the DARK IDEOLOGY secretly lurking in language YouTube
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 дек 2024
- Flags and "native" speakers. Is that really how we want to talk about things?
patreon: www.patreon.com/languagejones
The discovery of France: amzn.to/3XDlq8S
Edited with Gling AI: bit.ly/46bGeYv
#languagelearning #polyglot #language #languagenerd
One thing I will reproach you for is your use of Fraktur blackletter script in the still image for this video to represent “dark” or “fascist“. Blackletter script was used in Europe way before the second world war and has a variety of different forms. It was the script used for science and literature in many Germanic and Nordic countries up until the mid 20th century. Your use of it in this context is akin to using a flag in the manner against which you are advocating.
@@passatboi I was wondering if anybody would catch that. It’s not exactly the same script, but paradoxically it is evocative of national socialism, for Americans, at least, despite having been actually done away by Hitler. Of course, it was largely perceived as Germanic, as opposed to having the Jewish influence ascribed (incorrectly) to Antiqua. All of those associations, though, are 20th century developments. Unfortunately, especially with thumbnails, I always have to make a choice about what will get people’s interest. I actually resisted the urge to have an explanatory footnote, but perhaps I should put one in my description after all! For anyone else reading this and curious to know more, here’s a good starting point:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antiqua%E2%80%93Fraktur_dispute?wprov=sfti1
@@languagejones Well - at least there were no long s or ligature errors in the text 😂
For me the red, black, and white colour scheme was bigger signal.
It's also worth pointing out that despite their association with Fraktur today, the NSDAP took a stance against Fraktur (albeit not until late in their rule), which was associated with the Monarchist right like the DNVP.
Pretty sure both were described by ultranationalists as "Jewish" or whatever at some point.
It goes even further than that. The Nazis HATED blackletter / gothic script / Fraktur. Here's what had to say about it, and I quote: "It is wrong to regard or describe the so-called Gothic script as a German script. In reality, the so-called Gothic script consists of Schwabach Jewish letters." ("Die ſogenannte gotiſche Schrift als eine deutſche Schrift anzuſehen oder zu bezeichnen iſt falſch. In Wirklichkeit beſteht die ſogenannte gotiſche Schrift aus Schwabacher Judenlettern."; Schwabacher is a type of blackletter script).
Hitler himself said the following about blackletter, which I will not translate but if you're interested you can do so yourself: "Eure vermeintliche gotiſche Verinnerlichung paſſt ſchlecht in das Zeitalter von Stahl und Eiſen, Glas und Beton, von Frauenſchönheit und Männerkraft, von hochgehobenem Haupt und trotzigem Sinn … Unſere Sprache wird in hundert Jahren die europäiſche Sprache ſein. Die Länder des Oſtens, des Nordens wie des Weſtens werden, um ſich mit uns verſtändigen zu können, unſere Sprache lernen. Die Vorausſetzung dafür: An die Stelle der gotiſch genannten Schrift tritt die Schrift, welche wir bisher die lateiniſche nannten."
The Spain flag for Duolingo Spanish is very misleading given that the Spanish taught on that app is clearly Latin American in both pronunciation and grammar (e.g. no vosotros verb forms).
I heard of a conspiracy theory that the reason American High School Spanish has vosotros is because the government of Spain pays to promote their flavor of Spanish.
@@timmyleanthe vast majority of spanish classes in american high school don’t teach vosotros, and the ones who do probably do it on an ‘in case you’re in spain and ya need it’ basis. almost all american spanish classes are taught by latin american native spanish speaking teachers. neither my small louisiana high school nor my fancy communication-intensive lsu spanish classes have even acknowledged the form.
edit: this includes my introductory spanish professor, a u.s. american non-native speaker who was likely educated the same way i was
My introduction to full immersion Spanish was at UC Berkeley, circa 1970 when they were on the quarter system. This effectively meant eleven weeks, no english two hour class plus labs, five days a week for a year, not including the summer and brief breaks. Each class was taught by a TA. The first guy was American x cia married to a Nicaraguan woman, and so spoke with the Nicaraguan accent. The second guy was Greek, no idea what his accent was. And the third was a woman who was Castilian so we suddenly got thetas all over the place. Today, if i'm speaking Spanish, it's hilarious.
My experience is quite different from what you all are saying. My high school Spanish teacher - who was from *_Spain_* - told us we didn't need to learn the vosotros forms because "nobody uses them, and you won't need them for anything". Then years later, when I went to Nicaragua, the people there definitely *_did_* use them, and my already very rusty Spanish was at an additional disadvantage because I didn't know those forms. So my impression has always been the opposite: that Spain-Spanish doesn't use vosotros, and Latin American (or at least Nicaraguan) Spanish, does. These things never turn out to be as clear cut as we would like them to be!
Spanish is from Spain. You cannot change that heritage. I say this WITH Mexican family. Just because they speak it differently slightly doesn't make it a different language.
For me "native speaker" is clearly related to the way you learned the language. If you learned it as a child in a intuitive way through your surroundings, you are native. You don't need to be from any particular ethnisity and you can have multiple native languages with varying levels of fluency
I sense a manifactured outrage
But then the question is when is the cutoff? Is someone who immigrates to the US when they're 5 and learns English then a native speaker? What if they're 10? What if they don't move until they're 15, but they learned English in by watching American TV and have been on the English side of the internet since they were very young and can speak fluently?
@@vi.vi.vi.vi.vi.d if the Immigrant in question learned the language of the place they originated from before learning English, then that language would be their native language. We don’t have to be to precise when the exact cutoff point is. Honestly someone who learned English really young might as well say their a native speaker even if they spoke some other language the first few years of their life. This is actually something we can afford to be just correct enough.
as a serb myself i always felt quite uncomfortable when languages were represented by country flags but I couldn't really coherently voice why, so this video literally felt like it came from my subconsciousness, thank you language jones for refreshing takes
And now tell me why?
@@SchmulKrieger Ain't nothing but a heart ache
Serbian, Croatian and even Slovenian are pretty much intelligible to one another and so I think they often get grouped together.
If you want an opposite example you have Norsk and Danish which are super intelligible but they have such a cultural feud (a greatly memed one at that) that it's considered offensive to call a Danish sounding Norsk and vice versa. So they are usually labeled as separate languages.
I'm from Vienna and the flag for German is just the German flag. But Austrians love Germany so nobody considers it weird. We even mostly watch German tv channels, the culture is quite homogenized.
So it's really a case by case thing.
It also makes me uneasy
@@BroockleNot all Austrians love Germans and many places also just use the Austrian flag to symbolise the German language. I don't recommend making such sweeping generalisations, even if it's not that serious.
“Fluent” is a weird term as well. I feel like it’s often more of an ego term than anything else. People brag about being “fluent,” but in practice this can mean anything from “able to work as a simultaneous translator at the UN” to “able to have simple back-and-forth conversation with my aging immigrant father but get baffled beyond belief when visiting his birth country.” Fluency strikes me as a term akin to something like “I can draw,” where there is no scientific definition and a lot of context and observation is needed to judge.
Yes, there's a spectrum to fluency. That's not a problem. That's great because people like to gate keep and it scares other people with lower levels of fluency from continuing. In linguistics we call it varationd of linguistic fluency competency.
Ive mostly heard "fluent" being used in terms of speaking or writing in "proper" English, so basically White middle class sort of English (or UK English for the most part in EFL aka ESL classes) and not regional dialects... I notice the same with German, where regional dialects in the former East are looked down upon by people in the South and West, and where the Hochdeutsch taught in the schools is seen as the proper version. There isnt the same racialized tint like with ebonics, but certian dialects are seen as lower class.
Is fluency really this vague? I wouldn't consider the latter example fluent at all, but those are my personal standards.
To me, and I'm not alone, "fluency" means what it says: "Flowing". Which simply means that you've moved on from constructing a sentence in your mind while or before speaking to instead just.. let the words come out. Flow, as it were. No thinking involved, the speech has moved to autonomous mode.
However: This does not have much to do with what I (and others) call "proficiency", the latter means great vocabulary, good automatic understanding of nuances, no issues with any parts of the grammar (not that it is necessary to *know* grammar, most native speakers don't, after all.. they just do it (mostly) right, automatically. "mostly" in parentheses due to e.g. the more than 50% of native English speakers who can't get possessive "its" right)
However, I've seen many well-known language people (here on RUclips) use "fluency" as how I describe "proficiency" above. Again, I disagree with that - "fluency" simply means being able to speak (to speak what you know) without consciously having to think about it. A person with a 3000 word vocabulary can be fluent.
I’m a professional Swahili interpreter. I learned the language as an adult . Sometimes my organization asks for a “native“ to translate a certain document, even though I am the best translator. Thank you for bringing up the subject because it needs to be talked about more.
as a Canadian i never understood language flags because we have many languages two of which are official and when we pick English the flag us either the Stars and Stripes or the Union Jack, or in the post Brexit EU, Ireland; which is weird on a whole other level
Then there’s Quebec French, New Brunswick French, and other French pockets
Last but not least the tapestry of indigenous languages not even recognised
Maybe they ought to use the flag of England for the English language.
Fun fact about the USA: We have more Spanish speakers than the entire population of Spain.
The video game _Celeste_ uses the Canadian flag for English! (But not French 😂)
@@joe_z oh my god! I came here to mention Celeste using the Canadian flag for English but it never clicked that the French flag should also be that lol
The canadian flags and associations with language and culture etc. is a very political topic and the conflict is fought exactly the way he explains in the video. After all, Quebec's flag was clandestinely installed illegally, to begin with, as a form of protest. But also to directly associate the language, culture and flag as the same thing... and for the creators of the flag to dictate what those are.
@@danrobrish3664no. Use the flag of Missouri.
The "native speaker" thing is a problem in other industries too. I teach English in Asia, and I can't tell you the number of times I've seen individuals who are highly skilled and well qualified teachers and highly proficient users of English, but who happen to not come from a "native speaker country" lose out of job opportunities to someone from the Big Five who barely understands the basic linguistic details of their L1. Or worse, I've seen those same highly skilled "non-native" teachers get hired and massively underpaid and overworked because they're now technically working illegally and the employers have them over a barrel. Thankfully the skin colour bias is changing, finally, and some nations outside the Big Five are being added to the "native countries" list, but that doesn't really change anything for the true L2 speakers.
That doesn't even touch on the bias against actual native speakers who don't have the right native speaker "look," like a native english speaker with east asian genetics. It's an odd business, when you can find yourself discriminated against for not standing out from the crowd.
That's really sad.
This this this.
Who are the five? US, UK, Canada, Australia and.... Ireland or NZ?
That's so terrible and completely wrong. So few native English speakers understand the grammar and mechanics of English because it's super complicated. Being able to speak English doesn't make you a good language teacher either. I would rather have a teacher who understands the language than someone who happened to be born in a particular place or whose parents spoke a particular language.
Meanwhile the Language Simp is never using the expected flags to symbolize the language he's talking about. While being a joke it is an unironically a good practice
And calls English American every single time.
I heard he does that
@@LanguageSimp omg you've seen the language simp's stuff as well? I'm glad he's starting to get some traction
@@RhapsodyinLingo I've been a Language Jones fan far longer than you've been alive, buddy
@@LanguageSimp I think he meant LanguageSimp.
I want to add: what about indigenous languages? Many have been oppressed and before colonisation may not have had nation states the way we think today. For example, representing Te Reo Māori with the New Zealand flag is uncomfortable given what our nation has done to Māori people and language. But also using the Tino Rangatiratanga flag doesn’t work either because that’s a specific political movement.
The Maori aren't indigenous to new Zealand. They killed off the original people in NZ. the Notre dame in France is older than the Maori in NZ. grow up. 😊
Indigenous is a very overused word because what is being considered an anticolonial resistance in post-colonial countries is easily translated in xenophobe tendencies in Colonialist countries. For example, you can see the raise of far right in UK stating that they are indigenous to the land and its the immigrants who are now destroying their culture. I would personally always use the word local. As it makes sense. No one is indigenous and human migrations or conquests didn't start in the 15th century either.
@ I guess so but what word would you use to describe indigenous peoples instead?
I learn different Indian languages, the flag was already meaningless because India has so many different languages
YESS thankyou i absolutely hate this especially due to being an indian. I've even seen tamizh being represented with sri lankan flag despite yk the majority of tamizh speakers being from tamizh nadu! and not to mention how it absolutely feeds into the wrong hypernational hindi crowd. the problem could be somewhat alleviated if each state had their own flags but that goes out the window considering there are languages that don't have their own states either(like tulu!)
Its not meaningless, it tells you that this language that you are learning is spoken in India, not that it is the ONLY language of India
@@ElMona
But it still doesn’t tell you which language it is, so it might as well be meaningless.
