education in all areas. What greater gift could one give a child than freedom of expression?

Secondly, we start teaching foreign languages far too late at school resulting in the disappointment felt by some in their subsequent fluency. True, we cannot know what languages people may need in later life, but the learning of any language enables better acquisition of further ones at a later stage. Why deny children that opportunity through refusing to teach them anything?

James Stedman, Berlin, Germany

we should start by teaching widely-spoken or commercially useful languages. chinese and spanish for starters. and then make sure there are adequate resources to teach them properly. get rid of tired old french that nobody speaks anywhere except on ski-ing or caravaning holidays....

stephen, china, china

It is my personal view that educating your children from infancy
in more than one language, has benefits to the exercising of the mind in many other subjects, and while the use of a second language may not seem to be practically usful, the influence on the IQ of the child can only be positive.
I say this from my own personal experiance with my own two children who have been brought up in a bi-lingual shool with welsh as the first language and english as the second, and french now on the way. Both Boys have been bilingual from the age of 8 speaking both english and welsh fluently, and the oldest who is 14yrs is olso studying french gcse as well, children can so easily absorb like a sponge more than one launguage if started from infancy, and it can only be positive in the expanding of the mind , and not least in your benefit of cultural interaction when home and abroad, its quit sad to see the comments from the "every one must speak english only brigade"

Phill Jones, Swansea, Wales

Those who hide behind their apathy by citing the tired lingua franca argument will be hard pressed to survive outside of a major european centre. Most natives here feel neither comfortable nor confident speaking english for any extended conversation. Almost certainly, they will not indulge your ignorance whilst in a group. Do not presume that younger generations all speak english - most learn but cannot confidently converse.

Any foreigner who can hold even a rudimetary conversation will simply be considered more highly than one who arrogantly expects to be addressed from the outset in their own language.

Sabine, Hallschlag, Germany

There's one amendment to my previous post on this subject... some employers DO look for language ability. But they do not want English speakers who have learned other languages, even to the level of native speakers. They want speakers of other languages who have learned English, and they usually phrase this in terms of wanting people who are "bicultural" as well as bilingual.

Again, there's no incentive for English-speaking people to persist in this area.

M.C., Washington DC, USA

Unlike many people who have commented here, I actually enjoy studying foreign languages. I'm also good at it, and I took as many language classes as I could manage at school. I even received my school's modern language prize at graduation. I studied abroad to improve my practical abilities, and I have continued to study languages as an adult.

And it has all been of absolutely NO use in the workplace. Employers do not want this skill, and many even see it as a sign that a potential employee wastes time on inessentials. I've seen people who got degrees in modern languages (which I had enough sense not to do) remain unemployed for ages, or end up working in restaurants. Most eventually gave in to the marketplace and learned computers or accounting.

Students, especially those of modest means, aren't fools. They know what it takes to get hired. But if language ability ever starts leading to jobs, there will be a lot more of it on display.

M.C., Washington DC, USA

"Lifting the curse of Babel"? If all barriers to communication are removed, people tend to combine for evil, not for good.

Robert H. Olley, Reading, Berks, England

This is just the same old cracked record - and it gets more out of tune with the facts of life with every decade that passes.

The benefits for an English speaker learning any other modern language are tiny compared with the benefits for anyone else learning English. They gain access to the global lingua franca - it is their means of communicating with the world at large. We gain access to a language that will be utterly useless most places. What price German in Mexico? Or Spanish in China?

There's no reason why English speakers shouldn't learn particular foreign languages that will be of use to them. But how can you possibly expect schoolchildren to know what languages those will be? Are they supposed to know how their adult lives will pan out?

As it happens, I'd have been a lot better off learning Thai than French at the age of 16. Of course, this possibility didn't even cross my mind at the time.

John C, Bangkok,

I'm glad that Cambridge university has got rid of the requirement. I too had the same problem of the author , when I applied to Cambridge back in 1989, having not taken any foreign languangue at O level from the comprehensive I went to. Luckily , the university got me a special approval to admit me without the foreign language.

