If, like myself, you are parents of children growing up ‘abroad,’ then we probably share a common angst if our children do not or cannot speak our native language.
Having grown up outside of Pakistan my entire life, save numerous long summers during early schooling years and then later, almost bi-annual winters during college and thereafter, I am able to converse and understand spoken Urdu. It is thanks to my parents, who spoke Urdu throughout my young formative years, and our visits to the motherland, that I am able today, to appreciate more of my rich culture because I have the ability to communicate and comprehend Urdu. My wish and hope is that my children too, are able to have this wonderful gift and opportunity. In the world we now live in, especially for our American/foreign born children, the need for them to have a strong sense of belonging and a positive self-identity in the western societies they live in, is paramount in my opinion.
As a parent of two young children, my husband & I constantly struggle with the fact that our children are not speaking Urdu. We think they understand the language in some minimal capacity, but not nearly enough to elicit proper comprehension or more far flung verbal communication. We – or rather I – think they are in reality absorbing more than we give them credit for, but the reality is that it is not a two way road (yet). I am an optimist in this regard. It really boils down to whether or not we as parents make a consistent effort to actually SPEAK to each other in Urdu, and therefore with our children.
It has been noted that even in households where parents speak Urdu, the children living abroad either stop speaking their native language soon after entering preschool, KG, etc. or never felt comfortable speaking it at all. So, if your children don’t speak Urdu either because you as a parent are not using it as the first language of communication in the household, or even if you are, and your children still either cannot or refuse to, I still feel that there is good in continuing to speak.
There are a lot of theories and much evidence that while children may not speak their native language, if they are around it and hear it being spoken, their young minds may be absorbing more than you think. Language acquisition begins from birth. Many linguistic experts agree for the most part that the years from birth to before puberty is when the brain is able to absorb the most language, as well as the proper accent and more ‘native-like’ fluency and pronounciation. This is considered the ‘critical’ or the milder term, ‘optimal’ period for first and second language acquisition.
Psycholinguists and cognitive scientists have debated this ‘critical period hypothesis’ quite enthusiastically (from: ‘Cognitive Scientists on Bilingual Education’, UPI, Steve Sailer – October 27, 2000):
MIT linguist Noam Chomsky is famous for demonstrating that children are born with an innate ability to learn words and grammar. He suggests caution on the subject but pointed out, ‘There is no dispute about the fact that pre-puberty (in fact, much earlier), children have unusual facility in acquiring new languages.’
Chomsky’s younger MIT colleague, cognitive scientist Steven Pinker, [now at Harvard] author of the bestsellers ‘The Language Instinct’ and ‘How the Mind Works, states, ‘When it comes to learning a second language, the younger the better. In a large study of Chinese immigrants who entered the U.S. at different ages, those who arrived after puberty showed the worst English language skills. Still, this finding of ‘younger is better’ extended to far younger ages. People who began to learn English at six ended up on average more proficient than those who began at seven, and so on.’ As an illustration, Pinker points to the famously thick German accent of former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, who arrived in America at age fourteen. In contrast, his younger brother developed a standard American accent.
Pinker’s arch-rival, Terrence W. Deacon, a biological anthropologist at Boston University and author of ‘The Symbolic Species’ replies, ‘I have to agree with Steve Pinker[on this one particular issue]that learning a language early in life can be an advantage for developing language fluency and sophistication.’
I know from personal experience, that languages in which I was immersed or were spoken to during the ‘critical period’ years, are still with me, and seem to possess the ability to speak with minimal non-native accent. I lived in Thailand until age 14 and also learned French in elementary school (as well as being exposed to French in Laos-French IndoChina- during ages 5-9). Almost 2 decades later I can still converse to some coherent degree in those languages. I learned Spanish in my mid-twenties, and many (!) years later, I can barely remember 5-10 basic sentences!