@@ElMonaEnglish is one of those languages isn't it?
because the nationhood of India was not created around language but around religion
In South Africa, we refer to it as your "home language". "Native language" and "mother tongue" are rarely used. That introduces a new problem, since it implies that it is the language in which you are most fluent, when almost everyone has formal education in English.
I didn't know that. This makes me like Language Jones recommendation to take the time to explain our relation to the language even. I can't think of a term like "native language" or "home language" that doesn't create similar problems.
In French, it's langue maternelle, literally mother tongue.
Home language is quite a good term though it poses the next question, what if you have multiple languages spoken in your home by different family members or multilingual family members in different situations?
But I still think speaking of home language(s) and maybe school/education language(s) would be a better distinction than native and/or first/second/third language
My wife teaches English "Home Language" in a South African private school. You can also learn a language at "First Additional Language" level.
The assumption is that if a student takes English Home Language he or she has skills in that language comparable to those of mother-tongue speakers. It is also assumed that students are familiar with elements of English culture which most mother-tongue speakers would be familiar with, e.g. nursery rhymes, songs, legends and folk tales. This presents a problem in the South African context, as you often fine that couples from different language background raise their children as English, and speak English at home. The problem is that the language is only spoken at a conversational level.
I can completely identify with the problem of using flags to denote languages. I've seen the new South African flag used online to represent Afrikaans, when we have 12 official languages. Also, this smells like Afrikaner nationalism and the former government policy of teaching Black students in Afrikaans (which resulted in the Soweto riots in 1976, but this a seperate issue.)
As another South African, I always interpreted “native language” and “home language” in different ways. Your native language is the language(s) you started speaking as a child without formally learning it, and your home language(s) is the language you speak at home with your family. The one stays the same all your life, but the other can change.
This "native speaker" thing... rant incoming 😅 : I'm Swiss - from the "German part". Linguists argue if Swissgerman is a language or a dialect. In my opinion it is a language (especially since I had to transcribe a 4h Interview in Swissgerman to German for uni). We learn German in kindergarden and are forced to use it in school. Everything we write (except chatting with friends) has to be in German. However, I'd never think in German and sometimes I use words or syntax that isn't actually German. But if I use apps (HelloTalk etc.) I have to choose "native German" and feel like a fraud. I'm a "native German" but at the same time I'm absolutely not, depending on the context.
as someone from germany but near Konstanz my slang is very similar to swissgerman, although not the same of course, and while i don't really feel like a fraud, it is funny to see how much germans from different regions struggle to understand me when i either write or talk this slang german to them. (er ist die treppe hinunter gefallen vs. der isch d'stäge nah keit). if it is different to a point where "native speakers" of the language, like germans from northern regions like hamburg for example, cannot understand you whatsoever you could probably classify it as a language and not a slang. in my case Alemannisch is even its own language on wikipedia. so i would argue you are right. swiss german is it's own language too and i always saw it as such personally.
I have a pet theory that the difference between language and dialect is whatever the force of nation-states wills it to be
for me it is a dialect but yeah i can relate the transcription thing... If it was an own language, i guess i'd have issues with standard german but i absolutely don't. i see a lot of swiss guys do indeed have very big issues especially with spoken standard german. btw i'm from liechtenstein, maybe my heart is born too close to austria so i am very considerate about using my language and always compare the dialect to standard german to make sure i am not using weird swiss terms german customers or austrian family don't understand like for example "das system verhebt"
I'm 100% with you (also Swiss german). Luckily I'm old enough, that I could speak Swiss German in all school subject except for German, French or English. The standard German requirement for all subjects and all stages came a few years later. My German is decent, but with a hefty accent (which I also cultivate a bit ;-)). But standard German feels foreign. It feels weird to click the flag of the "big canton" to select a language. But hey, it could be worse, if we would have to select the Habsburg flag instead 😂
@@TimeConvolutionHas some truth, but I think there are also some linguistic factors. I grew up on the border of highest alemanic and high alemanic dialects. The grammar I use when speaking is highest alemanic, pronounciation is a mixture of highest and high alemanic and the vocabulary is all over the place with a lot of french influences, germanisms and anglicisms. I would say my native language is Alemanic. But this option is rarely present.
The reality is that the map of modern-day Europe is dominated by nation states, and language is something that is deeply tied to national identity for most nation states. Language being tied to flags is a fact of the modern world, just like nationalism is a fact of modern-day Europe. It's not good or bad, it's just how Europe generally works.
Related: I wish Duolingo (only bc it's the one I use most) would let me explore regional Spanishes.
They do.
The thing is that they don't tell you what regional spanish you are learning.😆
I'm a native Spanish speaker.
I think they just took the more "neutral spanish" from all the Spanish speaking countries and choose the more recognised ones.
@@LuDa-lf1xd”Midatlantic Spanish”
i second this but with japanese even though its extremely unlikely
I want to learn scottish english 😢
It's the same for Norwegian. I learned it on babble before I went to Bergen and realized, that Norwegian is not a homogeneous language throughout the country. I had to relearn a lot, even the grammar is a bit different. These apps give you Oslo Norwegian and that's it. For everything else you would need to speak the language and search inside Norway to get some learning material
Fun small anecdote about flags and nationality. Latin is very near and dear to my heart as a philologist, having studied it since I was 12 and been involved in spoken Latin much of my early adult life. I wanted to get a shirt to represent that and had a choice between an SPQR shirt and one with the Vatican flag. I went with the Vatican flag because I use ecclesiastical pronunciation when speaking Latin.
When moving back to Northern Ireland I was moving into an AirBnB, and forgot that the shirt I'd put on back in England before getting on the plane, was that Vatican flag shirt...and my host lived in a Protestant neighbourhood. Got a couple of weird looks for that one as I walked in with my bags
😂
As a Catholic American living next to a Protestant church who has (playfully, but earnestly because I want to rep my faith) considered buying a Vatican flag for my flagpole (but I actually don't because I wouldn't want to actually offend/alienate them; they are lovely people for the most part), this is especially hilarious to me. I hope they ultimately took it in good fun, as much as possible.
I wouldn't think that most people even know what the Vatican flag looks like. I know I wouldn't recognize it if I saw it.
People might actually recognize what it is in Belfast (unlike most places outside Italy). Maybe.
But it isn't one of the most politicized symbols of the Troubles. And thankfully, things are much quieter than they used to be with the conflict.
Also, it's worth saying ... People in Belfast have a way of just staring down anyone looking even slightly unfamiliar or out-of-place, regardless.
@@BlissfulDee You'd probably recognise the papal tiara and keys... even if you don't know the flag is vertical yellow and white!
A friend of mine who studied at Queen's University Belfast was fond of telling the (no doubt apocryphal) story of the somewhat unworldly German philologist and Celtic expert who arrived to take up a senior teaching position there (in the 1950s?), confident that he would be able to purchase everything he required in the shops of that city using the Irish language.
"Peasants into Frenchmen" is another wonderful book on basically the same topic
@@bradyisbeast12 I haven’t read it! I’m unreasonably excited about this
I can't put into words the relief I felt when I saw you brought up this topics. I am Catalan and not only do I have to worry about the active and open attempts of cultural genocide in the country I was born but now also all these "lang youtubers" who are devoid of any deep knowledge and appreciation for languages. (Not the topic here, but how do these guys manage to learn 29 languages and all of them happen to be colonialist-state languages. Their concept of languages are just medals. They don't speak languages, they consume them. The whole thing itself writes poems about their unlimited white-ass privilege. They really make you think if "globalization", the way we understand it, is neo-colonization.)
Not big on flags either. Here's some context though.The Catalan flag is way older than the Spanish flag (which is famously based on the Catalan one). Don't really care. But you should feel the irony in having Amazon and most other companies putting a Spanish flag (which is a remix of ours) to refer to the colonialist language that has been imposed to us catalans; with the added cherry on top: the website is never available in Catalan. But check this out: since now they are woke, you have a different translation for Latin-American Spanish (because we won't put the speakers through the trauma of reading a different dialect). Still no money to translate into Catalan though (with 10 million speakers, same as European Portuguese).
I'm tired of writing complaints to these companies, just getting an automated reply. Duolingo is, in my opinion, the biggest perpetrator of these lang-youtuber-esque train of thought. At least the one with the most influence. You can learn Klingon now! (and 3 more invented "languages"). But you can't learn Catalan, Basque or Galician unless you *drumroll* ... already speak Spanish. These languages were considered to be so useless(†) that nobody outside Spain could bother to learn them, so they are available only taught in Spanish. With this kind of policy, who wouldn't expect these brainless youtubers to come out (this was 6 or 7 years ago; just checked and it's _still_ the same).
*Globalization without diversity is just colonization.*
(†) You should make a video talking about the ill-formed concept of the _uselessness of a language_ that every time it is used to devalue minority/minoritized languages and promote the colonialist ones.
And how is Castilian pride less dignified than Catalan pride? The terms you reason in could make us condemn all of culture as colonialist.
"globalization without diversity is just colonization" ✨✨✨🔥🔥🔥
off topic, but last time i looked they were having problems with the klingon because the algorithm didn't know how to deal with a comma as a letter
"They don't speak languages, they consume them." That's chillingly accurate.
I have a Welsh friend who wrote a protest song 'Wales is not a business plan' with the lyric: 'What use are our vowels to capitalism?' I love it and think of it often
I’ve been thinking about the native speaker thing a lot. I grew up in belgium in a fully dutch-speaking family but consumed so much english-language media as a child that I basically spoke perfect english when I was 12. I think in a mixture of both, often dependent on the context (e.g. when I am with other english speakers, my thoughts are also all in english, but when I am alone, my internal monologue is about 60% english, 40% dutch). people in the uk also consistently identify me as a native speaker. I’m not really sure what that makes me
You managed to completely avoid the most hilarious flag as language: it's so common you completely overlook it, but it's everywhere. Is English a union jack, a stars and stripes, maybe a red maple leaf or some variant of a southern cross flag. It's so common to see a website which can represent a localization choice with one or many of these variants for English. I've even seen cross of st george on occasion..
I mean if you're going to use a flag, you might as well use the flag associated with its name.... So the German flag for Dutch.
@@dog-ez2nuwhat?
Isn’t American English a dialect since it was an English colony? It’s like the local or invader debate
@@Whiskers4169 There's a lot debate to have over THAT: is the colony language that preserved elements of 18th Century rural/lower-class England better than modern England English's most-known "British accent", "just" a dialect, or the original?
(Of note: the same phenomenon happened with Quebec as a French colony spot: the joual and patois we've got smattered around here? They're preserving nearly-lost rural french dialects-- Abitibi's joual dialect is translating nearly 1:1 to a very thick rural (provencal, I think? can't recall the village's name augh) french dialect that modern French speakers can't really parse as French, meanwhile my joual is mutually understandable with that village's dying dialect.
In both cases, the "colony" dialects are usually born from rural/lower-classes dialects, while what we perceive as the "modern French/English"... That's a linguistic shift toward the higher-class dialects spoken in the big cities, IIRC.
Basically the colony versions are just people who collectively went "ah fuckit I'm too broke to GAF about sounding like a posh from the old world and this works fine".)
@@dog-ez2nuplease check what dutch (Nederlands) and German (Deutsch) Mean.
As someone who has been learning Spanish for years, the use of 🇪🇸 confuses me when using some tools to learn, because I’m trying to learn Latin American Spanish. Then I have to do more research to see if they are of the “vosotros” crowd. 😂
As far as the term “native speaker,” it’s just simpler to use that term, instead of saying “a person who started learning as a child and has a pretty good handle on the language.” Where I have the issue is when some of these tools claim to help you “speak like a native,” which is something that 99% of people will never achieve, and it doesn’t matter in the grand scheme of things. The goal should be to speak to be understood, period.
I use the Spanish flag for that exact reason, I am learning and speak the vosotros form lol.
Foreign-language instruction in the US had been Eurocentric for over a century. I mean, Latin was in the standard curriculum in the US until the... 1980s(?).
I'd learn real Spanish first, then learn the variations in Latin American Spanish - since I've been told by Colombians, Cubans, and Mexicans about the differences in vocabulary and meaning, etc., between those.
@@DanSmith-j8y the fact that you’re saying “real” Spanish seems like the point of the video was missed. Does one need to learn British English before they speak to an American, Australian, or Indian? There will be variations in any language.
@@foodforinsomnia7026 Say "original" then if it bothers you. It's not equivalent to learning American English, Australia, etc., or British, because we're not talking about differences in slang, in pronunciation, etc. I thought I was pretty clear that it's about differences in vocabulary of ordinary words, not slang, and not about pronunciation, between places like Colombia, Mexico, Cuba - so, better to learn the Spanish of Spain, _then_ learn regional variations. I thought that was pretty clear, but I guess not.
