"You can have many myths, many stories. That's what counts. Do not fare well who has the ability to have only the stories and myths collective"
(Odo Marquard)
It has the impression of understanding what it means to speak their language perfectly, especially when you meet a stranger. In particular, this happens even when years and years in Italy have not scratched anything in his Italian sui generis. If you think not just isolated cases of Shel Shapiro, Heather Parisi and Dan Peterson has always served in an Italian to express the "Laurel and Hardy," then you realize how to speak our language well needed in other words, other sounds and intonations. From this experience with foreign speakers who are non-existent words, which articulate the sounds in their own way and giving the melody a bit 'ridiculous their sentences, it is considered to obtain full knowledge of what the role of language teachers foreign: to ensure that students suspend their usual way of finding words and forming sounds and get used to find and train others. The student, he argues, must first of all to learn - at least for the time of the lesson - forget how to speak normally and go up to a phase of his life when he could not use the privileges of verbal language. The student takes in short, the ideal conditions for language learning, it is believed, though for a while 'is able to pretend to be a child who does not know what the words and how one can pronounce.
This intuitive consideration suggests that there is a big difference between learning, for example, quantum physics or the doctrine Keynes' economic theory or system
Luhmann and a foreign language. In the first case the acquisition of new knowledge requires the activation of prior knowledge, putting into play their knowledge, their awareness and knowledge of its practice, the effort in the latter, priority would be to put aside everything you sa. In the first case is to be who you are, even to enhance it, in the latter, in the best way to simulate what is not and can never be, namely a native speaker. They spoke as already in the womb because his hearing was impressed by certain sounds and rhythms and how the first words, for example, mom dad hunting, delivered in that language. And the primary experience with what happens when we speak - the complacency, remembering, lying, promise, and so on - has made them in that language. Those who study a foreign language has gained experience with but must be other words and other sounds, in short, has a different past. If you want to learn a foreign language then you need the ability to acquire in a simulated a biography than their own. It is, in other words, requires the ability to find a substitute for a practice that language could not be charged, the substitute, in short, a life of others. Given that no human being is allowed to repeat all Whenever he wants his first encounter with the language and the experiences it offers, learning a language, in his experience as a surrogate can only act as compensation for what is no longer accessible
The ability to speak a foreign language is a kind of expertise that compensates for an obvious, natural incompetence: that in all the languages \u200b\u200bof the world other than in his native. A surrogate can ensure the best possible replace the original, but it can never be truly and perfectly the same. It goes without saying then that you can not wander to achieve the goal of perfection and completeness of the native speaker each time you start to study and speak a foreign language. The approach to it rather must maintain a degree of relaxation: as is humanly possible to start life anew every time it is considered good and useful, you can not even reach the proficiency of a native speaker. We can do wonderfully understood by the interlocutor, you can even cheat on their linguistic identity conversations more or less long, if you really are virtuosos in the reproduction of the sounds of other languages \u200b\u200band if you enjoy the pleasure of exhibiting their skills . The linguistic distance between the native and the foreigner can not be remedied, however, in no case at all. Learning can ensure best simulation possible, but can not substitute for the original experience despite the exercise, will, attitude and also a long experience, so to speak, on the ground. There can be expressed in a language only a simulation of human imperfection, never with the original perfection.
The reason for such a peremptory statement is evident already in the simple observation that there is no perfect language. No one can learn a language perfectly because even among the natives there are many ways of speaking, each perfect in its way. A language is not contaminated by differences in possession of the men before they were seduced by their vanity by building a tower to reach heaven, to approach the divine. But a language that unifies all people by eliminating the differences, a language that is not corrupted by the discrepancy makes everything intelligible and understandable, is a language you do not like the gods because it gives man the illusion of possession of a perfection can not belong to him. That is why God inspired man in front of the vanity of the completeness of its instrument of communication, has disrupted the uniformity of its language, it has corrupted the dispersing unit perfection in countless variations. In this way, however, the man returned to him his prerogatives, privileges inaccessible to the rest of the deity is the difference particularity, uniqueness, the uniqueness.