Omar, Manchester, uk

This is the first article by this author I have ever found convincing, well done Mr H. Why the BBC has failed to point out the crass inconsistency of our schools shutting down European language learning, while the UK claims to want to be at the heart of the EU, is amazing. I suppose it reveals just what an irrational and emotivist culture our pundits and political caste now inhabits.
A decade ago I heard a head of department of Engineering at one of our new universities, former poly, saying that he was being forced to accept undergraduates with no maths, and also that he was not allowed to fail any, for financial reasons.
Be afraid when you drive over bridges built in the past decade.

Tom, Witney, UK

Shouldn't it depend on the university course that the one is applying for?
For example, Russian should require a modern language at O level, physics should not.

Conor, New York, New York

Like many I dutifully passed my GCSE French with a A grade, but this left me with no practical ability whatsoever to carry forward to the present day when I actually need to speak and understand French on a daily basis. Learning a language is not impossible: I'm not reasonably able to communicate my wishes to my employees. What is at issue is the laughable manner in which languages are taught in British schools. It's a grave disservice to our children that they are not taught at least one other language from primary school age, or that more time is not devoted to languages on a daily basis.

sue, ottawa, canada

I currently live in Japan and when I first came here I could not speak, read or write a single word of Japanese.
Although many signs are in English, the majority of people do not speak it and something as simple as ordering in a restaurant can be near impossible sometimes. The rest of the world certainly does not speak English! After seven months here I now have survival Japanese, although my reading and writing is still very poor, owing to the unique difficulties of the language. It is complete folly to assume that the rest of the world will automatically understand you!
on the plus side my ability to get what I want using actions has certainly improved a great deal.

K Brecknell, saitama city, japan

I think it's very important for English schoolchildren to learn a foreign language. I also think the government was quite right to stop it being compulsory at GCSE level. By the time a student is choosing their GCSEs, aged 14, those extra two years are going to make very little difference. Better, if they have neither the aptitude nor the desire to study a language, that they do something they do have the aptitude or desire for. Language education needs to start much earlier than KS3 if it's to be of any use. Maybe once the first cohort of students who've learned from age 5 onwards get to GCSE level it will be worth making it compulsory again.

Tom, London,

Of course we had to expect ignorant comments such as that made by Ged. Yeah wurl they all speaks English so we don't need ter learn other lingos - I mean stands ter reason dunnit". Of course, when Ged goes abroad, everything will be conveniently translated into English for his benefit. of course, when our traders try to do business in Germany, and they compete with a Frenchman who has been taught not only English but also a second language like German, the English busienssman will get the contract. It just makes me want to weep.

Walter Cairns, Manchester, UK

English is spoken all round the world by someone not always well, but enough. Who among you is going to learn 400 languages to the fluency some seem to expect? English is the lingua Franca.

If you have a desire or a need to speak a language that is another matter, entirely up to you which you choose. How do you know till you need it. So don't blame schools.

There are 3 things you should know- linguistics, semantics, and cybernetics.

Linguistics explores the origin of languages, and their development. Norwegians and Swedes understand Dutch and Flemish are the same etc.
Semantics explores the meaning of meaning. Some say we are drowning in a sea of words. Cybernetics is about the study of automatic communication in living bodies and mechanical electical systems. The world is complicated enough without learning dead languages you may never need.

ged, manchester,

You think it's bad there, here in America, I can't get much in accurately spoken English! If there's anything worse than mono-lingual, it's semi-lingual.

I'm somewhere between mono-lingual and bi-lingual. If you hear me speak French, you'd understand. But, what's that called?

Dan'l, Portland, US/Maine

Here in Wales we speak a foreign language - 100% of us. But seriously, such views are very narrow. Charles V may have spoken more languages than me but I know infinitely more physics, chemistry, mathematics, etc etc. Languages are not the sole measure of intellect.