On the topic of "learning from native speakers" - I once had a language exchange partner whose goal was to learn Indian English. He lived in India, and American English (my native dialect) was not useful to him. I helped him through his (Indian) English courses, and it was a really interesting experience, especially whenever his textbooks disagreed with me.
Is Indian English some people's first language in India? (I almost said native language there...)
I still have trouble separating the name "Indian" from a people that we now designate as "Native American".
@@Cuinn837How, paleface!
@@paulwalther5237 yes, although it's rare. A friend of mine told me that he's more proficient in English than in Hindi
@@Cuinn837 Many Native Americans call themselves Indian and have no problem with that.
As a Brazilian I'm all in favor of keeping using flags because they use the Brazilian flag and that makes the Portuguese angry and the Portuguese MUST be angry. Keep the good job, guys!
Are you stereotyping with that font you’ve used? It’s still used in German-speaking countries today…
of course, he's jewish you know
Thank you. It makes sense of China talking about Chinese rather than Mandarin and Cantonese. It's been bugging me as to why something that I'd always understood as the ignorant thing to say is now encouraged.
Do you really think Mandarin and Cantonese are the only Chinese languages?
@@DaveHuxtableLanguages I would assume the OP doesn't, but it does bring up a point that the CCP actively suppresses knowledge of the other languages spoken in the region. There are a lot of them, but usually usually only Mandarin, the one they choose as their "official" language is encouraged to be learned by foreigners.
I wish that it was easier to find out more Chinese languages exist, because I don’t know any names of the languages besides those two, which are the most commonly spoken language in the world and the language you would most likely actually encounter as “Chinese” amongst diaspora people.
@@darkstarr984 Google?
@@darkstarr984 There's stuff about them on places like Wikipedia, but most are local languages that aren't widely documented.
I used to teach middle school in NM, and boy did attempts to impose "native speaker" as a categorization real fail there. The public school system classified any kid who reported speaking a language other than English at home as ESL, even if they had been speaking english their whole life (alongside spanish). Sure most of them did have language proficiency issues, but that was more a systemic failure of the education system to keep everyone on grade level than being 'non-native.' I'm sure you'd have a "fun" time looking into the history of language ed in NM.
For those wondering, "NM" here means "New Mexico", a state in the USA with a large number of Spanish speakers.
Yes, this. As a (former) MLL teacher, I know for certain that many, many "native" English-speaking students would not test out of the program were they required to do so. I still have MLL students in my world language classes who speak English as well or better than their "native" peers but still haven't tested out. Something is a bit awry, and most of it has to do with structural prejudice and bureaucracy. For what it's worth: it's not just NM.
Classifying kids who didn't speak English at home as potentially ESL makes sense, but yeah obviously you'd want to check the levels of the kid before making that designation.
@@CalCapone3 Note that speaking a language other than English at home doesn't prevent speaking English at home as well.
Oh goddd this reminds me of how I got classified as an ESL student (despite only speaking English) for about 4-5 years, because my dad speaks Mandinka, alongside English and other languages (he's from Sierra Leone), but I don't even speak Mandinka (only know a few words and stuff). I'm in Texas tho, so my case has nothing to do with NM's education system.
I agree what you rea syaing in spirit, but the word "native speaker" is a really useful term that quickly and clearly communicates the idea of "someone who grew up speaking this langague as their primary language, and has a strong intuitive understanding of that language". Most people either clearly fit or clearly do not fit this idea. Even if their are a lot of people who blur the lines.
I don’t think anyone is disagreeing with what you say here exactly. But as you acknowledge, although ‘most’ people fit, ‘a lot’ do not. So… it’s not actually a great descriptor and maybe we could do better?
@@ghotay3 but could we really?
"Everyone supports candidate X", as I saw in a news report not long ago..., "except minorities, women, hispanics, and young people."
This quote clearly communicates the intended message: that "everyone who matters" means old white men. "Native Speaker" is used to communicate the exact same concept, often in exactly the same way.
One very clear example is using the flag of South Africa to represent Afrikaans. "Most people" in South Africa speak Zulu or Xhosa. Only about 13% of the population speaks Afrikaans. But it's the old white men who carry the flag.
It only looks like "most people fit" if you're looking at a few very specific parts of the world.
@@andyarken7906 Guess you have a limited imagination… /shrug
Just returned from a trip down the Danube (sorta) visiting Prague, Linz, Vienna and Budapest, where the impact of what you’re talking about couldn’t be more relevant. Pretty much every tour involved some discussion of the (bad) impact of the differences between language communities and nation states. As an American I’d never learned much about it - very eye-opening. I think you’re spot on with this one. Also, as a UX professional, I think icons like flags generally suck in terms of usability. Think about how often you need the tool tip to figure out what the icons mean - that’s why we have alphabets in the first place.
I think if you go on a witchhunt - you're probably going to find witches.
I did write an even longer post but I always wonder if there is any value in it.
Flags are visual shorthand. They're useful. If you don't have a good flag - don't use one. But for some languages it's easy because the language is named after the country or the people and huge % of the speakers are there. And it's just obtuse to pretend they're not related.
Native speakers know things they don't even know they know. A book isn't the language. A dictionary isn't the language. The spoken language precedes and supersedes it. It's a reaction to a time where people were told they were 'wrong' in the way they spoke because it didn't match some old textbook someone decided to write. And that's just in the same language!
"you can't use a double negative"
"what about quadruple negatives?"
*head explodes*
Part of growing up was realising the neat little borders on the map were actually a lot less neat in real life. Then growing up a bit more is realising we still use terms even if they're fuzzier than we thought they were because it still communicates what we want to say. And at the end of the day... that's the point.
Oh, and no matter what, someone is always going to take what you say the wrong way! So no, you're not 'feeding into' whatever. Most of the time. Probably.
I doubt he really cares about any of this, he just needs Content.
Well no. If you learn Polish the Polishness sips into you and 1/10 of your soul is forefit to Wojtek due one year after you die.
I'm in the "you're overthinking it" camp here, but appreciate the thoughtful video. I am learning portuguese and like the flag on duolingo since it clearly signals "this is the variant of Portuguese spoken in Brazil and so you should probably try a different app". I don't know the Spanish course but presumably if yiu were going to live in Puerto Rico it would be useful to see at a glance that the course you were learning used the specific grammar, accent etc of Madrid so you could decide if that was really what you wanted. I don't think the flag signifies my endorsement of the constitution of that country, just tells me what to expect. More to the point, what else would you use as a visual icon for the language?
Native speaker is a bit more problematic - I can see situations where a person who speaks a language to the same standard loses out because it's their second language, but it's a decent shorthand. The more complicated versions you described are difficult to parse snd don't tell me whether the teacher I'm about to hire really knows what they're talking about or is going to lead me astray with half-arsed ideas of the language. I'd describe myself as fluent in portuguese but I make a lot of mistakes that a native speaker wouldn't. And native just means you learned it from birth not that you are a member of the indigenous people of that country - so a native speaker of American English isn't implying they're a native American or that English is the language that has always been spoken in America or whatever (native and indigenous are two words that could usefully be teased apart to reduce some of the friction around this imho)
So I think you've made some good points, and it's all food for thought, but I'm not really convinced.
I endorse this comment.
About the Duolingo flags, some people have pointed out that the flag for Spanish is Spain, but that they teach you... _some_ Latin American spanish. They're not even sure which of all the versions. So like - for Portuguese, the flag helps, but for Spanish, it very much doesn't.
Breton here. I unfortunately never learned the language, and few are the students that do and use it regularly. Decades later, the policies' effects are still felt, but I hope the language can still survive
They seem to backing off on bilingual schooling, unfortunately, in pays bigouden sud. But the Breton flag is everywhere.
you mean "patois" 🤣
You can start now 😉
Policies aren’t everything. Low prestige and too small language areas can also lead to voluntarily giving up, with parents trying to teach their children a language that gives them more opportunities.
@@D4BASCHT why is the prestige low and the language area so small though? these are a direct result of the policies in question
In the online language learning community there are people advocating for grammar, people advising against learning grammar, people swearing by flash cards, others saying you have to watch Netflix in your target language, people saying give me comprehensible input or give me death, not to mention endless arguments over the efficacy of language learning apps. The problem is that it all kinda works, more or less, and people on RUclips especially act like there’s only one way up the proverbial mountain.
I’d recommend the video “Cooking internet and lifting internet have the same problem” by Andy Ragusea which highlights a similar problem in other communities.
You're absolutely correct!! I've had my share of online discussions because of this issue, back when I let myself got tangled in such nonsense. I'll check the video* you recommend, Tnx a lot
I was going to post a similar comment, but you said it better than I could have. The comprehensible input community has become cult. As you said, this problem exists in many other subjects (fitness, nutrition, et.)
@@theymademepickaname1248 I don't think it's just about comprehensible input. Its detractors are guilty of exactly the same thing. The video by Andy Ragusea that @davo_v quotes explains the phenomenon pretty well
Fully agree. Also it's Adam Ragusea btw
Don't forget the ones that say you should focus on learning only one language at a time and not start with another until you're at fluency with the first one... and the ones who say you can and should learn multiple languages at the same time.
There are many language apps that proudly talk about how you can interact with "native speakers" through their platform. I think it sounds good on the cover, but I'm now wondering if a "native speaker" is the best person to learn a language from. English is my first language, and I'm probably a bad person to talk to about how it works... I've never really had to think about it too hard. Probably more helpful to learn from someone with an outside perspective on learning the language.
English is my first language and tbh, I didn't get a lot of things until I had to learn them in my second (French).
An average native speaker is not a great resource for grammar advice. A professional teacher or book will help you there.
But if you want to have a conversation in the target language, having conversations with people who are literally experts in having conversations in that language is quite helpful.
Yes, the average native speaker is probably NOT the best, since they probably can't remember learning it and were never taught to teach it. There is also something to be said that learners make some of the best teachers, they know what a learner is going to struggle with! I know a lot of native English speakers who couldn't answer a grammar question to save their lives.
A native speaker who has also learned another language (more specifically "yours") will be extremely helpful in learning they understand the pain points. like Santiago said you learn a lot about your first language learning another. A professionally trained teacher is always gonna be better but having friends to discuss the language with on a more casual level won't be a detriment.
High level L2 speakers are good to learn from since they can explain how they learnt the language
I am glad you brought this up. I have thought this way for a long time already, as a speaker of Spanish who does not feel represented by the Spanish flag. People seem to be unsettlingly comfortable with the use of flags for languages - most usually forgetting, ignoring or dismissing what these flags actually mean. I recently began to study Serbo-Croatian and this feeling multiplied by ten.
Apart from that, I'm glad you think this way - in some previous videos you made some remarks that sounded too American nationalistic - now I guess they were kind of dark jokes, but as a learner of English that is not always completely clear.
All nice and dandy, but is there a simpler and less nationalist way of iconifying a language? Aren't the names of the languages themselves a bit, well, nationalist? English, Deutsch, Japanese, French... they all carry the nation state in their name.
I do get your point but at the same time, I don't see an easy fix.
Isn't this all an exercise in the etymological fallacy? We talk about ancillary protocols, but just because the word "ancillary" has its roots in Roman slavery doesn't mean anyone using the word is supporting slavery. Just because someone uses the word "native speaker" doesn't mean they're supporting an ultranationalist agenda (and I would bet that most people are unaware of this connection anyhow). The alternative to calling someone a "native speaker" is to give what is functionally a biography for them, and it'll start breaking down once you refer to more than one such person.
Less direct information also means more room to confuse and confound. Someone could be "an Irish speaker for 20 years!" but neglect to mention that, from the perspective of those who grew up using Irish Gaelic as a daily community language (and see how many more words that is than "are Irish Gaelic native speakers"?), they have completely failed to master the phonology and speak in a completely unintelligible manner, and have only learned the language through formal education, which is notably of extremely poor quality. If they claim to be "a native speaker" but turn out not to be able to even distinguish its phonemes, then there's a specific section you can point to where they lied.
I won't comment much on the flag thing, since I mostly agree. My major critique is the same as the last one: What would you replace it with?
Ultimately this is all like proposing an English spelling reform. What we have is, for better or worse, already entrenched. I don't see it disappearing anytime soon.
_We talk about ancillary protocols, but just because the word "ancillary" has its roots in Roman slavery doesn't mean anyone using the word is supporting slavery._ Lots of good points, but that's basically what it boils down to.
/bump/
What's the 'native' language of Australia?
Not so convenient now, eh?
You replace the flags with what wikipedia does for languages: you write the name of the language its own language. Anyone looking for their language would see it.
As for how to convey it on RUclips, you do the same and put in (parenthesis) the name of it in the primary language of your audience (or the language you use to tell people to 'like and subscribe' and for intros and outros.)
@@chuzzbot”Native speaker of a language” and “native language of a country” are not related concepts, and pretending that they are is disingenuous.