The teaching and learning a foreign language that aspires to reach the perfection of the native speakers are inspired by the vanity of the men of Babel that attract divine intervention designed to confuse their tongues, to differentiate them in their complexity. Those who cultivate the desire to adapt perfectly to the original model, to blend with the natives, can not rely on deceptive language, far from that with which the speaker has to deal daily foreign: the so-called standard language, so an artificial language fair pronounced by announcers television or in Hollywood movies. The experience with the reality language of a country, for example, Anglophone, immediately destroys the illusion of its existence. As soon as you are confronted with an Australian or an Indian, or even with someone in London or Dublin, we find that the language learned with so much waste of energy and possibly including, but is not spoken by native speakers: the pitch is and also many other items are. Obviously it is inaccessible to those after the divine intervention at Babel, the ability to smoothly adapt to the ways of talking about other people. It is a language standard is an artificial product that can only feed the vanity and the illusion of being able to rely on uniformity and completeness foreign to the human condition. So the question naturally arises as to why they commit so much energy in acquiring skills inaccessible, why you want to repeat the failure of the myth of Babel ignoring biblical teaching.
As in countless human affairs is also the intent to adapt as their perfect expression in a language standard to obtain approval to speakers of another language, is marked by contradictions and paradoxes. On the one hand it acts the natural tendency to simplify, to the shortcut, the make-up. The ambition of the intent in fact hides a deception and self-deception: the standard language is taught how to concentrate all their forces in search of a wallet under a lamppost although it is known to have lost along the dark street. Hurl themselves in the difficult business to learn the language perfectly standard only because it is accessible, clear and consistent, not because it is actually spoken. There is only so conforms to its rules, not the words and intonation of the speakers. And here is also manifested the intention paradoxical that you said only a foreigner is asked to comply strictly with a uniform, a native speaker can easily find the words and articulate the sounds that are proper. Only a stranger has the mammoth task of ensuring the certainty of being understood by others, to use a language of the same characteristics of what the men spoke before the Their idea of \u200b\u200bbuilding the Tower of Babel, only to him, therefore, is required to eliminate any possibility of misunderstanding. It is weird to do at least daily experience inability to communicate with our fellow neighbors and then claim the maximum intelligibility when speaking with a foreigner.
Learning a foreign language, if we are serious about pursuing the purpose of dialogue and exchange, requires more than courage to face the differences of the efforts of uniformity. Requires more than the ability to flex their own behavior and the ability to adapt to fixed models. The meetings and exchanges with foreigners require the bringing into play oneself, particularities of its filtering, which can only filter through the "imperfections" of its expression. The offer of its strangeness and difference is a terrific opportunity to deepen communication misunderstandings can be addressed only if they arise. The opportunity to clarify, to explain, to investigate what was believed of course, is the great advantage offered by the collision of imperfect understanding. Also eminently practical goals such as selling cheese or describe an innovative machine tool, I assume an exchange between partners who have no interest in hiding. For this reason it is not only permissible but even desirable for a Modena or Reggio Calabria or Ancona, speak English as it can and must speak a Modena a Reggio and Ancona. If the prosody of an Australian or an Indian identity is the track to meet and realize it is essential to interact with him properly, so can an Italian with confidence and courage to articulate sounds contaminated by the unequivocal language of its melody . Moreover unjust authority which could be considered a right that London or Dublin or speak Welsh in their own way and prevent this prerogative to a Modena or Reggio Calabria or Ancona?
one who is preparing to study a foreign language should not forget that the language, like all events human - and the Bible is right to remind us - is subject to deviations and metamorphoses: only God is immutable and languages, like all things human, are exposed to conditions that make them mutable over time and space. Their viability as an instrument for encounter and dialogue is indeed guaranteed by contamination from abnormal, by disagreements, from imperfections. The deviations from what authorities prescribe the rule, even the mistakes are more human than there is in it and it should be ensured that the language retains all his human powers. You can not always count on the God of the Bible that intervenes to restore to man his humanity every time he alienates.
0 comments:
Post a Comment