Fwanky, St Clears, Wales

The widespread knowledge of English around the world is explained by the power English gives to access most of world culture including pop and earning power, so the incentive and motivations are very high to learn it.
But for Britishers what foreign language will they choose? Unless one has a very strong interest in a particular culture there is really no point in learning a foreign language which one will not use. To put in the required massive effort involved just to use for a couple of weeks on holiday is obviously pointless.
I have studied Hindi, Persian and Mandarin because for me there was great 'profit' for me to be able to understand the cultures and peoples in those regions. Few British schoolchildren seek such 'profit' at that stage of life particularly with no land borders of a different language.
I remember the 10 year old boys working in the restaurants in Kathmandu in the 60s who could understand the orders in English, French, Dutch, German but could not read Nepali.

Dennis Anthony, Hastings, UK

Learn a foreign language? It seems to me that 90% of school leavers can't even read and write English fluently.

Bob Travels, Stevenage,

The British don't start teaching languages early enough. Most Luxembourgers these days are trilingual by the age of 13 (Luxembourgish, German and French) — then they learn English...

Alan Carlisle, Haller, Luxembourg

At least two private schools in Mexico offer Mandarin at pre-University levels. The Chinwese are offering their langauage and culture at Confucius centers world wide. Worth the investment?

Errol, Juriquilla , Mexico

If the UK is going to trade with the emerging economies, kids should be learning Mandarin and/or Spanish and/or Russian.

Allan Richardson is right about buying and selling. I worked in a German speaking country for 20 years, but was not allowed near prospective customers until I was competent in German.

Dave Taylor, Krabi, Thailand

There is more to communication than slavishly learning vocabulary and grammatical niceties. Having lived for twenty years in Spain and spent hours at Spanish classes learning verbs and tenses I only began to communicate when I relaxed and used whatever structures and phrases came into my head. Local people would be amused but tolerant and very willing to correct any gaffes, especially the many Spanish allusions which have a somewhat vulgar application. Spanglish is a very useful language.

David, Cheltenham, UK

All 'O' levels were in 'soft' subjects. I'm surprised Oxford University
gave you admission.

tari, London,

Most British people are too lazy to learn other languages. They could, but they can't see the point. That's a pity, but it is part of our national character to take the easy way out of things rather than try to do things well. Our insular, inept and unfocussed educational establishment also contributes to this sad state of affairs.

Colin, shrewsbury,

How pathetic that so many of you who have English as a mother-tongue think that learning another language is unnecessary because "everyone speaks Enligsh" and anyway, who cares?
It's quite untrue that everyone else speaks English, and even if it weren't, who are we to impose our language on others when we visit their country? I live in France, and I can tell you that I am ashamed to see how few expats speak French, let alone make an effort to do so.
Not only does it isolate these same expats & force them into their own little cliques, it really annoys the locals, and creates a real divide.
I've defended the Brits in abstentia for years, but after reading some of these comments have to admit defeat. Foreign languages are part of a good education, & the lack of them makes us look ignorant, insular & arrogant.
It is time the British got off their backsides & justified their reputation abroad as educated, courteous and fair-minded - something which many of you clearly are not.

HWagner, Chateauroux, France

my wife is french, I am english.

Our children speak fluently, they read fluently, do maths fluently in BOTH languages. They only ever speak to their mother in french, she has never uttered a word of english to them. At home discussions are in both languages.

My point being simply that our kids have a huge head start BUT and this is the critical point.... I don't really believe language is taught well in school, not enough time is committed to it, and as a result kids end up understanding the basics and being able to operate in a travel situation but I would be surprised if more than 20% of A level students or university graduates could read a foreign newspaper with the speed they read an english one, or have confidence socially.