Aisha PZ is the proud mother of two beautiful children and blogs at Boundless Meanderings. This post was originally published at ATP in September 2006.
muja BBC NEWS pusun hey
I think both Gabaroo and Rafay Kashmiri have valid points.
I don’t think all the references to “glorious” historical points made by Rafay are relevant as far as teaching your child a language is concerned, however, Urdu is indeed the lingua franca of Pakistan, and it’s indeed a very big language in the world, and therefore it is a very good language to know, and therefore also more useful to know than e.g. hindko or siraiki.
Gabaroo’s point is however also valid. I guess it all boils down to practicalities, and not whether one language is “better/finer” than another.
It would obviously be easiest to teach your child the language you know best! The problem arises when the parents know more languages than they can reasonably teach. Using the OPOL method (one parent one language) you could teach a child three languages.. but it all comes down to what your family looks like… what languages do the parents know, and how well etc.
If both parents are pakistanis (which I believe is the most common case(correct me if I’m wrong)) and you live in an english speaking environment (which is also the most common), then I think the problems are not so much practical. One language can be used at home (with parents), and one in society. There can however be an issue of status involved here. How proud of their language do the parents appear in front of their children? Does the language have any specific status in the society. The important thing is that the child does not see the minority language as something inferior. In Pakistan, english is still associatied (knowingly or not) with the “upper class”… and “urdu-medium” students are associated with “lower classes”. This is really sad. There is a huge mix-up of financial situation, education and family background, and this class system messes things up.
I have worked in certain international, english-medium, schools in Pakistan, where only very well-off families could put their children. These kids (the pakistanis) often couldn’t even write their own name in the urdu script. I was shocked. They had lost so much of their national language due to status issues.
These are just my one and a half cents. I encourage all to research bilingualism on internet.
The more languages you can teach your children, the better it is! Keep it up!
@Gabaroo,
To hear this, is a shock for all Pakistanis from all
origins. A language which should be declared world
heritage, because :
It was created as a rich human invention of 17th century.
It has four major culturel ingredients Farsi, Turkish, Arabic
and Sanskrit, being an Indo-European most authentic
language spoken actually by more than 250 millions.
Written in Arabic Khat (letters) adding 5 major new letters to equate 5 sanskrit pronunciations
Invented by the muslims and the Indian muslim’s
sophisticated culture, in old India, adopted officially by Pakistan on Independance as National Language.
One of the most possitive inventions during Mughal Raj
was the last most prestigious inventions after Mughal’s
other contributions e.g. gastronomy, architecture, libass, etiquetts, manners, social code, etc.
At present,Urdu is the only communication between Pashtoons and Sindhis, Balochis with Punjabis, and all speaking one “common” language, all four provincial languages can not be compared with Urdu( sorry), which
is not a monopoly of Muhajirs.
The stereotype impression must be abandoned.
The Muhajirs who claim any thing of the sort, must learn
first how to speak Urdu language.
Aisha PZ,
going thru some painful comments:
@The assassination of Pakistan’s National Language,
To assissinate a Nation, kill her language first, they
will become your slaves, ‘Ghengiz Khan’
We are assisting the tragic death of Urdu, Pakistan’s
national ” consensused” language, we have never
disqualified other provincial languages !!
An average European speaks three languages, in my own
parental family we speak and write 6 European
languages, but never to the detrimend of others.
I understand all this about urdu this and that…but Urdu is really only the native language of the so called mohajirs which are mostly in Karachi…..what about all the native languages of pakistan namely Punjabi, Sindhi, etc. Why are pakistanis first dumping these mother tounges in favour of national language of urdu, thinking they are now better than all the poor people, and then when they know urdu they will dump that in favour of English to think they are better than everyone else. Really you should teach your children the native language of where in pakistan you are from…if it’s punjab then punjabi (which is the most spoken language in Pakistan) and sindhi if you are from sindh…What about that??? the system in pakistan is designed so that only with English you can be very successful, somewhat successful with only Urdu and have poor opportunities if you only know your mother tounge….that is sad isnt it?