At my last workplace I was working this woman originating from somewhere in north africa. No idea which country.

She was born in the UK, and did not know her mother tongue.

According to her it was very important to know it, and she regretted not learning it. In the area she lived she said she always told the asian parents to teach the language, so that they do not lose any of their history.

It is important.

"Admin" wrote:

It is important.

Thats ur opinion

in my 18 years of existence I've never felt its neccesity or importance

and you have I dunno, 2 times that amount of life left?

Its better to be prepared for what may happen.

I think it good to know your mother Tongue and too be able to speak it. But it ain't a big deal if people don't. I would have prefer to have been fluent in at least punjabi or Urdu, but the fact i ain't isn't going to give me any sleepless nights. But living in England i think the priority should be english and anything after is a bonus.

"Admin" wrote:

Its better to be prepared for what may happen.

do u spend ur life preparing and anticipating what MAY or may NOT happen in the future?

have u learned French, German or Spanish?

after all its possible u could end up living in those countries in the future.

Why should British schools make it a priority to teach Urdu? If kids are illiterate in their mother tongue their parents should make provisions for them to learn the language in their school if it's available or in a weekend or evening class. It's not an imperative for the British government to teach these kids their mother tongue. Surely for them to teach these kids English is their concern? They're trying to prepare kids for examinations later on, for a career essentially for a material life in the west. So we shouldn't "expect" such a commitment from the government.

There are also a lot of Bangladeshis who can't speak or write Bengali but I wouldn't say it's an imperative on the government to teach this in their langauge faculties. If it's an option great, if it's not usually it's because there is little demand.

For those of us interested in studying Islam whether we like it or not we will have to learn Urdu at some point, especially if we choose to study here in the west or somewhere in asia. Because the ulema would have learned via urdu, and therefore can only teach in the same way.

Although there is a lot of Islamic literature in urdu a lot of these books have been translated from Arabic to Urdu because of the demands to teach Islam in the indian subcontinent. There is far more Islamic literature in Arabic if the truth be known. But we have little access to them because we're unwilling to learn Arabic or we have to learn urdu and then learn Arabic via urdu. I don't see the point of the long winded approach just like Yuit.

It seems like Islamic studies in the west is exclusively for those whose mother tongue is Urdu. I mean students who can speak urdu because it's their mother tongue are far better off on an islamic course taught via urdu than someone like me who doesn't know a word of Urdu. It doesn't seem fair or right. Why can't we learn Arabic and teach Islamic courses via Arabic the tradional way?

I agree there's a lot of literature and beautiful poetry in the urdu language, and i'd love to learn the language. But i don't think it's a good enough excuse to exclude non urdu speakers from learning their religion in depth. Of course those who truly want to learn will learn urdu and then proceed to Arabic however gruelling it maybe.

Also why are you praising Imams in the UK, who refuse to learn English and continue to exclude students who have very poor urdu or are non urdu speakers. What's so virtuous about that? Muslims come from all sorts of backgrounds, English, Bengali, Malay, Somali etc. Mosques that teach exclusively in their mother tongue will exclude students who don't knowthe language. But if they know English everyone will be welcome.

Is it too much to ask a person living in a particular country to learn the language so they can communicate and not appear ignorant? If i was going to live in Pakistan i would learn some urdu before i went, and if i was deciding to stay permanently i would take lessons to learn the language. For me it would be a form of empowerment. I don't want to have someone chaperone me everytime i go out, simply because i can't catch a bus alone, or get some groceries on my own. How sad is that?

Those in my parents generation although they've lived here for decades can't speak a word of English. It's like they've created their own little Pakistans, Bangladeshs within the uk and have refused to integrate at all. This really makes me mad, especially when elders can't do something simple like withdrawing money from the bank, filling in forms. Some of them can't even hold a basic conversation on the phone and will often say my daughter speak i no understand i live here for 40 years i no know ingelese. This is down to their own pride. Why didn't they make an effort to learn the language? Don't tell me this is a glorious thing.

I'm all for kids learning their mother tongue, and maintaining their unique cultural identities. But I also think kids should learn the language of the country they're living in. Refusing to do so for no good reason just displays arrogance.

With the same token as there are soo many Urdu and Bengali speakers in the Uk it's not asking too much for native english ppl, especially teachers to learn the basics of the language. We make an effort to totally immerse ourselves into their language, culture etc, it's common curtesy to learn a bit about ours. Otherwise our host countries could appear just as ignorant as those they're trying to educate.

P.S I think you'll find the problem lies with the children. Very often kids don't want to learn their mother tongue it's not cool for a Pakistani child to know Urdu, or for a Bengali child to know Bengali after all that's for "freshies" not for us. That's the mentality amongst the youth. Parents need to change that first. It's not the fault of the schools really.

Thats true

why single out Urdu

what about punjabi, Gujarati, bengali, Tamil etc etc

"Fatima" wrote:

French was difficult but i liked it. I took it cos not a single student had any respect for the urdu teacher. Poor guy was subjected to all sorts. It was a "doss about" lesson hardly anyone passed, if they did at the most it was a C grade.

you went radclyffe didnt you?

interesting points raised........i think it probably is best not taught in schools, unless as an option or as weekend/evening class - as it already is

knowing your mother tongue is important to some people more than others - if you hardly visit pakistan or wherever ur from - its no big fuss

no i didnt go there ^^^

was ot Dr Samee tho?

yeh it was Dr Sammy [size=9]bechara[/size]

exactly why i picked french over urdu

they cant get a teacher who can get a group of monkeys to sit quite for 50mins

u mus hav had him at count hill

wrong again i wasnt at Count Hill

where else has he taken his terrible teachings? :shock:

met him on wimmy rd last week...hes still teaching lol

[size=9]dont really wanna say which school i went to, im sure u can understand, (anonominty)[/size]

yes

wooopsy

[size=7]my bad[/size]

its ok, you weren't to know

"Iftikhar" wrote:

There are nearly seven million native Britis who are unable to read and write English.