We work very very hard to have children who are genuinely fluent, fluency ONLY comes when you live with a language, at best language students have the basics here but there seems to be no recognition of just how hard you have to work to be fluent.

abharrisson, london,

For non-British, learning English is a necessity. They have to learn it because they can't do without it. For native English speakers another language is an academic exercise. How often do they need it for the internet, film, television, even communication on holiday? In my international school all the Indian caretakers speak at least 3 languages. Are they more aware, or cosmopolitan? No, they need to use these languages to get by from day to day. Until we need to speak another language other than English we won't bother. So stop harping on at it. It's just not going to happen.

Jeff, Dubai, Dubai, UAE

As someone who frequently travels and works abroad, I can tell you that most of the world *does not* speak English. Even in Northern Europe!

Contrary to assumptions, young people throughout the world are not English-proficient, not even remotely. Many learn some English for their professions, which they will use depending on where they go and what they do.

But if you want to do anything of consequence internationally, you have to know another language.

China will soon be the world's largest economy by far, and frankly, considering the shocking speed of the USA's decline, it'll be sooner rather than later.

With Germany as EU leader, and Spanish spoken throughout so much of the world, I'd say that Chinese, German and Spanish are especially important. Other languages, such as Arabic, French, Portuguese, Hindi, Japanese and Russian will also be important for certain professions.

In the USA, big companies won't hire you w/o language skills. To survive, you need languages.

Mark, New York, NY

I am bilingual in Spanish and English and it is quite clear to me after reading the other contributors' comments that speaking other languages actually improves your English. I have also travelled abroad and it is a myth that everyone speaks English. Most people learn a bit at school but are too diffident to use it and the older generations definitely do not speak it. Speaking other languages teach children from an early age that words are arbitrary and helps them to link ideas and words with much more flexibility that they would have if they only spoke one. You need good language teachers, though!

Inma Arkwright, Cheltenham,

Learning a language (any language) is a skill set in itself. Learning as a youngster is far better than approaching foreign language learning for the first time in adult life. I hardly used my French skills post-GCSE - or so I thought - but I'm so glad it was compulsory then, as it's been the springboard to learn Swedish and Russian much quicker than the majority of my adult education class.

Elizabeth, I would venture that your German GCSE would not be a piece of paper stating that you can speak German, but rather a useful piece preparation for further study in any language field.

Mark Churchill, Bristol,

Another point, in response to the "most people speak English" commenters... Most people between 15-40, maybe. But if you need to communicate with an older person abroad, or a child, or indeed an immigrant to that country, reliance on English won't help.

I discovered this in Sweden. People pointed out that it is a country with an astoundingly high level of spoken English, so why should I trouble to learn their language? But even as a casual traveller, you still need to communicate with people that can help you -- bus drivers, shopkeepers, nurses, food vendors... The local Iranian grocery store owner or Vietnamese nurse is more preoccupied learning Swedish than English.

Mark Churchill, Bristol,

Some of the comments here really make one despair. ("There is no point in learning any foreign language nowadays and little advantage in speaking one. The curse of Babel is being lifted from the world - all the foreigners are learning English." etc.) What ignorant fools.

David K. , London,

Whilst at school (1993-1997)I desperately hated being forced to learn French and felt the 4hours a week would have been better of in a subject I was stronger in.
Having lived and worked in Spain, Italy, Austria and China in the past 4 years I have have had fun learning conversational phrases in these countries from locals but always they will come to me asking for help with their English pronunciation and spelling.
It may be arrogant but there is no doubt the world has chosen to learn English as their second tongue and I feel we should be using our school time to concentrate on other subjects especially the sciences and business/IT/Finance based subjects.
The current system of pupils that WANT to learn a foriegn language at that stage of their life will mean a smaller number do but to a higher standard.

rob gear, southampton, UK (currently Austria)

This argument about taking a GCSE in a foreign laguage is ridiculous; ask someone who left school 5 years ago if they can tell you directions in French, and in most cases they can't. I am 15 years old and I am not taking a GCSE in a foreign language. Why? Beacause I know that if I were to have a GCSE in, say, German, I can tell you that I would never speak the language again as I would have a sheet of paper saying that I can "speak" German. Having a GCSE in a foreign language doesn't mean you can effortlessly speak fluently in that language;nmany people can barely string a sentence together.

