I'm multilingual (Dutch, English and basic German) and find myself to think about most things in English, express myself in English. But whenever I'm stressed out, not aware or angry to get back to Dutch again.
I find myself to forgetting Dutch more and more.

Same as for example a Russian manager in America starts to curse in Russian after receiving bad news, or just using Russian terms now and then.

The main problem many people (at least the Dutch) have is mixing their languages, trying to translate Dutch to English directly or vice versa. Often it results in bad English, which nobody understands.

For me I need to know when to switch. When i know i have to speak English its good, but when someone suddenly starts to talk English to me, it somewhat crumbles, having the Dutch mindset active.

I am Multi-ligual in speach but not written. Interestingly enough, this has presented a very interesting trigger in my mind.

My native language is english as I was born in the states. However, I also speak Russian, Spanish, French, a little German, a little Norweigen, and a little Cantonese.

I often find myself thinking in multiple languages through a single thought process. My mind seems to sort out the easiest way to say certain things and then converts them into one thought. So I may speak in one language but I am thinking in multiple languages. This becomes VERY apparent when I am drunk as I have a tendency of mixing all of the languages in speech as well as thought which makes for some very confused people around me.

Spanish is a second language to me. Sometimes when I leave a patient's room after having a long conversation in Spanish, I find myself accidentally writing my chart notes in Spanish.

My dad's first language is Hungarian, though he moved to the US when he was 9. He said that he still counts in Hungarian sometimes.

I would also like to mention that culture is a factor in language as well as the language itself. For instance, I was raised in the country and so we speak a different dialect than most people in the city. Trying to go from a country life to the city I had to acclimate to an almost completely new language.

Just asking the question; does anybody believe that artificial natural languages still have some merit, such as Esperanto or Volapuk? They were once conceived with the idea that they would contribute to universal brotherhood. Now one could say that english plays the role of a common language nowadays, but english is of course the language of one specific culture or community. The nice thing about artificial natural languages is that they don't bring social or cultural associations or "content" with them, thus avoiding a certain form of cultural imperialism. When I speak or write english I feel often the urge to be an american. I say "Hi buddy" or "How ye doin'?", like I drive along Route 66 or have dinner in a hamburger "joint", but of course that's not me. I feel it's unjust that nobody appreciates my dutch patois, the noble language of Vondel and Van Maerlant, while there's Rock and Roll around the world. C'mon baby, let's roll, this fella kinda speaks english ;-)

P.S. That's cool.

Oddly enough, I think the idea of a common language is a poor idea. The only reason that I say this is because the purpose of language is to communicate ideas. If we remove the cultural connection from the language, we lose an aspect of communication. This makes the language less adequate and thus creates a less realistic communication tool.

I also do not believe that any one language should take over, especially not english. It is truye that I am a native english speaker and an American but there ideas which relate to me in Russian which the average American could never understand. Same with most languages. I think that it is important for people to learn as many ways as they can, how to relate information to the people of the world. If you speak one language and everyone around you speaks another, it is your responsibility to learn the language of those around you. I have never met a man, woman, or child who was opposed to teaching you their language and culture as it is usually a point of pride for them.

Just wanting to repeat and emphasize again that cultural imperialism, connected with enforcing a foreign language, is very real. Some may have heard about the belgian situation, where five million people speak dutch and about the same amount speaks french. Only the momentary perception of common interests holds us together as a nation, political tensions almost rising to the point of civil war here. Now this situation is not that of let's say hundred years ago, when my people (the dutch-speaking flemish) were simply dominated by french language and culture, when the upper-class in Flanders spoke french, read french, thought french... Now we have just found some space to be ourselves in our own country or there's another wave of cultural agression, alienating us from ourselves, cutting us from our roots, and that's the States and what they represent. Yes, they bring cultural values but do they have any respect for ours, do they come to learn or to teach? Icon, you say that if you speak one language and everyone around you speaks another, it is your responsibility to learn the language of those around you. For centuries the opposite was done here, other nations imposing their language and their culture on ours, humiliating it, destroying it, and this is still happening worldwide today. Small cultures (often from poor countries) are being crushed by others that are somehow more powerful, economically, military, culturally, that force them to take over their foreign language, without a sherd of respect for the language and culture of their subjects. One must speak different languages, and explore the cultural elements in them, but you must be able to do that by your own free will. First of all you must have the freedom to speak your own language, and live your own cultural values. That seems to be obvious, but it is far from that in many places around the globe. It might be good for some americans to realize that.

There was a playwright, pretty modern too, who was a native English speaker but preferred to write in French. He said that writing in a second language helped him to avoid unnecessary literary flourishes, or something like that.

Personally, I can't imagine that knowing more than one language would be harmful. Knowledge is knowledge.

"Personally, I can't imagine that knowing more than one language would be harmful. Knowledge is knowledge."


German culture and language (Kultur und Geist) are immensely rich and have expanded my worldview considerably. But the nazi's shot my grandfather and I cannot think that is just irrelevant. A bulgarian friend told me that when she was young she had to learn russian at school, whether she liked it or not (english being of course out of the question). She still speaks russian perfectly today. learning it has expanded her horizon considerably, while at the same time enriching her general frame of mind. Yet she is not thankful. The chinese institutes in the Himalaya are doing a lot of good work, bringing the sherpa's over there the rich tradition of chinese language and culture. Yet it seems that their generous efforts are not always appreciated. But they go on in in the name of civilization. After all the expansion of the knowledge of languages is the expansion of knowledge itself, and knowledge will make us free.


Hm, reading this over I wonder if I was clear here (I rarely am). I only wanted to express and consider the following supposition. Languages can be an instrument of oppression, they can even be its most visible manifestation or symbol. The language of the oppressor is always an oppressing language. If you wanted a job in my country a century ago, you better forgot your native dutch and were fluent in french; if you were not well versed in french you simply were not noticed at all. You were considered a peasant if you spoke your own language in "good" company, even if you spoke it very well (which was difficult to do, only a few being eccentric enough to study it). It was absolutely forbidden for highschool students to speak dutch on the recreation floor. A subtle system of treason was in use here: those who were denounced for speaking dutch had to denounce others in order to be forgiven. At first sight it may seem that this has nothing to do with the inner value of each language as a language, but I want to suggest that there is no language that is really innocent or "neutral". A language can be abused in many ways and is always associated with those who speak it, not only with their cultural values, but also with their schemes and (political) intentions. So language and freedom have an at least ambivalent relationship, and the analysis may not be wholly positive. One more point: can you understand my feelings when I'm "forced" to speak another language than my own, even for practical reasons like in this forum? Sorry for this digression. Back to the question.