It’s important, but...

In this article, we provide an analysis of discourses for and against the second language (L2) requirements on American university and college campuses. Facing enrollment declines in language programs, professional advocacy for L2 learning has shifted from liberal arts education ideals to practical benefits associated with multilingualism. Such benefits are often recognized by the discourses that attack the L2 requirement, according to our critical analysis. Often organized in the discursive pattern of “language learning is important, but…,” these discourses tend to argue that 1) L2 learning should be a choice and not a requirement, 2) the L2 requirement is a source of stress and a burden, and 3) the L2 requirement does not aim at full proficiency and therefore achieves nothing. We follow this discourse analysis with a reflective case study of our own experience advocating for the L2 requirement on our university campus, where we have encountered all three of these arguments. Our goal therefore is to show that these discourses are not unique to one institution, but rather common ways of attacking the L2 requirement. We conclude with implications for sustainable and meaningful advocacy that can directly counteract these skepticisms.

本文对美国大学校园里争取和反对二语项目的话语进行了分析。面对着大学外语项目招生人数的下降，学界对二语学习的宣传从传统的文理教育理念转变为着重多语能带来的实用效益。然而，我们对攻击二语教育的批判性话语分析显示，这些攻击通常以认可这些实用效益的形式出现。这些话语通常的表现形式是“语言学习很重要，但是……”，紧接着便话锋一转关注以下三点：(1)二语学习应该是选择，不应是要求；(2) 二语要求会造成学生的压力和负担；(3) 二语要求本身不能实现对二语的熟练掌握，因此毫无意义。对这三种话语进行分析之后，本文会继续就笔者所在校园的二语要求相关讨论进行展开，介绍我们亲身应对的这三种话语形式。将话语分析与个案调查相结合，本文旨在说明我们的遭遇并非是孤立于某一院校的独有现象，这些攻击形式具有普遍意义。本文最后针对这些对二语学习的质疑如何进行有效反驳、并如何能有的放矢地宣传二语学习提出拙见。