As we all know all language learners are secretly Norwegian nationalists
@@NeichoKijimura the runes should have alerted us
Bad company in the yt comments section holy
@@yvetteday5656 yeah, seem to have struck a nerve
[Insert Norwegian sentence] 🇳🇴🇳🇴🇳🇴🇳🇴🇳🇴🇳🇴🇳🇴🇳🇴🇳🇴
Bokmal or Nynorsk?
eh, language as a tool of *cultural* identity can be just as radicalizable as when it is used as a tool of *national* identity. So, no matter what you replace the flags with, unless you teach some kind of culture-agnostic language continuum (which would arguably be harder to communicate in), you'll still expose ways to divide people along its lines. No matter how we slice humanity, it inevitably turns into an us vs. them situation. It's too useful an exploit.
I don’t think that Language Jones advocates that we separate language users through their cultural identity. He said this while explaining what people usually mean when they say “native speaker”, and then describes how that is also problematic. He actually advocates “saying what we actually mean” i.e. taking the extra time to describe the speaker's relationship to the language. This won’t get rid of the human tendency to tribalism, but it lets us speak more clearly and avoid the various problematic elements of identifying languages through flags.
@@Gorg1122I find the term problematic to be problematic.
Language is of course inextricable with the cultures of those who use it. I think one point that's trying to be put forward is not to replace national symbols with cultural symbols to represent language - see his critiques of proposed Yiddish flags - but rather the appropriation of symbols already unified by other elements for the representation of language.
While it is of course useful to represent languages with symbols, the issue with the symbols is when those symbols already unite a community through other factors beyond 'speaker of the language'.
However, I think most would acknowledge that our current use of flags and cultural symbols to represent language is unlikely to change. Nonetheless, it's our responsibility to be mindful of which symbols are chosen, why they have been chosen, and the implications of those choices.
@@jaetwee hahaha yeah I don’t think it’s going to change anytime soon. But I could see a world where people become more aware of those nuances and push back against the use of flags or at least hesitate to use them. We can try to stop unknowing support of nationalistic ideals.
I think you'll find that language tends to be more naturally divisive than other aspects of culture - excluding that other divisive aspect of culture: religion (though not all religions in equal measure.)
No matter. The real crux of the issue is that human beings are a social species with fairly strong in-group /out-group tendencies. There's enough evidence to say that it even seems to be an evolutionary trait it's best to accept that reality - we like to divide into groups that become cultures (with distinct languages, religious views and other cultural traits) and then guard against the "Other". Then we can engineer a way to mitigate those instincts.
That's pretty much what we've been trying to do anyways with various political solutions in Late modernity.
French language teacher born in Alsace here. I am so happy you are using the phrase cultural genocide which is exactly my feeling a bout Alsacian culture. My grand-parents when they were children would be hit by the teachers when using the Alsacian language at school (also bear in mind that this was just after WWII so Alsacian language was associated with the language of the enemy, but still this was happening before too). Now I don't speak the Alsacian language as it is portrayed as lowclass/cultureless compared to French (this is a feeling that people have towards Alsacian and Alsacian accent). My generation doesn't speak the language anymore so it is dying out. I live in Catalonya (Spain) now and it's interresting to see how the people here are very adamant on keeping their language and culture alive. It helps that it has been institutionalized (Catalan is the school for public affairs, healthcare and school).
Anyway I am agreeing on all your points. Reading Eric Hobsbauwm when it comes to understanding nations is something I would recommend anyone in order to understand the world we live in now.
The flags issue has been bothering me for a while now, and I'm glad it wasn't just me. Thank you for the video.
If the term "native speaker" isn't scientific and isn't useful in linguistics, how should we say "a language is defined by the way native speakers speak it" or something similar? How can we know how, for example, a verb conjugation is supposed to be done in a particular language if we can't observe how a "native speaker" does it?
I think you're not doing descriptivism if you define "correct language" based off of a subset of speakers (and a small one at that for English)
"A language is defined by how the majority of it's speakers (including those who learned it as their second language) uses it."
Let's be honest, in the age of the internet, it doesn't really matter if someone is a "native speaker" or not.
Also, the concept of a language being "defined" is already a vague concept that doesn't really work that well. Language is fluid.
hmm - usage implies a community of language speakers. People already distinguish between different communities of speakers to specify different dialects (you get "British English", "American English", "Australian English", "Indian English" etc.), so surely specifying which community's speech standards and rules you are talking about would be the fix here - you don't need to define language in terms of "native speaker", just be more specific about which community of language speakers you are talking about.
The problem is, there is no "native speaker" there are many speaking a language and they all use variants and also a language naturaly changes over time, as young generations just change it. Usually that what is taught as "native" is a political descision.
For example in germany (or famously in france) there are boards set up by the goverment that define what is the "correct" & "native" language. The Swiss and Austrians don't adhere to these rules in the case of german and the Belgians and Swiss in the case of french also don't adhere to those rules.
But even in Germany and France: Go and Speak to a Bavarian, Saxon, Provencal, Breton "native speaker" - you will find out that observing them is something very different than what is taught as "native languge".
@@Hidrobyte Duck it, I am the only native speaker of my language, dialect, sociolect, and ideolect!
He actually said monolingual beta.
I have fun on the channel. If you say it three times, language simp shows up in the comments!
@@languagejonescan there please be a collab between my two favorite language daddies? I have no idea how to make it work, but I want to see it.
@@languagejones monolingual beta monolingual beta monolingual beta
@@languagejones Hello
is this like compared to multilingual alpha
i feel this too is problematic
Oh man, as someone living in Ukraine and who learned Ukrainian, this is such an interesting video.
Did you ever hear of Ivan Dziuba’s “Internationalism or Russification”? It’s about culture as a whole but language is a part of it. Saying that the uniformity of the USSR is done to “uniting the people”, but it’s all Russian focused and the languages and cultures of the other countries (especially Ukrainian) were given a complete second class status, a ripple effect you can sadly see today. When I first moved in 2017, so many similar stories from people who mainly grew up speaking Ukrainian, that when they went to a more Russian speaking city (like Kyiv at a time) there would be an assumption that they were less educated or from a village.
A big talking point by pro-Russian voices is “well people in those eastern territories speak russian, so it seems pretty right that they should be a part of russia” (and the assumption about language isn’t really true either when you remember that Surzhyk is a thing). While inside the country there is a movement towards speaking Ukrainian more often, I never run into people who would say that those who still speak russian are not Ukrainian (even if they don’t like hearing russian constantly on the street)
Oh yeah and I should bring up that Ivan Dziuba wrote it in the 1960s and it destroyed his career and sent him to prison since it was considered anti-soviet
Well Ukraine is a pretty fascist country when it comes to minority languages' rights, Poroshenko's slogan was "Army, Language, Church" lmao but they're still playing the victim card. Ukrainian was an official language during the Soviet era, even all non-Ukranians had to learn it, so in a way USSR was more liberal than modern Ukraine when it comes to language policy, soviets never banned the use of minority languages like Ukraine does now
@@popkinbobkin saying “playing the victim card” about a country currently defending itself from a genocide tells me everything I need to know about how serious I should take any opinion you have, not to mention the factual inaccuracies in all your other statements.
Yeah, and I’m sure Stepan Bandera was a great woke liberal as well who loved cultural diversity and minority rights!😂
Soviet Ukraine was far more progressive in every way than the current regime, which is a disgrace to humanity.
So what's the alternative?
I’d like to see more regional languages get the resources and recognition that they deserve. Although a majority of people may not want to study those languages, there are enthusiasts like us who will happily dive headfirst into those rabbit holes.
Agree with your points, but re "native speaker" your solution is a nonstarter. Asking people to replace their 2-syllable shorthand term with a cumbersome explanatory phrase, are you kidding? See "mormon".
I feel like this video does a good job of describing the experience of "historical Anglophones" in Quebec without meaning to. You can have been living here for generations, but without the language as a signifier, you're often not accepted as "part of the nation" - and some will even say so out loud: you are not "a real Quebecer" without descending from the culture that the language represents. The idea that culture, nation, and language are inextricably tied is just a given here.
There is also the pervasive notion in Québec that "bilingual" means either "speaks French and English specifically" or "speaks French and some other language". I know multiple people who expressed that they were bilingual while in Québec, but because they spoke (e.g.) Spanish and English or English and Mandarin, they were told that they "didn't count as bilingual". Québec is so afraid to lose its cultural/linguistic heritage and identity that they are sometimes quite chauvinist and discriminatory toward others. The CAQ's agenda is of course the ultimate example, wherein the word "pasta" becomes forbidden (you have to say "pâtes").
Of course there's some good and some bad that comes out of it. There are a lot of French language classes available for cheap or free, through the government, through employers, etc. - and I think that's a perfectly good way to promote the language and culture. I'm in one of those classes. But then you also get the stripping away of previously existing English communication channels for anything official or from the government, and anxiety that you might, for example, be refused health services in a language you can understand in a moment where it really matters.
That's because they are. It's silly to pretend otherwise
@@_oaktree_ Well, English and French are the only two official languages, so that makes sense. It'd be odd to add Mandarin and Spanish to the list in a country with so few speakers. Personally I figure we should just have one official language, English, especially since Quebec has all these laws to keep English off of street signs and store signs, etc., but the rest of Canada (with so few French speakers relative to the number of English speakers) have all this bilingual packaging and other stuff.
@@_oaktree_ _Pâtes_ is both the correct and the usual word in European French too. Even though _pasta_ is (of course) originally Italian, its use in French is, effectively, an Anglicism, if not an outright Americanism.
What about the names of languages? I speak English though I have no affiliation with the nation of England. Names of nation states and their languages are intimately intertwined in many cases
Then what symbols would you prefer ??!
🤷♀️🤷♀️🤷♀️
Duolingo is also pretty inconsistent in how they use the flags. Some languages are represented by the flag of the country where the language originated or is perceived to have originated (ex: Spanish flag for Spain), but others are represented by the flag of the country with the most speakers today (ex: USA flag for English, Brazilian flag for Portuguese). Never mind that Mexico alone has almost 3x as many people that speak Spanish as Spain does, and that most of the user-base of the app almost certainly has more interactions with Latin Americans than Spaniards.
Can't speak for the other languages you mentioned, but the Brazilian flag on Duolingo makes perfect sense. They are teaching Brazilian Portuguese, rather than any other version of the language, it makes a difference.
And the fact that they use US English to teach Mexican Spanish. Since I lived for 10 years in LA, I can deal with that, many other Brits will find it confusing or annoying
In fairness, wouldn't they be using the Spanish flag to signify Castillan Spanish which is pretty much the default even in Latin America.
With Portuguese Brazilian and European varieties are quite different from each other being just a few words and pronunciation. There are grammatical differences as well in Portuguese
@@mikeball6182 They don't teach Mexican Spanish. It's a complete grab bag of vocabulary. The only way it's "Mexican" is the lack of vosotros or voseo, that's it.
The moment you said "flag" I figured out where this was going and got really excited. I've decided awhile back that I personally dislike the term native speaker, and this is entirely due to my own experience with languages. I acquired, to varying degrees of fluency (as you do), four languages as a kid (and continue to speak them, with different but still varying degrees of fluency), but have never felt like I could confidently claim to be a native speaker in any of them on the international stage. As you mentioned, the term seems to have more of a social definition than anything. For three of these languages I speak, I don't know enough about the culture and nuances typically associated with them because I don't come from any of the countries typically associated with them (the way a "native speaker" of English is typically expected to be from the UK or US or Aus/NZ). My pronouciation and word choices are occasionally not "native" either because I grew up with the local variant of the languages, which has undergone the inevitable localisation. The one language I could argue to have the background and culture for......I don't really, and definitely do not speak it fluently. This is the official language of the country I come from, and growing up I predominantly only used it for official business such as interacting with the government. I don't speak it with the "correct" accent, so to speak, either, though I suppose you can argue the variant I speak is one of the variants available in the country. As such, the terms "first language", "mother tongue" and "national language" all refer to different languages to me. Currently, I've settled with gibberish as my native tongue, seeing as that's what I spout when surprised or confused =P
I'm a native speaker of swahili, my mother is tanzania. I cannot hold a conversation in swahili for my life does that make me not a native speaker? Swahili was the first language i spoke thats the problem with linguistics, its all one step forward six back.
That’s a really good characterization of linguists
You are not a native speaker of Swahili, and you shouldn't go around saying that you are one. Your post is an obvious example of the Straw Man Fallacy.
@CameronNewland I disagree that it is an obvious straw man argument. I could conceive of a genuine argument that "native language" is the first language you were exposed to and that that language was spoken by your ancestors. Furthermore, I'm not sure that being able to currently speak the language is necessary to be a native speaker of the language. In which case, following those rules, @AmaniElArnab creates a valid situation that is very hard to accept. You can change the definition of “native speaker”, but that’s his point, it’s not a scientific term, it’s a socially understood one without a clear definition that creates confusing situations.
