Ministry policy misguided
I was dismayed to read that a Ministry of Education official said that since "English is not a native language of the Philip-pines and India, Filipinos and Indians speak English with non-native accents" ("Ministry cool to teachers from India, Philip-pines," Jan. 21, page 1). The inference is that these countries were not suitable places from which to hire English-language teachers.
One could very well say the same thing about learning Mandarin Chinese in Taiwan, but to do so would be a big mistake. Taiwan remains one of the favored destinations for learning Mandarin, and I had excellent teachers at National Taiwan University.
Taiwan is such a good place to study Mandarin precisely because Mandarin is not the "native" language, and so it was necessary for the government to invest heavily in training teachers. These are the same type of policies implemented by the colonial governments of England and the US in both India and the Philippines.
Today, many of the most celebrated writers in the Eng-lish language are Indians. Phone banks in both India and the Philippines handle customer service and telemarketing for US corporations (using American accents). The educated elite in both countries speak English as their first language and are often unable to communicate in local languages -- just as many Taiwanese can no longer speak the languages spoken by their grandparents' generation.
It would be easy for the ministry to hire people based on their linguistic fluency without basing this on country of origin. In fact, country of origin is not even a guarantee that a job candidate will have a good accent. Not only are there more than a few Americans whose English is far from standard -- proper training in the field of English-language education is as important, if not more so, than mere fluency.
If the ministry is determined to bring in native-speakers to teach English, they need to have hiring practices that will enable them to pick the most qualified candidates regardless of their country of origin. Otherwise they will be no better than the many cram schools who continue to turn down qualified Asian- and African-Americans because they only want a white face in front of the classroom.
P. Kerim Friedman
New York City
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS