Posted by
paenme
16 yrs ago
The question is about an average person's language talent/capacity, not just to the extent of fluency, but being able to compete with the best of the native users of the languages, be it in speech presentation, impromptu discussions, or formal literary writings.
I have seen a lot of well educated bilingual children/people that are seemingly great with both languages, but pale when compared with the best of the native users of the languages. I have long wondered about an average person's limits as to how well he/she can master a language when there is more than one language to be learned/used.
If this ability is indeed limited, will it benefit a child more to educate him/her to be "excellent" in one language but "ok" in the other, than try to have him/her to be "good" (but not "great") at both languages? In today's upper or professional working world where the ability to write and speak brilliently is increasingly important, it almost seems a primary goal of training the child to be "excellent" in one language (to the extent that he/she can compete with the best user of that language) should benefit the child more.
Your thoughts?
Please support our advertisers:
cara +1
can't even believe someone could make such an assumption as the OP...
Please support our advertisers:
The two types of "average" people you just described are not average, first group is below average and the second may be above, but I highly doubt they can use these languages as well as the "best" users of those languages.
I don't disagree with that potentially more doors open if you know more languages, but there is a price to be paid for knowing these languages. That is, you're likely not be as good as the best native users of the languages used in the professional world and may cost you the top jobs. I suppose it depends on what you envision your child will do, if you just want him/her to be one of the regular workers but able to move to a lot of different places, go for multi-languages. But to be, say, the head of a nation or the CEO of a large multinational, the ability to master the language in all fronts is crucial.
Economists had an article about how the British generally benefited in EU discussions/negotiations because they were able to articulate and debate better than others in their native language English.
Please support our advertisers:
Agreed fully with cara. paenme, your argumentation is full of flaws.
1. Should we groom our kids to get the "top jobs" and CEOs of large multinationals? Poor kids.
2. It is fully possible for multi-lingual kids and adults to excel at multiple languages. I know at least 4-5 people whose native language is not English, yet they speak it better than most native English speakers.
3. Languages are important, but to get the "top jobs" requires much much more than language skills. If nothing else, it might be more important to speak multiple languages well than one language "perfectly" (whatever that means).
4. I have noticed that some people speak one language only and badly, while those who excel at one can do so in multiple languages (not to mention other skills).
"second may be above, but I highly doubt they can use these languages as well as the "best" users of those languages."
Think again. Just to take myself as an example, when I was in school I consistently tested as "good native speaker" for English, the fourth language I learned. In my native language (one of two) I consistently tested better than average. To top it off, my first eight years of school were in yet another language, the third I learned.
I know several people well beyond my level.
Please support our advertisers:
1. I know parents groom their children to be pro tennis players, but you don't think there is anything wrong with that?
2. I don't consider most native English speakers the "best" users of the language, not in a competitive professional working world anyway.
3. Top jobs require more than language skills, but without mastering the language required and be competitive with the best users, your chance of getting the top jobs is definitely reduced (significantly in most cases).
4. I have addressed this one in my earlier post.
Don't mean to be rude, and what profession are you in? I know people don't like to hear this, but I've experienced it myself and most other colleagues of mine would agree with me. Being able to be as good as the "best" and I repeat "the best" (not just above average or proficient) in the language most commonly used certainly makes a huge difference in getting those top jobs at large firms.
Please support our advertisers:
"1. I know parents groom their children to be pro tennis players, but you don't think there is anything wrong with that?"
I do find this to be wrong yes. ;) I mean as long as the kid is having fun, sure, but pushing kids too far is unhealthy.
"3. Top jobs require more than language skills, but without mastering the language required and be competitive with the best users, your chance of getting the top jobs is definitely reduced (significantly in most cases)."
Reduced chance, perhaps. But the best will prevail.
I am not currently working actually. :) My wife, though, is definitely in the high percentiles of her profession. Her English, while very good, cannot quite be described as "native level". This has never slowed her down her.
No professional is ever perfect at all the skills required. Every person has weaknesses. You can't point to languages and say that they handicap a career more than any other weak trait.
Please support our advertisers:
"Reduced chance, perhaps. But the best will prevail."
Assume all other skills being equal the only difference is that your competitor is the stronger user of the language and is perceived to be more capable of presenting him/herself as well as the company/group because of it, he or she is much more likely to get that top job. This happens all the time in the professional world even in situations where the top job winners may not necessarily have better qualifications in other areas.
I know many bi/multilinguals who are in the high percentile in their profession, but when it comes to the top jobs in those professions - CEO, CFO, partners at large law or professional firms, if you are not one of the "best" in a language generally required, most of time you're not likely to get there.
I never said languages handicap a career more than any other weak traits. But if there are no other weak traits, the weak language trait can definitely hurt.
Please support our advertisers:
I think there's a difference between educating/training a child, and having one grow up naturally bilingual, as in if the parents speak different languages. Then of course they'll handle both languages like a native cos they are a native! And here in HK we're surrounded by such people, proof of the pudding is on the streets!
Please support our advertisers:
That is exactly what I was referring to. A lot of Asian kids grow up speaking/using two or three languages. Even if they seem to handle the languages as natives, when you really look into the depth of their use/knowledge, it is not there, or at least not as deep or wide as the best users of the languages.