Tim Halmes also remarked that most teenagers who take GCSE foreign languages go to grammer and private schools. Well, I am hometutored and from September I will go to a private sixth form college; I am not incompetent towards foreign languages. In fact, I intend to study French and Russian on a long term bases so that I can develop my linguistic skills as best as I can.

Elizabeth, Sussex,

At my (comprehensive) school languages are compulsory to the end of year eleven, which, as a passionate German speaker, I love. However, A-Level was another matter - what I now consider to be 'my language' was not going to be run if the group was too small.
There are now three of us definitely studying German next year, after a slightly aggreived letter on my part, phonecalls on the parts of the other two student's parents and several meetings with the headteacher - proof that 'pupil power' works!
However, surely we shouldn't forget that many students in very multicultural schools are already bilingual, speaking one language at home and another at school. Does not having a formal qualification make you any less of a linguist, even if you are fluent in two languages?
And yes, as I improve my German, I do look differently at my English - even if that is only because I haven't switched my 'German Brain' quite off and I keep putting the verbs at the end of my sentences

Hannah Sketchley, Northampton,

People are not educated today. I worked with a chemist charged with inducting PhDs into the company. He gave up they were so 'learnt up' you could not squeeze another fact in.

Anyone interested in languages should study linguistics. Then when they need them they can understand whole families of them

ged, manchester,

Foreign language tuition in Britain is a disaster, and so is the general view that English will get you by everywhere. The issue is not only to do with the value of communicating in another language, but of opening pathways in your brain that are closed if no language effort is made (Chomsky's language centre). From personal experience I have seen my young children soak up Spanish almost effortlessly while we struggled harder to adopt Spanish. Why? Because they learn by ear whereas those over about 18 to 20 struggle to rekindle their language centre. British education should be pushing a relevant foreign language to youngster from age 3 or 4 onwards, with a goal to maintain a language skill beyond the age of 10 (otherwise the skill can be lost).

Keith Martin, Dubai, UAE

I have been frequently embarassed while travelling when I meet people from non-English speaking countries and they ask me what languages I speak. I say I speak English, and then I get asked what else? The reply to that used to be "thats it", but now I can say I speak some Spanish as I have since learned a little.
In my opinion the trouble with English speaking countries is that languages are introduced too late in the curriculum. If you look at Europe (and elsewhere) you will see that most countries introduce languages to children by the age of 7. Surely it is much easier to pass an exam in a foreign language if have been learning it for 4 more years?

Rachel, Chch, NZ

A German businessman said, "When I'm selling, I'm willing to speak English. When I'm buying, I expect to be sold to in my own language." This seems reasonable. Does Britain expect to continue to export to countries in which English is not the mother tongue?

Allan Richardson, Halver, Germany

I teach French (I'm a native speaker) and Spanish in a high school in Kent and I do understand the case for introducing Mandarin, Arabic and Hindi in primary schools. However, I see on a daily basis kids unables to cope with these 2 languages in spite of having a grammar very close to English grammar... now you tell me how they can possibly cope with oriental languages, whose structures are miles away from English.
Some suggest the use of translating devices. Yes, why not, but: my students cannot even cheat in their exams because their English spelling is so poor that the online translators cannot identify, let alone translate, the words they try to enter. I am very pessimistic.

Cyril, Rochester, Kent

It may be pointless to force a foreign language upon all schoolchildren, especially if they cannot express themselves properly in their own. But for a world-class university like Cambridge to drop its insistence upon a language qualification in order to "attract more bright students from state schools" is a cowardly surrender to political pressure. Cambridge, along with Oxford and some other British universities, used to insist upon a basic qualification in English, maths or a science, and a foreign language no matter what subject a student wished to study. This was a perfectly reasonable demand to make of anyone who wished to claim that they had had something approaching a rounded education and if "bright students from state schools" can no longer achieve even this minimum qualification in sufficient numbers, this is hardly an argument for dispensing with the qualification. Otherwise we would have to reduce the 100 metres to 75 because some athletes cannot cover the ground in time.