@@CameronNewland this is what i would say if i learned what "strawman" means recently and I needed to test it out on someone.
@@Gorg1122 "Native speaker" does have a clear definition, and no, it's not possible for a native speaker to not be able to converse in, or understand, that language. You're trying too hard, but you are simply running in circles and embarrassing yourself.
Thanks!
The most egregious case of flag usage I’ve seen was in Canada. At a provincial park, they had brochures in English and French. For English, they used the Canadian flag 🇨🇦. For French they used the France flag 🇫🇷. As a proud bilingual Canadian myself, I don’t even know where to begin on how stupid this was.
Was that stupidity, do you imagine, or was it a political statement?
@@stephenspackman5573 I would say stupidity. I would be very surprised to see French represented by the French flag here in Canada; it would be much more common to see it represented by the Québec flag. (Undoubtedly this would annoy many francophones from New Brunswick, Ontario, or Manitoba, whose French is no less French than that of the Québecois, but, well.)
If they want to use foreign flags, use England for English and France for French, because those terms are related. Otherwise, use Québec and British Columbia?
@@Liggliluff I think if they used England (a red cross on a white background) very few Canadians would recognise it.
It should have been UK and France, if they really wanted to be clear. The Canadian flag means nothing linguistically since Canada is an officially bilingual country
I agree on the flag thing, it is indeed kinda annoying. but I think the term 'native' has a precise meaning that the language is acquired in childhood, not learned at any point later in life (although it is true that at some point the person might get less eloquent in their native language than they are in the learned one). Therefore the term 'native level' would mean that the majority of the other speakers of the language will hardly pick up on the fact the the language is learned as a second one.
Early or childhood acquisition is sometimes used.
Isn't what you are describing rather the term "mother tongue" than "native speaker"? To me at least, native speaker describes how other people perceive your speech, not necessarily at what point you started learning that language. In most situations this coincides, but it doesn't have to.
@@Garbaz Shibboleth's gonna shibby.
@@abmindprof yes, but the word native is shorter and means the same (to me)
One thing I learned from lurking on the "English Language Learners" forum on Stack Exchange is that there are a lot of mostly unspoken, unwritten language rules that a native speaker will intuitively pick up without realizing it, and what often differentiates a non-native speaker from a native one is that they won't follow those rules.
Thank you for making this video. As an Indian, this has been bugging me for a long time. I'm bilingual in Tamil and English, and I would say that English is my preferred language of communication, although I do speak my native (lol ironic) quite well.
My schooling was entirely in English, I speak to my friends in English, and almost the entirety of my reading, both online and offline, is in English. Also, I've had to learn English myself, so wouldn't I be in a better position to teach someone English?
A native speaker has had the neurological pathways built in naturally, so things have just always made intuitive sense to them. They didn't have to think about rules, their exceptions and things that don't make sense and things that simply have to be learnt lol.
I also speak Hindi, though less ably, and the native speaker thing doesn't seem to bother them as much. I'm not exactly sure why, though.
oh my god the title and the first 2 minutes of this video already pissed me off so much. The thing is, this is actually a very interesting topic to discuss. But the dramatic tone just made me so mad.
This smells of:
1-we don't want to offend anybody at the cost of being ridiculous
2- we have to treat people like dumb kids
Fact, most languages are connected to a specific country, there is no way around it. If anything, this makes the whole "language study" a study of culture(s) and geography and people. It's what makes them fascinating. Of course there are cases (many of them) when people in a country speak a language (or more) which originated from a different country. It's expected that people in such countries speak a variant of such language (as in the case of south america), but the fact that their language is associated to a different country is part of their history and their culture. If anything, it add more to the experience of learning about a new country and language. Then we have the name: if a language is called SPANISH, the spanish flag attached to it is not exactly shocking.
Now I realize there are situation where it gets more complicated and delicate. China and Taiwan speak the same language and using the chinese flag could be problematic. Then again, I trust most people to realize that such flag means "1.5 billion people speak this language and they are localized in mainland China" and do not read that as some sort of political statement.
There are other cases less controversial but still quite tricky, such as the standard arabic which is spoken everywhere and nowhere at the same time. Or the balcans (according to wiki Serbo-Croat-Bosnian is the same language with different variants, I trust this is correct). Let's not forget about english, which is represented by at least three different flags around. Personally I prefer the England flag since it keeps the English-England consistency. It would also teach some people about the whole England-country-in-the-UK issue.
My point is, it's complex, but it's also what makes language study fascinating. After all, the idea is to learn the language so you can travel to countries where they speak it and know the people and the place, its history and culture.
Languages are not in a vacuum. People use them to communicate. People with the same languages have complex and often violent history behind and we must be aware of that. But labeling a complex and beautiful discussion such as this with "dark ideology" and propose something dumb as removing language flags altogether (which is a non issue in 95% of cases) it's extremely irritating and makes me sad. It's patronizing and smells of the worst pc of "not offending anyone".
As a Ukrainian, I just want to say that some languages wouldn't even exist now without nationalism and/or nation-states.
Yeah, it goes both ways. Some survive in spite of being inside a country with an official language, and some survive because of it. Languages like Welsh, Scottish, and Irish would have probably died out years ago without their local governments helping to keep them spoken by the younger generations.
One could argue, however, that such defensive nationalism is only born in response to offensive nationalism. Reaching admittedly further, reactive nationalism has everything it needs to become aggressive when conditions change.
As a Québecois, this is a pretty sensitive topic for me too. We want to protect our language and culture despite the omnipresent english supremacy. We cannot compete with the production value of american movie and TV series and we live in an english country. Most of us are not separatists, but neither do we identify much with our english neighbors and their americanized culture.
@MrOvipare there is also a issue that is kinda unique to colonized places like the Americas and Africa, by elevating one old language of thr colonial power, one risks destroying the already versatile and possibly dying language of the Native people
@@codymoon7552 nobody here is denying the wrongs of colonialism, two different things can be both important. However, equating Québec’s language and culture as the language of France is dismissive and ignorant at best.
Heh! I'm Swiss. So how am I to represent my Swiss German with a flag? Localised websites often combine two flags or add a "D", "F" or "I" to the Swiss flag. I have never come across localisation for Rumantsch...
On flags, I somewhat disagree. Sometimes it's important to have a symbol to represent a language, and a flag seems to be the most obvious such symbol. I do think that sometimes flags are problematic, but frankly they are the best solution I could come up with
Off the top of my head, in the translation industry we often use 2-letter abbreviations instead, like DE for German, EN for English, and then specify further if needed, like American English if they want the dates to be MM/DD/YY rather than DD/MM/YY and they don't want "favor" spelled "favour."
I think it being the easiest solution atm isn’t a good reason to change the system imo. Like yeah it’s useful shorthand, but the shorthand is propagating ideas we don’t condone. Trying to change the system might not work because the flags are just that good at communicating the idea, but it doesn’t hurt to try right? It costs practically nothing to advocate for and use a new system on a personal level
@@ancientromewithamyThis does not solve it completely. Some country codes, like NL, are for both a nation-state and language.
Having the US flag to represent English is an atrocity, culturally, linguistically, historically, emotionally and aesthetically. Man is not wrong.
I consider myself a native speaker of English and Spanish. I grew up in the US, did my formal education there, but spoke Spanish outside of school. But I've had people both in the US and Mexico tell me i am wrong. Why? Because i grew up in the US, therefore i cannot be a native Spanish speaker. Or, my mother tongue is Spanish, so I can't be a native English speaker. I also have a different accent when i speak English since i haven't spoken it on a regular basis since march 2020.
One thing i am sure of though, Spanish is my only mother tongue. It is the only language i speak every single day without fail, since the day i could talk. No language will ever equal that, no matter how good i get at it.
What symbols to use instead of flags so that users find their way around?
What word to use instead of "native speaker" to signify the meant skill level?
Exactly. With these people, it's all complaints without offering a solution of their own. It just amounts to paranoid yapping.
Hey! American guy here. As recently as 100 years ago I had Breton speaking ancestors in the Breton region. My great-grandmother recalled that her father and his parents almost never spoke it. She didnt know why, but it was a direct result of that systemic eradication effort you spoke of.
Id argue you dont need a nation state to have a flag. Ukrainians had national flags long before statehood and the Indigenous Metis Nation in Canada has its own flags but was never a nation state and is actually older than the Canadian nation state.
Of course, but national aspirations definitely play into it most of the time
@@languagejones And I'd argue that's both a good thing (eg indigenous and national rights) and it is a bad thing (eg fascism). It's a double edged sword.
Having the Ukrainian flag associated with Ukrainian as a language is part of Ukrainian self-determination, and many of us would view divorcing it as an attack on our independence. But in another context, Mandarin Chinese being associated with communist China as opposed to Taiwan sends a message about who is really considered valid.
So my point is that there is potential for this to buttress fascism or linguistic imperialism but also potential to buttress linguistic ANTI-imperialism - indigenous and minority language rights and the rights of nations to have their own nation states vis-a-vis imperialist nations trying to repress them.
@@MasiukAYES! Thanks for expressing exactly what I wanted to comment to Dr Jones. It really seems to me like flags and languages and nationalities, like everything else on Earth, can be healthful or harmful or both, depending on how seriously you take them and what you do with them
@@languagejonesJust come out as an anarchist already 😄🏴
"Is actually older than the Canadian nation state" is a meaningless and ludicrous statement. It's also funny how a group of invaders can interbreed with an indigenous people and somehow be considered part of "First Nations".
I actually, no lie, started thinking deeply about this as a child. I was 12 when I learned it's called, "Spanish," and not, "Mexican."
I was already a history nerd who read books in class instead of paying attention, but yeah this topic is what really threw me into the world of learning and appreciating cultures.
Great thought provoking video. I'm not sure how long it's been since I thought about this.
Its really important. I think it has something to do with the way Latin American immigrants are treated. It adds to the idea that they're savages that use what the "Holy Race is gracious enough to build them."
Thank you for sharing.
I just realized a funny irony. Latin American people are looked down on for using European languages, yet we're exactly the same for speaking English instead of American lol
Huh? Who looks down on them for speaking European languages? I've never heard anyone even remotely hint at that.
ruclips.net/video/ps2luFn5iPE/видео.html
I suppose the main thing that bugs me in the prioritization of modern/living languages over "dead" languages and of speaking over reading. I do speak many languages when I can but I read a whole lot more languages than I speak. I studied philology and have used those skills to learn many related languages, principally for reading. Of course I try to talk whenever I can. Yet I've had people tell me I don't "really" know a language when I can read novels and textbooks in it comfortably but I struggle to have a conversation in it.
I saw a question in a personality test asking whether I'd pick a dead or living language if I could magically learn one. I answered that I'd rather learn a dead language with that power. Why? Because you can always learn living languages normally unlike with dead ones.
Sorry if I'm just slow, but I've had to break the video down for myself in this comment, in an attempt to understand what the hell your point is. This video was very frustrating to listen to for me, and that despite the fact that I was very intrigued by its subject. I found the video extremely difficult to follow and felt like I was left with almost nothing of real substance in the end.
"Problems" identified:
- use of flags as symbols of languages
- use of the term "native speaker"
Why are they problems?
- they have roots in (ultra)nationalist and/or fascist ideologies
- continued usage today normalized their original meanings
You hear the shape of this argument all the time, especially when speaking about languages and their use, and I don't like it. I won't get too deep into the why, but by analogy, I don't like learning languages by memorizing rules and nervously applying them mid conversation, and I especially would rather not speak my own native language this way, and much less *think about concepts* with such restrictions in place. Just convince me with your arguments for why a thing is bad, please, not why it used to be bad, and I'll acquire that knowledge and know what to do. I am a thinking human, able to be convinced.
That paragraph aside, I was prepared to hear you out, like you asked. But unfortunately, it felt like you were trying to shake me off your train of thought, rather than lead me to your destination.
3:24 "I'm just trying to go into this with a clear picture of the results here."
I first had written here a longer description of my frustrations, but I'll be brief and say that I don't think the 30 preceding seconds were very clear.
4:36 "So in this case one language was imposed as a way of cultivating good citizens of a nation state and imposing that national identity."
And then, paraphrasing, in the germanic case a common-ish shared language clued people together into one folk and state. Here we're talking about fascism, alright. But then you go off into tangents along a thread that I'm really struggling to follow. Each sentence in isolation makes sense, but I don't get the story you're trying to tell. Yes, you point out problems with using flags to represent languages, problems that have been pointed out before by many people, but none of these address the claim you made at the start of the video. Where fascism?
