If We Only Spoke Two Languages Summary
Analysis of If Only We All Spoke Two Languages
If We Only Spoke Two Languages by Ariel Dorfman was published June 24, 1998. Dorfman is an editorial from the New York Times as well as an American novelist, playwright, essayist, academic, and human rights activist. I believe she is qualified for this discussion because she has credible experience as stated in the fifth paragraph that she has endured both languages Spanish and English. Dorfman makes an argument for the bilingual method of teaching young people English when she came to the states 18 years ago, in hopes that America will become multilingual one day. As opposed to the immersion method which would give them an intense year of English, then put them in regular classrooms.
The bilingual method doesn’t isolate children in their original language meaning denying them from experiencing other languages, making them feel postponed. It does the contrary. The author uses to appeal to tradition by keeping the child’s original language alive to “build bridges to English” whereas the immersion method cuts the child’s connections with their past culture. Dorfman also uses appeal to patriotism because we are being introduced to other languages and other cultures while in the comfort of our home. …show more content…
Dorfman suffered the immersion method in 1945, according to the paragraph six when her family moved from Argentina, and when she caught pneumonia. She was contained in a hospital where they only communicated in English. Our bias is that we think children should learn their native language as they progress in life, and learn other languages as they wish. Our bias doesn’t affect how we react to the author's argument because Dorfman says that she “suffered from the immersion
If We Only Spoke Two Languages by Ariel Dorfman was published June 24, 1998. Dorfman is an editorial from the New York Times as well as an American novelist, playwright, essayist, academic, and human rights activist. I believe she is qualified for this discussion because she has credible experience as stated in the fifth paragraph that she has endured both languages Spanish and English. Dorfman makes an argument for the bilingual method of teaching young people English when she came to the states 18 years ago, in hopes that America will become multilingual one day. As opposed to the immersion method which would give them an intense year of English, then put them in regular classrooms.
The bilingual method doesn’t isolate children in their original language meaning denying them from experiencing other languages, making them feel postponed. It does the contrary. The author uses to appeal to tradition by keeping the child’s original language alive to “build bridges to English” whereas the immersion method cuts the child’s connections with their past culture. Dorfman also uses appeal to patriotism because we are being introduced to other languages and other cultures while in the comfort of our home. …show more content…
Dorfman suffered the immersion method in 1945, according to the paragraph six when her family moved from Argentina, and when she caught pneumonia. She was contained in a hospital where they only communicated in English. Our bias is that we think children should learn their native language as they progress in life, and learn other languages as they wish. Our bias doesn’t affect how we react to the author's argument because Dorfman says that she “suffered from the immersion