For the love of language

That realization is false, extremely false, but unfortunately that does not make its ramifications any less real. Non-native speakers like me oftentimes feel self-conscious and unsure when speaking in a class with native speakers. This uneasiness amplifies our disappointment with our relative inability, intensifies our disgust with a class and quite possibly deters us from future study. Much like relative wealth helps define personal happiness, so too is relative suckishness a primary factor in determining our feelings toward a course.

Given this self-consciousness, it would be best for all students, regardless of background, if all language courses were separated into native and non-native sections throughout entire language departments.

Here at Princeton, languages at the introductory levels are well stratified so that equally capable students study the language together, but upper-level courses lump all students together under a banner of assumed fluency. Many departments, such as Chinese, have separate tracks for native speakers, allowing them to study at a more advanced level. A conspicuously unarticulated corollary to this system is the unmistakable benefit to non-native speakers. Separated from the linguistic superiority of their peers, these students, like myself, feel more comfortable exploring the target language and making mistakes. We recognize that our errors will fit in perfectly with the distribution of our class, alleviating our self-consciousness. This ability to screw up is integral to fostering an accommodating environment for language study.

However, as we pass through these introductory courses and begin to study literature and art in the target language, following the natural progression of available courses, this structural distinction between native and non-native classes evaporates. Students who have studied a language for six years are mixed with those who have spoken it for a lifetime. The professor is left unsure how to grade and teach, knowing full well that it is unfair to expect the same mastery of the language from his native and non-native students. On the other hand, he is equally aware that to secretly craft separate grading metrics would be unacceptably unfair. This grading quandary is then brewed with the pungent, odious cauldron that is grade deflation. In the end, it would be easier to understand how the Harry Potter movie directors could have cast Ginny so poorly than to unearth the rationale for the cryptic, bold letter on SCORE at the end of the semester.

Despite this grading and instructional ambiguity, many would contend that the idea of separating students based on their language abilities is counterproductive. They argue that exposure to native-speaking students boosts non-native students’ language abilities, creating a consortium of minds and perspectives that yields a fruitful discussion transcendent of the initial discipline. I certainly believe that being surrounded by fluent speakers and immersed in a foreign language is an effective way to learn. Unfortunately, having native speakers in a 50- or 80-minute class twice a week is not sufficient to reap the benefits of immersive study. This counterargument may sound nice, filled with the maxims of liberal arts academia, but my experience is that it’s just not realistic.

We non-native students are not the only ones who feel uncomfortable in a class with native speakers. Knowing that they speak better than anyone else in the class, and recognizing the ire that it may draw from their classmates, the native students themselves may clam up altogether. In the end nobody is learning anything substantive, but everyone is muted by the miasma of silence and awkward glances.

Studying a foreign language is a beautiful undertaking, whether it prompts us to interact with another culture, or whether it allows us to carry on secret conversations in the dining hall that are specifically engineered to annoy our monolingual friends. Any deterrent to this language study, whether one is a native or non-native speaker, should be considered highly unfortunate. For those of you who speak a language fluently, I applaud you, and to be blunt, I am jealous. I study Spanish to attain the fluency you find so natural, and I propose this system because it captures what is best for both native and non-native students, relegating them to a class that will suit their needs and their enrichment most fully.

Chris Goodnow is a sophomore from Pleasanton, Calif. He can be reached at cgoodnow@princeton.edu.