6:51 Now for the term "native speaker"
7:36 "And that last bit is the rub"
Thanks, there we go. I think it's difficult to talk about language levels in general. I'll hear someone talking up a friend of theirs who speaks a certain language so well, only to meet this individual and have it turn out that they basically only speak enough to order at a restaurant. It doesn't matter what terms were used specifically to describe this person's language level. The simple fact is just that my bar for speaking a language well is different than the one who was describing their friend.
Even more rigorous scales, like the A1-C2 system or whatever, are flawed, because one grade is not enough to describe your performance across multiple axes like writing, speaking, listening, or reading, as well as in all situations and topics. Any real attempt at describing someone's level of mastery of a language will need to describe their history with it, when and how they learned it, and what they've used it for.
But do you notice, even in the context of such a detailed description of a person's history, the term "native speaker" might be useful! Especially with followup information to specify what you mean by the term!
From one thing to another, I thought you would bring up Russia's invasion of Ukraine, as an example where language-flag conflation can be used for fascistic purposes, attempting to justify the invasion using an argument like "The people there are clearly Russian, just listen to how they talk!" But then you maybe also would have to mention Russian-speaking Ukrainians these days embracing the Ukrainian language in order to distance themselves from Russia. The thing goes both ways.
Anything that can be used for unification, I suppose, can also end up excluding those not united. We Norwegians used our cultural heritage and language as a way to find our own identity and distance ourselves from Denmark, and our flag and the formalization of our multiple official languages were a very large part of that process. And it worked! We became a country and felt like it! But then today, immigrants that don't learn the language will end up on the outside. Those that want to become residents or citizens need to prove their proficiency in it. But should I then not call anyone a "native speaker" so as not to shine a light on the fact that immigrants and refugees have it hard in their host countries linguistically speaking?
I'll end my rambling, ranting response on a question, just in case anyone even bothers to read what I've written: If flags are problematic as symbols, are the names we use for different languages that much better? Would you rather see the symbols "Spanish" rather than the symbol "🇪🇸"? How about "Castillano"?
"Even more rigorous scales, like the A1-C2 system or whatever, are flawed, because one grade is not enough to describe your performance across multiple axes like writing, speaking, listening, or reading, as well as in all situations and topics. " - have you ever tried to pass exam at C2 level?
@@marikothecheetah9342 Pass an exam? No, and I hope I'll never have to. "Goodhart's law", and all that. But I have been asked to complete a test to assess my level on that scale, so as to be placed in the right language class, to be grouped together with students of approximately the same level. Needless to say, for a small sized language school, attempting to group students so coarsely is bound to lead to frustrations.
@@frodethorsenbrseth5014 well, as a person who did attend such exam I can tell you - your little assessment isn't even remotely close to the actual exam. The C2 exam is pretty different than up to C1 and is based on long reading, long listening, long writing and all this requires a native like a bit of specialist language knowledge around college level knowledge and the knowledge gap is even bigger than between B2 and C1. You basically work WITH every possible way of communication in the language and don't choose any answer - you give that answer yourself. The same with speaking, of course.
And yeah, I'd easily count people who hold C1 level exam as the native level (sometimes even an academic level, since natives can have low communications skills as well). I wouldn't discredit the highest level of the language exams (well, maybe JLPT, because then you are at the level of a middle schooler :P) but for example HSK has now new levels and you can reach skills equal to people who GRADUATED from university. If that's not native level - I don't know what is. :/
@@marikothecheetah9342 my point is not to say that passing a C2 exam is worthless, rather that the scale is not granular enough to tell you much about a person's language level. Much like how someone may be a "native speaker" while illiterate, you could also be able to read and listen at a B2 level without being able to speak at all. I should know, 'cause I've been there!
He wasn't talking about fascism at 4:36 (yet) that was about the people of the fractured German duchies and city states of the Holy Roman Empire starting to form a unified idea of a German people in the 18th and early 19th century, instead of identifying primarily with their regional heritage or their monarchs. This nationalist trend advanced further and further with the founding of the German Empire and culminated in the first World War after which that paused for a time. Hitler then picked it up again and brought the idea of Nationalism to its extreme and logical conclusion.
The use of Fraktur as visual shorthand for "fascism" or "dark ideology" is extremely problematic, since blackletter type was abolished during the NS regime for being "Schwabacher Jew letters", with Antiqua being favoured for its imperial heritage
I strongly urge you to change the thumbnail, and maybe you could even make a video explaining why it's wrong. Schwabacher and Fraktur are an important part of Central European typographic tradition, and shouldn't be falsely politicized like this
🤷 It's not like the NSDAP is the only definer of the far right, neofascists and neonazis have used the script alot in the past 60 years. It's literally one of the hints that can be used to look into a page or group further to look for far right dog whistles, and you'll find them.
🤷 It's not like the NSDAP is the only definer of the far right, neofascists and neonazis have used the script alot in the past 60 years. It's literally one of the hints that can be used to look into a page or group further to look for far right dog whistles, and you'll find them.
You are committing the same sin you denounce, O DoppelpunktDDD,
but if the end of your username is accurate,
there might be no good reason to rebuke you over it.
After listening, I think you have a point on both issues, but I'm having a lot of trouble seeing that it's a big deal. Maybe I lack the expertise? I understand disliking a flag. I really don't like Duolingo's Star and Crescent flag for Arabic (what about Ibn Ezra, Jews in Arab lands and Christian Arabs?)
But is there a better symbol?
Same issue with "native speaker". It's already something of a mouthful to say "native speaker", why would anyone want to say, "he was born in Paris but moved to Düsseldorf at age 6" instead of just saying "he understands some French but is a native German speaker". Even if we replace "native" with "fluent" we bump into the issue of nuance. I know foreigners who are naturalized Americans that speak excellent English, but they still miss some of the nuance of certain words/phrases. Especially with Early Modern English words.
My point is, fluent level ≠ native level.
I say this as someone who understands my Hebrew, Spanish and Aramaic may become highly functional, but I'll never fully understand all the nuances that someone born into those languages would understand. And that's okay.
PS. I think replacing the word native could work if it's really as serious as you say, but the question stands. How? With what?
Same as the flag issue.
Anyways, sorry this was long. I hope I've communicated that while I'm willing to see your view, I'm having trouble seeing it and understanding it. I think others may be in the same boat.
I'd also like to know what solutions may work better than extremely personal biographical information.
The problem is that being a native speaker doesn’t always imply that you have the highest level in that language. Understanding nuance is a matter of being challenged with that nuance in the first place, and many people lack these challenges during their lives to better grasp those concepts. I can clearly see that when I compare native speakers that had different levels of education. This problem of nuance could be further enlarged when comparing different accents in the same country, or between countries that speak the same language. A *certified* C2 foreign will most likely have a better usage of the language than the average native speaker. Although it could be unfair that I’m comparing the average of natives with the highest level of foreigners, I think this example serves as a starting point.
I used to use the flags thing as a conversation starter on dating apps all the time. if you know your familial history, you're pretty much guaranteed to trip over an ancestor who would never in a million years identify with the flag you boost, despite living on the territories they claim to represent.
What alternatives are there to represent a language in a visual medium? You could say the written name of the language, but on a list of language names, it gets hard to make them stand out and if you go ahead and, say, use a font like Fraktur for German, then you're back to where you started. As for "native speaker" is it better to use "L1" ?
The first two written symbols of the language's name, in that language.
EN - English
DE - German
日本 - Japanese
官话 - Mandarin
广东 - Cantonese
Arabic - عَرَ
سَوَ - Swahili
@@WoodEe-zq6qv I guess that works until you get to "Francais" and "Frysk" , or "Slovenščina" and "Slovenčina"
Case for flags for languages: situation is the same as using name of peoples or countries for naming the language. Is it fine to call English language English, even if spoken by person from Nigeria or the USA? If we can call it English, then we can use flag of England, UK, USA, etc. to talk about the language in pictures. What is the alternative for identifying the English language?
I don't know if I agree 100% with what you said, but it's a good observation and it definitely makes me think.
@@DynamicFortitude I pointed this out in another comment, and his response really shows that he doesn't understand what he's talking about.
With these kinds of people the point is to deny and erase the people that gave birth to the language
I don't know, man. this seems a bit too much. Ultranationalists can make a sandwich into an ultranationalist symbol, doesn't make a sandwich anymore multidimensional than bread with stuffing. Same with flags with me. I don't care which flags English, French, or Spanish are represented by, as long as the language is spoken in that country in day to day life and at home. Yes, nation-states are political entities, doesn't mean that simply referring to a flag that carries a political value equals agreeing with said political value. It's simply the flag of a country that primarily speaks that language as a primary means of communication. regardless of why, when, or how they speak it, or started speaking it.
Iranian flag? Who cares? Iranians speak Farsi, that's all I care about. Yes, other languages and ethnicities exist, yes other varieties of Persian exist in other countries, but who cares about that nuance when the primary requirement is met- this language being the day to day means of communication within those political borders.
See but this can still be problematic. By choosing one flag or one symbol to represent the language, you are essentially endorsing that as the “correct” form of that language. Go back to the French example-who says that France French or even Parisian French is the one form of the language that people can or should learn. There are French speakers in Quebec, New Brunswick, even Louisiana and Nigeria-all of which have their own nuances that set them apart from each other. If we only associate the French language with that of Paris, France via the French flag, then we are alienating all of those other speakers.
One example, when you give people who speak “lower” dialects of a language (southern American English as an example) a survey with question about their language use, they, THEMSELVES, will say that they use their language incorrectly even though they are using the language they acquired by the same means as everyone else. This is because there is a “correct” dialect associated with a certain type of speaker (i.e. Standard American English spoken by newscasters in the Maryland or something). This type of stuff has consequences-this is a part of what perpetuates the misconception that people from the American South are uneducated, for example, and thus their dialect of the language as being undesirable.
This is all to say that these things do matter. Over time, these varieties will most likely become less and less similar to each other and that’s when the big bad fascists swoop in to declare the varieties as “inferior” or whatever and use it as a symbol for ultra nationalism saying “these people took our language and destroyed it” or something like it. Even in the United States I hear people talk about how immigrants use English wrong and then proceed to say things like “I don’t know why they’re even here” or, in universities, that “TAs who don’t speak English well or have strong accents shouldn’t be allowed to teach classes” when that’s the thing that’s allowing them to get funding to go to school here. What do you suggest they do then? They be taken out of here? They be denied admittance to a university or the country on the grounds that they don’t happen to speak identical to you? That’s ridiculous and it’s just plain wrong and it starts with these small details that end up terraforming our understanding of what is “correct” or “good” about a particular language.
@@Jboudasolid points
I feel like this is more of an issue for larger countries which encompass multiple cultures, less so for smaller countries which are formed around a single identity everyone feels drawn to.
Yes. I am thinking that England has had a history of colonisation. Therefore they have been in conflict with the poeple trying to protect themselves by forming nation states. Their ruthless opression of Irish, Scottish, Welsh, African, Native-American, Indian, Indonesian cultures. Bigger countries want to preserve their power, therefore the idea of a nation state is dangerous, and the people that define it. I think that this cultural undertow can explain American foreign policy.
French forces protecting their homeland during WW1 where nationalists. Nationalism in Poland was an important factor in separationg them from Sovjet. Ghandi was an "Indian nationalist", and spendt a lot of time trying to construct an Indian identity. sfbe
This implies that Belgium and Switzerland are big countries. You've raised my self esteem
No. Most borders represent a useful hegemony of some group, not a natural cultural or ethnic boundary. Neat boundaries are a nationalist confabulation
In my experience when you dig a little deeper in the countries that claim to be formed around one identity and their "natural" territory you find skeletones in the closets. Most of them if not all of them will have minorites in them that has been or still are repressed because of the single identity you talk about. Just look to Japan and the Nordic countries. These are countries that are often portrayed as being formed around single national identities, but Japan has the Ainu and the Nordics have the Sami. Both being minority populations which has as long an history in areas that make up these countries as the main population. These minorites have faced horrible discrimination. Never trust a nation state that claimes to be homogeneous.
English is spoken by multiple countries so of course apps or anything else that wants to quickly use a visual representation will have to exclude all the other countries that also speak the same language. Usually they choose England or America. A lot of the time it's England I've seen and it feels like a small slight to me because I'm a native English speaker but I have never been to England. But I can deal. It's mostly for practicality and I get that. And technically England was the first country to speak English. If you have an alternative to flags please suggest it though. If you write the name of the language then suddenly you're not speaking a universal language but the one you're writing in. Flags are just really practical.
Most of the time the term "native speaker" is pretty clear cut. The majority of people don't grow up wondering what their native language is. Sure you get some exceptions but I don't see any issues with the term and I don't find it confusing. The exception I can think of would be people that started growing up in one country but then got uprooted and moved to another country. But if someone says they consider themselves to be a native English speaker I generally just go with it. They know better than me - they are them after all. Again, if we didn't say native speaker what else would we say? I guess you could define the term in every video if you want to be clear to make sure everyone is on the same page.