Geoffrey Warner, Didcot,

I agree with the author on the importance of language learning in particular language as a means of understanding a culture. In a globalised world the employees of the future will need to be more flexible and be able to work with people from countries all over the world. We can't always expect all the others to adapt to our culture.

I would think it might be a more relevant approach to teach other languages than the European ones - like chinese or arabic. In countries which speak these languages you may also not have the advantage that the people speak english anyway so there would be more of a point.

I don't think that handheld translation machines will in anyway replace language teaching. If you really speak a foreign language you will know how inadequate the translations often are and how limited to only a certain number of situations.

Steffi, Wallington, England

I was forced to study both french and german, for three and 5 years respectivly.

German
Vo ist Der Bahnhoff?
(Where is the train station)

Ich Bin Zwolf Jahre Alt
(I am 12 years old)

French
.....

What a productive use of my time that was.

Frankly, I'll measure my education against, I dont, know, Science, rather than the opinion of men who spent their days pillaging the neighbouring village.

Dominic, Tameside, UK

It is perhaps worth noting that many international organisations and insitutions including EU institutions require applicants for internships and jobs to have fluency in at least 2 languages in order for them to stand a chance of being accepted. With fewer British children taking up languages are we at risk of depriving them of some of the great career opportunities available in Europe - opportunities that will no doubt be snapped up by their bi if not multi lingual European counterparts.

Lydia, Liverpool,

The government says it is backing primary school French. In the 1960's there was something called Nuffield French, in which several hundred primary schools took part. It was a pilot scheme - all primary children were eventually to be taught French. It was abandoned because there were not enough teachers of French.
Now, with a foreign language not compulsory for GCSE, the situation will become far worse.

Dave, Wrexham,

Good article but I think the argument is a bit silly. The case for learning a foreign language for an English speaker is no different from that of learning the piano. It is something rewarding in its own right. But it's quite obviously not the least bit necessary in order to get on in life. What else are you going to do - travel only to those 2 or 3 countries where you've mastered the language (with more study than you will accomplish at GCSE btw).
It's a nice hobby capable of giving great enjoyment in certain situations. No different from rollerblading.

Jack, London, England

The GCSE in Modern Foreign Languages has been consistently watered down over the years I have been teaching it since 1987. Similarly, the new Edexel syllabus for GCE at A2 requires the examination of only one literary work in the foreign language, rather than the currently lamentable two. Why are we not challenging our children? They have so many distractions that they hardly read books any more - their three "R"s are weaker than ever, apparently. Why did we let French dominate MFL fo so long? Schools offering a choice of languages ab initio are leading the way. Good luck to them!

G.M.Evans-Jones, Cologne, Germany

I don't know about commercial reasons, but I certainly think having a grasp of foreign languages helps on holidays. Last year I travelled to Italy, the year before, Spain. On both occassions I did not learn any of the language before I went (lack of time!) and just took a phrasebook. I regretted it both times. In Spain we struggled with embarrassment and being unsure of ourselves for 5 days out of the 7 day holiday, although the locals were very forgiving. In Italy, the situation was made worse by the natives who had no sympathy at all for our lack of Italian language and did not try to understand us even when we were attempting to speak their language. We got into a couple of quite tricky situations and just having the confidence to compile a sentence in Italian, even if needing to use the phrasebook for some words, would have been an immense reassurance. I am travellng to France this year and intend to thoroughly refresh on my rusty GCSE French before I go!