Bilingual Muslim children need bilingual teachers as role models. They need to learn standard English to follow the National Curriculum and go for higher studies and research to serve humanity. They need to learn Arabic to recite and understand the Holy Quran. They need to learn Islamic Studies to develop their mental, emotional and personality. The children from the sub-continent need to learn Urdu to keep in touch with their cultural roots and enjoy the beauty of Urdu literature and poetry.

But shouldn't the focus of British education be toward the competitive advantage of it's next generation in world markets for the future economic success of Britain? I would think Chinese, French - what appears to be the growing language of the EU, and perhaps spanish and other "major" languages would be the most important under such a perspective.

Maintaining cultural and ethnic identity is certainly important - but is that necessarily a job for the state? It seems to me that the only culture the British government has a responsibility to is British culture.

Actually most of the work in urdu is original. Currently in madaris in indo-pak the arabic books are taught in arabic, the persian books are taught in persian and the urdu books are taught in commentary. The assumption that the urdu works are translations of arabic/persian is not true. The works have always been taught in their original language. Hence those wanting to study deen in english may do so entirely but arabic, farsi and urdu will remain indispensable because so much knowledge exists in those languages.

"Iftikhar" wrote:

The children from the sub-continent need to learn Urdu to keep in touch with their cultural roots and enjoy the beauty of Urdu literature and poetry.

but why do they need to keep in touch with their cultural roots?

I'm in touch with my culture-without being fluent in Urdu

"ka pattha" wrote:

Hence those wanting to study deen in english may do so entirely but arabic, farsi and urdu will remain indispensable because so much knowledge exists in those languages.

agreed

but nowadays, a lot is becoming available in English as well

but having said that, a lot of the classic works in its original form are in arabic, farsi and urdu

Wahey! Iftikhar replied to his topic!

LilSis; that is what GCSE's are. general preparaztion for knowledge that you MAY need during life.

Why else don they teach standard deviation in maths? (Inceidentally, that is not taught at A'levels in detail either...)

Or einstiens theories? or how planes fly, or how electricity works? because it MAY be useful.

my conclusion in my essay of bilingualism

In conlusion attitudes to language seem to be associated with the individual’s conception of the most desirable future for himself and his group within British society. Those who opt for a British identity seem to favour assimilation (Hamers and Blanc 1989). I consider myself more British then Pakistani. I do not fit in with my Pakistani relatives in Pakistan and am prepared to assimilate only at the expense of my language. This is because I am part of the third Pakistani generation residing in England, who are mainly dominant or monolingual in L2. My personal opinion is that, my children will not know one word of English and will be a victim of language death, and a language revival will be needed in order to recuperate this language.

I find a doorway to culture.

If you learn langiuage properly, you understand some of the culture.

I 'get' linguistics (but not language...).

Just learning language can open up your mind.

"MuslimSisLilSis" wrote:

my conclusion in my essay of bilingualism

In conlusion attitudes to language seem to be associated with the individual’s conception of the most desirable future for himself and his group within British society. Those who opt for a British identity seem to favour assimilation (Hamers and Blanc 1989). I consider myself more British then Pakistani. I do not fit in with my Pakistani relatives in Pakistan and am prepared to assimilate only at the expense of my language. This is because I am part of the third Pakistani generation residing in England, who are mainly dominant or monolingual in L2. My personal opinion is that, my children will not know one word of English and will be a victim of language death, and a language revival will be needed in order to recuperate this language.

What the hell?!

You start off your conclusion "in conclusion" speak in the first person and misused the word "recuperate" (shoulda said "resuscitate" since that is done with the intervention of third parties upon a thing, while recuperation is self driven)

Where did you learn how to write?!

"Admin" wrote:

Just learning language can open up your mind.

yep

and there are theories that prove this

According to Cummins (1976) the further the child moves towards balanced bilingualism, the greater the likelihood of cognitive advantages. This relationship is known as the third threshold in the Thresholds theory, which means one has an age appropriate competence in two languages. He has also suggested that when a child has age-appropriate ability in both their languages, they may have cognitive advantages over monolinguals (as cited in Baker 1996).

and read my intro snobby Dave

This assignment will consist of a case study of my own personal experiences as a bilingual individual. It will consider the social and political context of language acquisition and educational experiences in the light of theoretical knowledge. It will draw attention to the agent’s of socialisation which influenced my past and current attitudes, and competence as a bilingual individual and will relate them to theoretical issues.

this essay was not supposed to be acedemic standard-I was meant to write in first person as I'm drawing from personal exp

snob

we simple people went normal schools

schools where we wernet provided with a ferrari for F1 lessons, nor did we have lunch with famous people

deprived, i know

I went to uni, and lost the ability to write.

Nowadays I cannot read my own writing, (some people blame this on engineering courses) and i am sure I would have got better grades if my writing was legible...

So forget multilingualism.

"Black Prince" wrote:

snob

we simple people went normal schools

schools where we wernet provided with a ferrari for F1 lessons, nor did we have lunch with famous people

deprived, i know

????? I didn't go to school with famous people!!

Just their kids.

lol funny you should bring that up considering my jeer at your education system in light of madheias STILL INCORRECT use of the word "recuperate" as well as beginning her concluding paragraph with "in conclusion" - GWB went to High School at my High School, and we all know how famously he gets along with the English language.

He speeches real good.