Ok, so, do we have a simple word or phrase with which we can replace ‘native speaker’?
he literally says at the end "I'm not even saying you should stop saying 'native speaker'"
proficient speaker
@@ViperMantisBut a "proficient speaker" who grew up in a culture where the language is spoken, went to school in that language, is the same as a "proficient speaker" who grew up in a culture or country where the main language is another, grew up using primarily other language and went to school in that other language?
You literally can see the difference of kids born and raised in latam, with kids born and raised in the us from parents who's native language is other and teach their kids that language.
@@livavapa I'm not contesting those things being important, I'm saying that you can get those things without being tied to a geographic location, and even being tied to a geographic location with those things is not guaranteed to make someone proficient or highly proficient. It's a semantic shortcut, which is why it works colloquially. It just isn't all that accurate as people would like it to be.
I’ve been having this conversation with my wife literally for a month now. I grew up in Puerto Rico, Spanish speaking friends, music, tv, but I learned English since before I was 5. I think in English, even though I grew up in Puerto Rico. I am fluent in both languages and unless I had spent too much time around coworkers, I don’t have a typical puertorrican accent when speaking English, so am I a native of both languages? My wife says no, but I’ve literally grown up on both languages, there’s no distinction of me being better in one than the other.
Counterpoint, by way of example. As long as hispanophones continue to use the word "español" (which, by and large - and contrary to what we're often told as learners- they do, in preference to "Castellano") then IMO it's reasonable to continue to use the Spanish flag to represent that language. It's not causing confusion, or offense, or anything like that. It's just... an effective and universally understood symbol. Same with French outside France, same with English outside England.
I agree on the meaningless of "native level" though. For example, some "native" speakers truly butcher their own language. By which I mean that their mastery is sufficiently lacking that they struggle to effectively communicate as well as, say, an educated language learner does. It's entirely possible to learn a language (and, indeed, the culture associated with that language) to a level where you are more proficient than the average "native" speaker. Just don't ever think you're "done".
That's what bugs me the most in the language learning space: the obsession with fluency. As though every language were a level in your own personal video game which you must (and possibly could) "complete". It's the same nerve that twitches when, as people talk about their travel plans, they announce "Oh, last year we did Thailand and Vietnam. Next year we're doing New Zealand".
"DID". As in, completed, done, check. Next.
The español vs castellano thing varies by region, Argentines for example tend to use castellano. I don't know if it's really a sensitive topic in Spain or not - I've heard Spaniards use both - but outside of Spain anyway the norm just depends on where someone is from and using one over another is not really a matter of etiquette.
@@87advil _Español_ is used virtually exclusively in the Canary Islands and those parts of Africa where Spanish is spoken. On the Spanish Peninsula, the term _castellano_ can mostly be heard in regions where some other language is also spoken, such as Galicia, Catalonia, Valencia and the Balearic Islands. In those regions, the choice of the word _castellano_ over _español_ can sometimes be intended pejoratively.
Yeah, you have a point, Hebrew is my mother tongue but if I will make a video on Hebrew with the Israeli flag, it would be a big nationalist statement and I wouldn’t like to do it.
At the same time, Israel is the only country where Modern Hebrew is the default spoken language. So the fact that using the flag to denote the language is a political statement is really not the fault of the language at all, but more the fault of people who over-politicize everything about Israeli and/or Jewish culture.
@@_oaktree_ definitely true, but the Hebrew language is not a political project. The existence of Israel as a nation state is
I didn't think i could disagree with you from both sides, @@rapramix, but apparently i can!
@_oaktree_ is very correct that there's a massive (and massively harmful and/or hateful) movement to politicize every thing having to do with Jews and Israelis. This is how you get so many "progressive" people who think it's ok to discriminate against someone because of their nationality, as long as it's Israeli, or because of their religion, as long as it's mainstream Judaism. How many other people can't use the flag of their country as a simple signifier of their origin/identity without being accused of every perversion & crime in the book?
And at the same time, the resurrection of Hebrew in the modern era as a spoken vernacular definitely had serious political elements. The success of Modern Hebrew was considered one of the greatest victories of the Return to Zion movement by its adherents, both for the love of the ancestral tongue itself and also because they thought any functional nation-state (like the one they were building) needs a language.
To me, it just says that's where most Hebrew speakers live. I noticed that this video acts as if there's an implication that Hebrew is the only language spoken there? I don't understand how we even got there.
@@MRed0135 no, also Palestinian Arabic . The thing is that the Israeli flag represents a political statement while the Hebrew language isn’t political per se. Although , I wouldn’t be shocked if Eliezer Ben Yehuda was a Zionist . Nonetheless, you can speak Hebrew from age 10 months like me and also oppose Zionism
8:03 "Does it matter what language they think in?". Do people usually think in a fixed language? I find I usually think in my most recently used language, even if I'm not fluent in it.
@@ClayChiarelott I am not really trying to make that kind of claim at all. I know two languages fluently(Norwegian and English), and the one I think in is the one I recently used, and this seems anecdotally to be the case in many of my friends and acquaintances too. I am also learning Chinese(am married to a Chinese and lived there for a while), and if I have been using Chinese a lot I find myself thinking in it, and substituting English/Norwegian words or images where I come short. I am not lying about it, or trying to be special, my comment about it was because I thought that was the default mode of operations. I find it a bit unpleasant of you to insinuate I am lying for attention.
Looking at forums this seems to be a relatively common experience among language learners[1,2], guess they are also all very special. I couldn't dig up any research on the topic(though notably that doesn't mean it doesn't exist), but I found a forum of researchers, some of whom are being suspiciously special[3]. It definitely doesn't seem my experience is anything out of the ordinary, you wouldn't be monolingual or at the very least English native by any chance? I'd imagine that would make it far more difficult to become immersed in different languages, and finding yourself thinking in them.
[1] - www.reddit.com/r/languagelearning/comments/br2arp/those_that_are_fluent_in_2_or_more_languages_do/
[2] - www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/3lpmea/do_you_always_think_in_your_first_language/
[3] - www.researchgate.net/post/In-which-language-do-you-think
Being native just means it was your primary language(s) you grew up learning subconsciously which can be multiple languages. Plenty of Spanish Americans are perfectly fluent in English and Spanish because they grew up with both languages. @@iverbrnstad791
If you had to actually sit down and learn a language, you're not a native speaker. A 3 year old is not studying a text book or using an app or hiring a tutor.
I almost always think in English. Especially when I'm normally speaking Telugu to my family, I still do deep thought in English, but I formulate in Telugu before speaking.
I find that while thoughts may enter my head in Telugu when I've been speaking Telugu, it's still usually "translated" into English for the remainder of my thought process.
When speaking French however I do find i start thinking in French and even some of my deeper thought levels are in French, but when I get nervous it immediately switches to English and formulating in French.
There are times when I'm speaking French or Telugu normally, and then have to switch to English for a friend or my partner and I accidentally don't switch/assume that person understood what was said and just wait for them to respond... Meanwhile they don't know what's going on in French/Telugu.
I learned English as a first language, and was the language for the majority of my academic endeavors. I also studied French for a decade, through the university level. Telugu however was taught to me informally at home or with family. I think this academic vs. Informal dichotomy I have with these languages are probably why I can engage in deeper thought in French or English but not Telugu. I don't think I have the vocab or grammar for Telugu that I do for English or French.
Being multilingual is a fun, lifelong thought experiment.
> expecting a critique of Algerian policy on the Amazigh language
> I get - generic leftist polifics
This feels to me analogous to how social and grammatical gender are different but we unfortunately use the same words to represent them, leading us to associate them directly with one another when in fact their actual association isn't as strong. Similarly, e.g. France and French are different but we unfortunately use the same flags (and words, I suppose, perhaps unavoidably) to represent them, again leading to a mental association that's stronger than their actual association is.
Subbed halfway through. Fantastic video !
I disagree with this, as no one uses flags to identify languages to promote fascism. Using the French flag for French still makes sense, using the English or British flag for English still makes sense, using the Spanish flag for all Spanish (aka Castillian) still makes sense, for these languages originated in these countries. Perhaps you would have to come up with more creative solutions for languages like Serbo-Croatian, but not everyone has this problem. For regional languages like Sicilian or Breton use their regional flags.
Pretty sure Americans speak an English closer to the original than people living in the UK now...
I think, "native" is so convenient, because its so fuzzy. You can use it to collectively refer to many different things. And as an aspirational goal it is more useful then "i want to be able to speak the language like someone who lived there since he was two years old".
Doesn't this ignore, that people, or communities, always have an urge to find common grounds and will define their borders by them? Languages will therefore often be a part of the same borders a culture will find itself in.
This is a far more complex set of issues of law, ethics, and different fields of tech, law, business, education, and government functions, etc, and not just about technical accuracy of linguistics. Any comprehensive analysis would be beyond TL:DR for those few whose literacy covered all those fields.
We need short form language conventions. Most such conventions have implicit context and interpretation, but are open to misunderstanding by those lacking that. Think about engineering standards, or law short form cites, or medical systems....
How does ASL fit in? Why, given modern tech and CC: options, do we retain legal standard to waste screen space on videos with an ASL signer, when CC: language can be far more precise on most topics, and is widely and freely available? How does that compare with schools that cater to more than one language, to the exclusion of most others? How does English end up the de facto US language, while it violates several core legal principles to officially designate any such langauge? How does that relate to the A of FAPE, ethical and legal standards for a "free and appropriate public education", often biased against very bright kids, whose literacy needs may be above those of most teachers?
Flags in some contexts help a lot with brevity and clarity. A flag next to a language or currency pull down box on a UI/UX design takes far less space than specifying in words, and where there are different dollars or other same name currencies, and different variants of English, Spanish, Portuguese, etc. "This works for usual practices here" is a functional need to communicate simply, even if there are underlying issues of history and society and attitudes, with many complex aspects.
I'm somewhere on the social democracy/democratic socialism continuum. I tend to root for underdogs, I tend to bristle at injustice, I tend to think the worst of the people who hoard money and other forms of power.
I also hold an undergraduate social science degree. In my junior and senior years, I took multiple units touching or focusing on nationalism, unavoidably through a critical/postmodern lens. I embrace that background. Fascinating stuff. Benedict Anderson's "Imagined Communities" is a profoundly insightful study, and it feels like it probably gets more to the heart of things, and the truth of how nationalism really developed than, for example, Ernest Gellner's ideas.
But, coming from that background, I really struggle when "nationalism" is discussed by most people who identify as leftists.
How can we still talk about nationalism in such a simplistic terms, as such an inherent evil? Nationalism itself is what you're clearly referring to as a "dark ideology." Why is this discourse informed entirely by the orientation and categories of Rosa Luxembourg, for example, and not at all by those of Franz Fanon, for example?
How can leftists talk this way about "nationalism" without cognitive dissonance tearing their brains apart, while they vigorously advocate support for anti-colonial movements, which are universally expressed as nationalisms? Pro-Catalan, pro-Palestinian, pro-Kurdistan . . . anti-nationalist?
Your sensitivity to insider/outsider, seeking out the gradations, the conflicts, the historical disjunctures, challenging the reified unities: this is all consistent with the problematics of academic culture study. And that is not all purely philosophical, it is often a real political factor in the lived experience of people around the world who use languages and share cultural expression.
But nationalism is NOT reducible to its most totalitarian, genocidal expressions.
If you read Benedict Anderson with clear eyes, he is telling you that nationalism was, in many important ways, a liberating evolution that allowed people brand new access to power knowledge and political strength to counter feudal aristocratic and clerical power structures.
Peasants bound to a noble's holding, and his obligatory language of court, had a new power against that lord, when common language areas proliferated with the progress of the written word.
Nationalities are real, and nearly all of them are practically and culturally associated with place. The vast majority of humans on earth learn one language before learning any other language, and that language forms the core of their cultural identity. That is true of nearly anybody reading this. You travel, have new experiences, aquire new expressions and cultural context to express them in, but you retain your self of who you are, based on your perceived, culturally-constructed sense of origin and its meaning. That is nationalism.
And if any one thing has done more to alienate the global working classes from leftism and leftists, it's the persistent blinkered effort to delegitimize that reality.
People will have nationalism. People have an intuitive sense of what "native" means, always contested at the margins, but always essential and real.
It's not evil. Totalitarianism is evil. Nationalism is a ubiquitous political fact of modernity, which totalitarianism exploits. But that does not define nationalism.
Found more Fasc trash. 💩
@@lococomrade3488 why do you write these comments? this was a very well written comment, what's your problem with other people being other?
@Ptaku93 You're being disingenuous.
He's not "being other."