Sarah, Hertfordshire, UK

If our excuse not to learn a foreign language is that 'foreigners learn English anyway', why should we stop there? Why do we learn to add if there is a calculator that can do it for us? Why do we learn to cook if ready meals are available? Why do we learn to tie our shoes if velcro shoes are so cute? Learning a foreign language can give us indipendence, an understanding of other cultures and people and it can be a very pleasurable experience. What's more, is it really true that all foreigners learn English? I travel often to Europe for business and pleasure and I would have huge problems if I could only speak English! Not to mention the fact that I would be doing a much less interesting job, were it not for my language knowledge! Thank you Mr Hames for such an eye-opening article!

Sarah, Belfast,

One does not learn languages in order to speak to foreigners, but to understand what they are saying to each other.

MDHinton, Sieradz, Poland

I hated French and Latin until I quit the latter and started Spanish. Within a month, my excellent teacher had shown me the relevance of modern languages and my French rapidly improved as a result. School language trips (not terrifying exchanges, but holidays in which we spent our mornings making local friends in local schools) turned the very basic language skills I had learnt into a useful tool and a passion about. I later studied 3 languages at university and lived in Paris, Andalucia, Quito and Milan - invaluable life experiences.

It is a myth that the whole world speaks English. Few who claim to speak English actually manage more than the clichéd basics and most are as embarrassed to try as a typical English student would be. Speaking a foreign language is an effort and most people, whatever their nationality, feel more comfortable in their own language. Learning even the basics of a language opens doors. Insisting on "English only" closes them. Make language study relevant...

John, London,

I agree with the columnist, and I am pleased to see the issue raised. Although many comments below are accurate in saying that one can travel throughout much of the world and get by speaking English (indeed, living in Paris, I find it extremely frustrating that the locals are so determined to speak English to me), it is not until you learn a language that you realise how much more you can get out of your time in a country having done so. Moreover, language learning does not simply concentrate on an ability to speak the language, but also on how language is formed and evolves, and its effects on culture, which leads to a far greater understanding of English (try teaching English to a foreigner without an understanding of another language). Of course, some children will find this altogether uninteresting, but not to persuade them to persist for at least a few years in order to make their own minds up is a travesty, and a sign of arrogance to all those who we visit.

David, Paris,

English may well be the universal language of business these days, but people still apreciate communicating on their level. The difference it makes when a native English speaker is also able to competently hold a discussion in another language can only fully be grasped by those who have experienced this. All of a sudden, one is no longer the native English speaker in the room, but a respected individual who can communicate effectively and understand both the cultural and linguistic barriers in the business setting. I have lost count the number of times my German colleagues have told me of their disasterous negotiations with British coleagues where they had no idea what had been agreed upon at the end of the meeting. Had those Brits had a knowledge of the German culture and language , they would have known to be clear in their expression of 'yes' or 'no'.

But then everyone speaks English these days, so why bother.

E. Harper, Bonn, Germany

Two points here:-
1. Very few schools teach the foreign language for the 21st century - Mandering Chinese. Quite a few speak German! Why? 100 million speakers only worldwide.
2. English is the world language as it is, and if you want to converse in foreign languages in the future, hand-hald translation machines (probably a feature on your mobile phone) will be totally commonplace within a decade.
Your journalist is still stuck in his 1970's time-warp. It's all moved on since then.

Chris, Northampton, England

The present is not like the past. I learned French at school in the 1940s. Most of it stuck. I picked up some german, Enough Spanish and Italian to get about. in the past 20 years I have been to Japan, China, India, Egypt,Brazil and 80 other countries. I never needed to speak a word other than English.

The clue was provided when I joined a conversation in Greece in English. thinking they were compatriots. One was Greek, one was Israeli. English was the only way they could communicate. English is the modern lingua Franca, otherwise the world would be in chaos.

ged, manchester,

I agree that learning a language is a wonderful thing - I was lucky in that I was good at it. Even so, like all skills it requires nurturing and practice. I studied Italian at school, got at "A" in my final year (Australian school system so hard to relate to GCSEs etc), but with scant opportunity to use the language in the 17 years since I left school, it is very rusty indeed these days. I suppose it's like riding a bike and I could pick it up again quickly enough if I needed to. But the fact remains that there are very few opportunities for native English speakers to have any extended exposure to a foreign language.

