EOE revised

During a weekend spent lying around on the sofa attempting to stave off impending cold with the indomitable combination of tea-lemon-honey, I also tore through a large portion of our english-language books.  One of which happened to be Hillary Clinton’s Living History (I chose to bring her book over Bill’s for three simple reasons: 1. she’s running for office 2. it’s a better book 3. it’s paperback).  The re-read reminded me of several good points, but her admiration and praise for Madeleine Albright’s fluency in Czech during their trips together also convinced me that future US presidents really need to speak a foreign language.  And not the way Bush “speaks” Spanish, but fluency to discuss foreign affairs, make small take with spouses, and tell dirty jokes over cocktails.  That’s dirty jokes, not just dirty words.

Granted, one cannot deny that English is the unofficial international language.  I ran into three lost Oktoberfest revelers yesterday, none of whom spoke English, German, or Chinese as a native language, but given those choices all jumped on English.  And as much as I value language and recognize the monolingualism of many English speakers, I also truly believe that it’s a bit of a chicken-and-egg dilemma.  Every American expat and traveller with a modicum of fluency in a foreign language knows the frustration of making good faith efforts to communicate in the native language only to be repeatedly rebuffed with English responses.  True, a lot of people don’t try.  But isn’t it also true that a lot of people can but see no reason to try?  After all, an increasingly globalized community needs a common language.  It’s ridiculous to expect all 192 UN ambassadors to speak every language represented there.  I would even consider it unrealistic to expect fluency in the six official languages.  Just as it’s unrealistic and limiting to expect every business traveller to master the language of every country they visit.  The world needs a common language, and with regrets to the makers of Esperanto, English it is.  And if you are raised already speaking the need-to-know language, there is less of an incentive for bi- or multi-lingualism.  After all, for the Slovenian or Hungarian teenager linguistic ability directly affects future earning potential.  For the American teenager, not so much.  And let’s face it, monetary incentives are everything when it comes to motivation.

But I digress.  The point being that while it’s understandable that the leading presidential candidates are completely monolingual (sorry, Obama fans, we’re taking a realistic look at Clinton and Guiliani here.  Also, Indonesian?) it’s also regrettable.  And though official state business, G8 summits, and more will likely continue to favor English, the rest of the world will look favorably on a US president who can fluently and comfortably converse in another language.  And it should be a requirement for any Secretary of State candidates – presidents can cry health care and social security, but them not so much.

For politicos-in-training, I would like to suggest the following languages:

1. Spanish.  Not only is it the most widely spoken foreign language within US territory, it is also the official language of the majority of our neighbors.

2. Mandarin.  I may be biased, but it is the most widely spoken language in the world.  Not to mention the official language of the other world superpower and an ever-growing trading partner. 

3. French.  I personally don’t see a dominance of French over any other European language but it is a language of both historical and cultural relevance, and a dominate language of EU affairs.

4.  German.  Again, not just because of personal bias, but German is the second-most common language in the EU, after English.  Plus, nearly 50 million people in America are of German descent, not to mention the English language itself.  And in terms of financial incentives, Germany is third-largest economy in world and one of America’s biggest trading partners.

5.  Arabic or Russian should probably go here, but frankly, I can’t come up with any reason to justify them other than proliferation.  So I say work on the top four and once you master those, shift your focus to social security.