He's a Nationalist. That's a choice. A decision.
We don't have to respect ~everyone's~ opinions. Especially not Nationalist Fascist trash.
This wasn't well-written. It's just catchy to idiots. That's how Nationalists operate. They con and trick fools.
For non native speakers you can translate this in
German 🇦🇹
English 🇦🇺
Spanish 🇦🇷
or Portuguese 🇧🇷
Austrian German is a different language for sure. 🤣🤣🤣
They should use the Dutch flag to represent German
Argentinian Spanish is well on the way to being a distinct language.
Very interesting discussion. What has bugged me for many years is the apparent disdain a lot of "native" speakers give to "non-native" speakers. Example, my wife immigrated to the US. Often people treat her as inferior due to her accent and manner of speech even though she speaks US English better and more grammatically correct than most locals where we live.
Ah yes first world problems. Nothing like making something out of nothing. Even if you ditch the flag the language Name comes from the country. We have to call them something. We cant just be like... Yeah i am learning Anime language, i am learning tulips language, cause we still have an association of what country is inferred. And we are back at your far right radicalisation blah blah blah remarks.
Yes, first world problems in the sense of problems imposed by the first world on the rest of humanity, since nationalism was invented in europe.
Even worse actually, Language names usually come from the names of the PEOPLES who spoke them! Lol How horribly nationalistic to associate languages with the natural divisions upon which these languages evolved over human history!
@@alexdunphy3716 You seem pretty ignorant about history. Most nations are a modern invention at the expense of actual cultures.
@@nicolarulli7733 no you're confusing "nation" which is the same as an ethnicity, a particular group of genetically related people, with a "nation-state" and a "country" or government. The current borders may not be very old, but basically every single country/government currently in existence is derived from a particular nation that built, unified or outright conquered and subjugated those around them to enforce the current borders. Nowhere near all of the nations of the planet have their own state, but basically every state has a nation associated with its creation and they are almost all quite ancient.
@@alexdunphy3716 no. You're confusing nation, which is made up, with ethnicity, which is real. Most "nations" are made up of at least 4 or 5 different historical ethnicities. In general, two or more of those ethnicities share a lot of culture through either shared roots or just long term coexistence, but that is just as true across "nations" or between "nations".
There's a broader conversation here about identity and the role of flags. Even if we remove nation states there is a certain requirement for adopting a new identity in that you have to learn the shibboleth's and lose elements of your previous identity. If you want to get really into cycling, well to be truly accepted by the community you need to buy certain things and know the words for certain things that people outside that group wouldn't know. And to some extend the only way to create an identity is to gatekeep others out of that identity, otherwise it's not really an identity. It's true for making Warcraft figurines, running marathons, home baking, and ultimately creating a nation state. A flag is just one tool to get the members of that identify group to confirm to the norm and keep those who don't out. The problem like in all identity groups is excessive gatekeeping. I've often joked how we need a flag for my country that says I'm proud to be a part of this country but I'm not an ultra-nationalist weirdo and I don't even live in a flag obsessed country like the USA.
What's been bugging me in the language learning space are what I call "method purists". People who have glommed onto some particular strategy for language learning and then claim that it is THE way to learn language, and everybody else are morons, or are irrevocably ruining their ability to reach native-level fluency (see what I did there?) or will somehow "fossilize" early-stage errors into their brains or whatever. My experience with different methods is admittedly broad but not deep--classroom pedagogy, linguistics-informed study, mix-media casual (Duolingo), and comprehensible input--but in my experience these methods *build* on one another. They all have weaknesses that the other ones compensate for.
E.g. CI is great and all, but boy is it frustrating to recognize some new word but not *quite* be able to intuit the meaning from context. Isn't it better to just look up the word? Why *not* take advantage of dictionaries and strategic interrogation of google translate to figure out meanings more quickly, so I can then not be stuck on that one word for who knows how long? But no, if you do that, then you have the CI brojobs say "No! Don't look it up! Then you're just learning the language, not acquiring it!" With an implied "you beta cuck" on the end.
The pedagogic method of just looking something up in a reference work compensates for one of the weaknesses of CI. Likewise, pedagogic learning is great for literal use of a language, but kinda terrible for gaining facility with non-literal idioms. But CI is fabulous for getting exposure to idioms! They build on each other. They compensate for each other's weaknesses.
And *every* method I've used has contributed something that the other methods didn't, and has increased my ability to make connections, deduce meanings, etc. The method purists can have fun in their little sandboxes, but they'll never convince me that their sand is absolutely better than anybody else's sand. Meanwhile, I'm gonna have even more fun playing in *all* the sandboxes.
Haha, really like your sandbox reference.
It also pains me when I don't get a new word from context while reading. Similar happens when I understand all words, but do not get a specific grammar concept (for example the usage of 'ce' in italian sometimes). I just have to look it up. Could never be a CI purist or my head would explode 😅
exactly!
Great video, would love to see more stuff like this!
It's actually funny that, in the same video, you link the use of the French flag to "ultra-nationalism" and mention the (sad) disappearing of all the regional languages and dialects when the policies that got rid of them were actually left-wing and "progressive" initiatives... against local particularisms, regionalisms and millenary traditions labeled that were labeled as "reactionary" (word that is not part of my vocabulary, by the way). The same can be said about Spanish and Italian: the violent centralization of those Nation-States were made at the expenses of the Basks, the Catalans, Sicilians, Neapolitans, and so on. And, for long, those people were considered as vulgar peasants refusing progress by the national elites.
So, in the case of French, if language learners were promoting nationalist/right-wing ideas, they would be using the French flag prior to the Revolution (white with three "fleurs de lys", lilium flowers) or other regional flags. And, similar statements can be made about other countries. So, no, the three-colors French flag is not just a "nationalist" symbol, history is more complex than that.
But, anyway, even though it would be the case: I personally don't see the fact that language learners associate languages with local roots nor as a problem, neither as a contradiction with being open-minded, tolerant or humanist. When you learn a language, you acknowledge folks are just different. You enter a new world through efforts (cognitive efforts) and hope you'll be rewarded with better understanding of the human kind. You access heights that cannot be reached otherwise and get a much better understanding of the psyche of a society. And this happens precisely because you get interested in the peculiarities of their language. It is a beautiful thing that, even in our ultra-globalized world, we still have diversity. That's what make our world fascinating. And learning others' languages is a huge mark of respect.
When you learn Japanese, a language I have recently been studying, it is so interesting to get insights about the way Japanese view the world studying their language. World views that can be challenged by some individuals and change with time, obviously, but still world views that have at least belonged once to a significant number of people in the Japanese history, giving birth to unique pieces of art such as Haikus. Similarly, as you mentioned Spanish: comparing the differences between the dialectal variations from one country to an other (from one region to an other within a country, sometimes) is one of the things that make this language unique and fascinating. And, again, through comparisons (for instance, asking question like "why do they use Ud pronouns so much in Colombia when it almost disappeared in many other countries), you understand others much more.
Actually, if you learn the language of someone that is proud of his or her culture (maybe an evil "nationalist"), you will always get respectful nodes. Celebrating differences, even at the most trivial and clumsy level (like, featuring a "not appropriate" flag) is not lack of humanity or an involuntary adhesion to fascism. I agree that it's good to be aware that one flag does not necessarily correspond to one language and vice versa but this "dark ideology" thing is kinda ridiculous.
Agree. Unification of cultures is a commutist, leftist idea which is dangerous for the existence of the languages' diversity. The right wing heritage worship is a boon for the languages, not vice versa
@@TheBannersOfCastile That's an accurate summary, to me, yes.
Funnily enough here in Catalonia language is being used to further separate people, only that the ones who are pushing for that division and to their favor are the Catalan independence parties aided by the central government, lead by the Socialist Party.
@@diegordi1394 Yes, I am aware of this sad irony. Same can be said about nowadays Breton and Bask nationalisms (not in Corsica, though).
Actually the same thing cannot be said of Spain because there it was not left wing progressives that oppressed regional languages but rather right wing nationalists. Different countries have different histories.
Me when people use the flag of France when there's the flag of l'Organisation internationale de la francophonie:
Tabarnac.
No one would recognise it.
@@enkor9591 Maybe not right away, but if people used it, it would get known.
Don't care about the flag point, so sure. Change it. Whatever floats your boat there. As far as "native speaker" being a problem, just no. It just means that's the language you learned when you were first learning to speak. A person can certainly have Spanish as theor native language but have been born in the US. Same with any other language/nation of birth combination.
I'm not throwing 3+ extra words into a sentence to beat around the bush, when i can just say "native language" and have 100% of the people know what I'm saying and what I mean 100% of the time. Clarity in communication is key.
The problem there has been mentioned by others in this conversation. What about people who learned more than one language when they were first learning to speak? Plus, the term is, unfortunately, often used as a form of gatekeeping in official situations.
My "native language" by your definition is not English, but I've been speaking English for decades and speak it so well that I'm far better at English than I am at my "native language."
The concept of native speaker as a level of proficiency is silly and harmful. It places a 3rd grader from UK at a higher level than Chinua Achebe or Arundhoti Roy, just because these authors are skilled in other languages too!
In casual conversation? Sure. But I think the point is being made more about situations in which it's taken as important. Like being denied a job opportunity because you're not a "native X speaker" and then have that position be given to someone who's unironically worse at X language than you are but who were born at the correct country.
@@Zancibar I've had that kind of experience. I speak excellent English-better than many people I know-but when I looked into getting a job teaching English overseas I discovered I was ineligible. I needed to either have English as my first language, or to have completed 12 years of schooling in English. Unfortunately I learnt English after I moved countries as a child, and completed my first three years of schooling in my birth country.
I've always found it odd, especially as I've been learning more about the language and its dialects, that Spanish is typically represented by the flag of Spain, but the lessons rarely teach the dialect from Spain because they're using primarily a Central Latin American dialect
😂
Lessons rarely teach a "Central Latin American" dialect either. If that were the case they would probably at least teach voseo, which I've never heard of an app doing. You may be talking about other types of lessons of course.
I think it makes sense to represent a language by nation state flag in some cases. Take for example Lithuania, modern republic of Lithuania was explicitly founded by Lithuanian speakers in resistance to occupation and russification. The country of Lithuania to this day puts national language preservation as a priority in laws etc as that is directly linked with continued existence of nation state. That is to say every person speaking Lithuanian one hundred percent would identify themselves with Lithuanian tricolour as nationhood as such first arose from linguistically determined basis.
Such manner of representation of course wouldn't work with countries who have colonial origins and language doesn't determine nationality.
If you zoom out and look at the kind of people who use these language learning products then it starts to make sense. The average 1st world middle class language learner (regardless of race) probably doesn't know much about the nuance of national identities the world over. To them the language they learned in school is the language of their country, their "native" language. So they project this onto every other language and by extension every other nation. It's easy to understand that people in Mexico and Spain both speak a dialect of Spanish because it's established by their respective nation states, but it's much harder to place minority languages like Mazahua. Projecting a flag onto them belittles the fact that a lot of these languages are spoken by people who don't have their own nation or feel as though they are a part of a nation that doesn't have the same "native" language as them, let alone represents their interests.
Now I'm not so crazy right wing nutjob but the idea of creating a nation with a common spoken language can actually be a good thing. Literacy rates in countries like Indonesia rose dramatically after the government established enforced a common language. It sounds pretty messed up from our western viewpoint especially when you consider that only 5% of the country spoke that language at the time. However, the hard truth is there's no perfect way to integrate a country with 700 local languages. Now that over 90% of the country speaks the language they've seen immense progress. (social issues notwithstanding) In 1972 there was even a join effort between Indonesia and Malaysia to harmonize the writing systems of both their national languages.
So I don't like the idea of portraying nation states as evil things that erase the existence of minorities in the name of national purity. It's sort of reductive in the same way giving every language on DuoLingo a flag is reductive. It's really tough because I agree with your points but at the same time don't really see a better alternative. Most people are interested in the languages of nation states, as that's the main language spoken by the people when they actually go there. I just get a little put off when I constantly see people living in the most privileged time in history complain about the very systems that gave them that prosperity. I really don't see terms like "native language" or "native speaker" to be that harmful, and to most people they aren't that ambiguous. As a linguist I'm sure you understand the concept of a category that is perfectly understood/comprehensible, but not rigidly/scientifically defined. That's just kind of how language works. As for the flags, maybe just remove the ones that don't make sense. In the case of Yiddish, I liken it to the flying of a pride flag. They don't seek to identify themselves as a separatist nation state any more than the LGBT do. Creating more representation for a minority isn't part of a dark ideology, it's part of progress. In fact I think a lot more awareness of the many minority languages of the world would result if they did all fly some kind of flag.
*Kurdistan enters the chat.*
You really need to organize your thoughts, it will help to express yourself concisely.