I am not sure what is the point here, since you seem to be decided to basically return to the good old reasons not to learn a language we all know already.
I_likes_languages wrote:After reading your post, I understand your question like this:
Why bother learning any language other than English?
and even more precisely:
What tangible use does learning any language other than English to a high level have for the average person?
For example, one of the main reasons why my country still can function so badly is the language barrier, that's what keeps most people in (without that, at least half the country would be already gone, just like people from the former eastern Germany were moving to the western regions en masse. Voting with one's feet is the most powerful freedom one has got). Not learning other languages than English to high level (and often not even English) is the chain tying people here. So many say "I would leave, if only I knew the language".
People are so focused on English (at least all those who don't fail at languages completely and stay monolingual), despite the fact moving to the anglophone countries is much harder than to the other european ones. Too many people are not realising that learning the other languages, like German, French, Spanish, or even the smaller ones like Dutch or Swedish, that is the way out. Or at least to a much better post in an international company.
For an average person in many countries, learning a different language than English is the way to several times higher income. Too bad people fail to realise it, due to the hyperstrong ESL marketing.
However, I don't think that these reasons are enough to justify learning a foreign language to a high level.
Of course many people don't see a reason to learn a language to a high level and there is nothing wrong about that. If they prefer to spend their free time watching a soap opera in their native language, it is up to them.
Language learning is awesome and should be more widely spread, but that doesn't mean it is equally valuable to everyone. And actually, the more people don't bother learning languages, the better for the rest of us, as we have to face less fierce competition and get more opportunities to get paid for these skills others don't bother to acquire
I can sort of see material costs of media, although a cost/benefit might prove it isn't worth the effort. I can see wanting to read or watch something which might never be translated, but again, lot of effort to learn a language just for a TV series or a couple of books.
That depends on the point of view. I personally don't see any value in investing that much money, time, and efforts in sports, as most people will simply never get anything more than some fun and earlier arthrosis out of it
That is the same kind of thinking.
And in some cases, we are not talking about a few books and tv series. A few years ago, I read a very interesting article about the language barrier in science, written by a sinologist. China invests a lot in various fields of science and publishes only a part of the findings in English, and only when it chooses to. It may not seem important today, but the laziness of the world to actively look for research published in other languages may turn out to be an important chinese advantage in a few decades.
Plus, don't underestimate the importance of having varied sources of information these days. You can tell really fast who reads only their national press and who reads more than that.
rdearman wrote:Cavesa wrote:Also, the "we've never hired 2nd language speakers for the job, only natives" experience calls for a follow up question: "and what kinds of candidates were you refusing,what were their language skills?". Perhaps only badly speaking 2nd language speakers were applying, or they were simply worse in other aspects than the successful candidates who also happened to be natives of the demanded language.
A company located in London is spoiled for choice. There were hundreds of applicants for the job, remember this was a call centre, so a position for Spanish speaker would get 100-200 applicants, so the first thing you do is strip out all applicants whose native language isn't Spanish and who don't already live in the country. Didn't matter what their level was, if it wasn't native then it wasn't enough to make the final cut. Even then we'd still have to go through 50-100 applicants who were native Spanish speakers and try to get it down to 10 people to interview then to 2-3 people for second interviews. I suppose if the job required more specialist skills like doctor or lawyer then 2nd language applicants would have been considered.
If there were some C1 or C2 candidates, I am surprised noone sued your company for discrimination
I hear suing companies is pretty common in the US, and this just calls for it.
C2 (and I'd say even C1) is definitely enough for vast majority of jobs, I cannot think of many exceptions. But the truth is that most people don't get to the C levels and get the certificate. And that is their mistake.
It is true that the anglophones are at a disadvantage, as too many people are learning English and competing against them, but that is the price for all the advantages.
How would you sell learning another language to a monolingual speaker who doesn't need it for work, marriage, or imigration. What possible reason could you give them?
But you have just named all the main reasons. I don't know what else would you like to hear. The only other reason is fun.
These three reasons, however, could apply to many more people than you'd believe. We often don't know we might need something until it is too late.
, Greek or Hebrew or Arabic to those who inclined to traditional religions, or Sanskrit to those who are just spiritually inclined. For reasons unknown, It is hard to sell Classical Chinese though. Russian counterpart of Facebook has numerous groups devoted to learning Sanskrit, while there is only one devoted to Classical Chinese with less than hundred of people in it. 