Tilly, Leicester,

"the advantages of speaking foreign languages have never been greater ... we are deliberately rendering ourselves less capable of communicating with our neighbours ... Learning a foreign language, or possibly three or four, is the best way to learn English..." This is all unutterable rubbish, and I know, because I am a superb speaker of English, a decent speaker of French and Japanese, and know quite a bit of German and Russian. There is no point in learning any foreign language nowadays and little advantage in speaking one. Tthe curse of Babel is being lifted from the world - all the foreigners are learning English. We are not less capable of communicating with our neighbors, because they are all studying the planetary language, English, as hard as they possibly can. And the best way to learn English is to learn English by omnivorous reading of the English classics. What is necessary for a child, above all, is perfect English, and a thorough grounding in the principles of science.

Thomas Goodey, Tokyo, Japan

I studied French for five years and Spanish for three at school and have to say it has subsequently been proven to be a complete waste of time. I've never actually needed that knowledge in real life.

We are very lucky in this country as English is gradually becoming the universal language. Conversely, other languages, such as French are dying. There are some jobs that require knowledge of a foreign language but they are few and far between. Most of us can manage quite well without.

Derek Stanley, St Ives, UK

I agree in principle with Stephen.
A key factor is what one wants to achieve or hopes to achieve with a language. I lived in Germany for six years, and, even though I say it myself, my written and spoken German were excellent. This meant I could enjoy my private life fully, become friends with several Germans, and really get to grips with the culture and history - all fascinating stuff.
However, when it came to finding work in Germany, my knowledge of German (I even took, and passed, a professional exam in German to prove that I had no problems with the technical aspects of my work) was a hindrance rather than a help, as the managers doing the recruiting saw me more as a threat than an opportunity, as my German was better than their English.
After a year out of work in Germany, and after numerous job interviews, I gave up and came to China, where I have now been living for two years. The language is difficult, but there's plenty of work!

Stuart , Beijing, China

If the lame outcome was a good excuse for abandoning compulsory language tuititon, the same should be done for all the other subjects. I cannot say that my students at a good UK university have particularly benefitted from their English A-levels.

I have just returned from France where I put my decent, but far from perfect French to good use. The amazing thing was this: all those of my party who occasionally spoke French over lunch or dinner were able to mix really well with the French. All those who insisted on speaking English only, were always sitting with the English. You can blame it on the French or you can realise that in social situations a lot is happening through culture, awareness and yes language. If education was about answering global challenges, compulsory languages would come back - and somebody would make it actually work. In the meantime, my kids already speak three (at the age of 6 and 8), my worries for uneducated masses here are limited.

Fred Freeloader, Manchester,

Learning a 'foreign' language, or possibly three or four, is the best way to learn English, which is a combination of German, French, Latin, and Greek. It also opens one up to the great literature and thinking of these great civilisations, and introduces one to the humbling concept of cultural relativism, which is the foundation of tolerance.

Neel, Oxford, UK

Seventeen years ago I sat a GCSE in German and managed to get a Grade A, but like your O level in French it was a triumph of memory rather than linguistic ability. What makes you think things would be any different if the current generation did a compulsory language exam?

My several years of study left me quiet unable to read a German newspaper, understand a German film, or have any sort of meaningful conversation in German. It may have been worthwhile for other reasons, but I can't pretend that it gave me any real practical skill.

I think European kids learn to speak English because global (largely US) pop culture is such a part of their daily lives. For our kids languages are like the periodic table or the inventor of the spinning jenny - something they learn to pass an exam, and then forget. I don't see how that is going to change, and therefore I don't see how making languages optional again can be a 'catastrophe'.

Stephen, London,