Lost in translation

As a language teacher and traveler, I commend almost all things polyglot as being diverse, interesting, authentic, and complex. I stand in awe of those that command several languages and switch between them seamlessly at the drop of a hat. Happy would I be to perform such feats; I would probably mascaraed around, parading my linguistic talents so the entire world could express its admiration. My own status as a humble speaker who probably only manages her own language with any finesse and mangles a few others is probably in God's design to prevent me from egomania and the inappropriate behavior I mentioned, above.

I love my country- men and women, but most of us do fall short of Europeans (and probably other global citizens) in our mastery of languages. There are many aspects of American life that factor into our largely mono- or sometimes bi-lingual existence (at least this is true in the parts of middle, square-state America with which I am most familiar). It isn't fair to chastise us for lack of intelligence or ambition. I think understanding the situation is relatively simple (excusable or not): 1) most of the people in this part of the US speak English as their mother tongue, 2) the distance one would have to travel to get to Spanish-speaking Mexico or French-speaking Canada is enormous and one would most likely only go on their vacation there once or twice in a lifetime anyway, 3) the Spanish-speaking minority (at least in my hometown), for better or worse, is often trying to learning English and often doesn't mix much with English-speaking folks, 4) language instruction is usually not added until 9th grade at the earliest and even then it is not treated as a "real" academic area of study by students or administrators, 5) contact with foreign languages is minimal, so authentic practice is a bit of a stretch for most.

A string of excuses. I know. But they do matter. I started taking language classes quite eagerly at the earliest point I could, when I was 14, and I continued to take classes, despite the fact that they were often not entirely motivating and optional parts of the curriculum. I finished a degree in Spanish without ever having had a conversation with a Spanish speaker. I am not sure, if not for my Peace Corps service and very meaningful and successful experience with the Slovak language, if I ever would have mustered up the courage or have found the context in which to use my Spanish. No one else in my family, for example, speaks a second language (although all of them took cursory courses for a couple of years in high school and later in college). Personal narrative aside, my point is that the opportunities to learn and practice language are not exactly at your doorstep as they might be in other places of the world.

The European, in contrast, begins to learn languages, especially English nowadays, in preschool and other countries are juxtaposed merely a few hundred (or hundreds) of kilometers away. The borders are a bit more permeable, and it is inevitable that you will meet with tourists, exchange students, business people, or immigrants just going about your daily business and most likely in your own home town at some point. Television and radio stations regularly transmit programs and provide films in other languages. The exposure, if one pays attention, can be great, and the motivation to learn languages is all around -- in education but also in the job market and travel opportunities. I don't mean to overstate the contrast because there are also more multi-lingual areas of the United States, but the context can be quite different.

There seems to be an assumption that "to be European" is to be a polyglot. I don't doubt that this is often the case, particularly amongst the younger generations and in more educated and urban areas or in countries with less-commonly-spoken languages. In Estonia, for example, you are hard-pressed to find someone who doesn't speak at least one other language. Depending on the generation or upbringing, this language might be Russian, German, Swedish, Finnish, or, as is often the case, English. I am fantastically jealous of their flexibility and mastery, no matter whether it comes out of exposure, necessity, or desire.

That said, I think that the assumption that every educated European is a polyglot might be a bit over-stated. As a teacher of English, a language that many can speak with great skill and ease, I also meet with students and friends who don't always understand the gist of what is happening in their surroundings during a lecture or conversation (not that it would be permissible to admit such a thing; after all, English is so simple in comparison with other languages, right?). Because of this exposure I have as a teacher, I wonder if the multi-lingual Europeans premise sometimes works against rather than for communication between people and the sharing of ideas.

Here are a couple of examples of what I mean. Last year, I attended a somewhat elitist intellectual event on "Modernity" at the New Europe College in Bucharest. The outline of the event and planned talks enticed me with interesting titles and various themes as well as a multinational list of speakers from Spain, Italy, France, Romania, and Great Britain. Because the provided program was in English, I had assumed the event would be held in English, which made sense considering the invitees and the status of English as a common international language (although I would not have protested the event had it been advertised in another language I speak). Much to my surprise, each speaker gave his or her presentation in Italian, French, Spanish, German, Romanian, and English. Much more to my surprise, no interpretation was offered. I must interject to mention that there were only about 50 attendees at the event, many of them students of literature or language. The presupposition was that every one could manage each language at an academic level. I sat through lectures in French and Italian without a clue as to what was happening, and despite the fact that the title of the talk as it was presented in English on the program looked somewhat interesting to me. I don't know that everyone in the room could manage all six languages equally well, but I somehow doubted it then and still do now. As I looked around the room, it was hard to determine comprehension as everyone sat passively taking in the presentation. However, I did note that when the question and answer session began, many posed their questions in a language different than the language being spoken by the presenter. It's nice to think that every European can manage several languages at a sophisticated level, but I wonder if such events are at cross-purposes. If not everyone understands the material at a deep level, what then is the point of sharing research, ideas, meditations... ?

Yesterday, I was present in a similar situation. The University of Tartu is celebrating its 375th anniversary this year and, as a result, is emphasizing its international nature by promoting itself as a multilingual university. The marketing materials and literature do this quite well. The campus itself is also a nice advertisement of this emphasis as you can easily hear several languages being spoken by students and faculty when walking between the main buildings in the center. Another way to emphasize its stature as a traditional and international institution is through the invitation of high-profile guests. Yesterday, I went to a lecture by Lord Owen, "The Future of Europe."

The special event was advertised and would be held in English, Lord Owen being an English speaker. The moderator (a native German speaker) spoke in English as did the acting rector of the university when he gave his opening remarks. Seated in the audience were a wide range of international students and staff as well as many Estonian students, staff, faculty, and Tartu locals. Many present were known to me either as part of the international community or as participants in my English courses at UT. I assume that attendees came to the event expecting it to be held in English, so those with weaker skills were prepared to listen closely and piece together the speech while listening. There were many known to me in the audience that were rudimentary Estonian speakers (myself included).

The interesting choice made during the event was by an Estonian government official who addressed the crowd in English initially before switching to her mother tongue for a 10-15 minute introduction. An interesting choice. She justified it by sharing her pride that in Brussels and in Strasbourg, Estonian is one of the official languages spoken. I agree that, of all places, Estonian should be spoken in formal events at its national university. However, over half of the audience did not have access to what she had to say (and I might have enjoyed hearing it as much of current events and other happenings are completely unaccessible to non-Estonian speakers like me). I am not suggesting that she have spoken English; I think her decision to speak Estonian at such an event was an acceptable one. One I can admire and agree with. However, I did not get anything from what she had to say. Total communication failure (and perhaps my fault really for not speaking Estonian a bit better).

In the same way, I wonder how many people that would have been an engaged audience for Lord Owen's fascinating talk about the EU and European affairs were unable to fully access the content of his presentation in English because of language barriers. Why couldn't there have been an interpreter for both sides? Is it completely embarrassing to acknowledge that not everyone speaks all languages? Is not the purposes of such events to bring us together and to communicate thoughts? Is not the aim of higher education to be a platform of inclusion rather than exclusion? I wonder, how much (and how many) should be lost in translation?