Hong Kongers, for example, pride themselves being able to use both Chinese and English, the truth is on average their English is not as good as Americans or British and their Chinese is not as good as those from China or Taiwan. You may argue there are more doors open for them, but they're also less likely to get the top jobs of large firms in either West or East (except in HK where Cantonese is a primary spoken language). Even here the highest managerial/leadership positions have been steadily lost to Westerners that are generally native and some of the best users of English.
Please support our advertisers:
"Assume all other skills being equal the only difference is that your competitor is the stronger user of the language and is perceived to be more capable of presenting him/herself as well as the company/group because of it, he or she is much more likely to get that top job. "
All other things are never equal. ;)
The reasons there are disproportionately few Asians in management positions at Western companies, even here in HK, are probably more to do with cultural fit than with knowledge of English. Even those who speak "perfect" English (whatever that is) often have a hard time adjusting to the requirements of being an executive in a Western company.
Please support our advertisers:
Whether other things are ever equal is beside the point. Actually in the real world promotions and top jobs are frequently given to people who are better users of a language even when other skills may be unproven or lacking.
Cultural fit is a different issue altogether. Although I would tend to think that most "perfect" English speakers growing up here are likely to head West for college education and perhaps stay and work for a few years there, so there should be a lot less "work cultural" differences. For many fluent users of English that received higher education and worked most of their lives in the West, work culture is not likely an issue to top jobs, but language is.
Please support our advertisers:
We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.
Please support our advertisers:
I am not a stay-at-home spouse/parent so I can only give my personal experiences/observations at a large professional environ, both in the West and East. Happy to hear from others who speak from their personal experience at work.
Obama is well known for his amazing talent/ability with words, which undoubtedly helped him with winning the presidential election. I doubt he'd ever be as good with them if he had grown up using a second language. Languages are like any other skills, the more you use and study it, the better you get. When a person's time is split between two or more languages, he/she is likely not be as good as could have been in any of them due to reduced time spent using each.
Please support our advertisers:
joga
16 yrs ago
Fluent is loosely thrown around term. I have often seen children that either act out or become extremely shy because they speak more than one language but cannot fully express themselves in either. In early childhood if a child is slightly deficient in a language and they suffer some kind of injustice at school or elsewhere they are less able to defend their position and will often either withdraw or act out. This of course can also happen with children with only one language but who are less verbal. The chances however increase when you introduce a second language. I am translator and have worked in various government roles in this capacity. Best translations are always done from your second language into your first we have had many people apply for jobs in our agency where neither of their languages are up to scratch. I think this must be a frustrating way to live life. We have 2 prominent languages in our family. With my children it their choice which they speak or if they want speak both. However it is a priority for me that at least one of the languages be spoken at the level of a first/native language and it is in that language they will be schooled from beginning to end. To me one complete language is better than two partial languages. At the moment I have one child (my oldest) who has just entered university and he was in top 20% of is graduating class for first/native language in the country it is spoken and he has a toeic score of over 900. My youngest on the other hand at this point has no interest in speaking or learning english which is fine with me too.
Please support our advertisers:
joga
16 yrs ago
Here I go again, I apologise in advance but I am actually extremely interested in all aspects of linguistics and this thread is right up my alley. I just remembered a study of highly skilled immigrants who moved to countries of languages other than their own. They usually fill a niche in their adopted country because of their language or other skills. The second generation in such cases will most probably see a drop standard of living in comparison to their parents. It was deduced this likely due language deficiencies i.e. speaking neither the parents native language or the the language of the country in which they live to a high enough degree. The third generation will then resort to the national average.
Please support our advertisers:
"Obama is well know for his amazing talent/ability with words, which undoubtedly helped him with winning the presidential election. I doubt he'd ever be as good with them if he had grown up using a second language"
I think you are wrong, or at least not right. There's no way of knowing how he would have done. He could have been excellent at English and still spoken a second language fluently. I think people have enough bandwidth to learn multiple languages "perfectly" (whatever that means). However I don't think most people put in enough effort, or are exposed enough, to get to that level.
In my case, English is, as mentioned above, my fourth language. The reason I speak and write it well anyway (frankly better than my native language) is that I had full immersion experiences like boarding school with English all the time, surrounded by native English speakers. Nobody would doubt I am a native speaker of my native language though.
It all depends on exposure and effort. You can't axiomatically state that multilingual kids will never learn one or more language as well as speakers of one language. It depends on the person and the environment that person is in.
joga brings up an interesting point about second generation immigrants. However that's an average. However I bet among those there are those who do really well and those who do not. Statistics are all well and good, but there are always people on either end of the bell curve.
Please support our advertisers:
joga - finally someone that agrees with my point, and an expert in the field :)
If Obama had put in the kind of effort and exposure required to be as good in English and whatever the 2nd language he chose, he likely would not have had the time to be as good in the other non-language skills necessary to be a successful politician (or any other top jobs).
"Statistics are all well and good, but there are always people on either end of the bell curve."
You have again described those well below or above average folks (and those are likely to be small percentages), they are not the ones we are talking about here.
If your life goal is to study languages with a career in languages, you can devote all your time to perfect each one of them. But for most people who want to have a career outside lanaguages, we have limited time and resources to learn them. For most, language is a tool, a mean to an end. Since time and resources are limited to learn them, most people really only have capacity to master one.
I don't know how well you are with the other three languages, I do not consider a language one is only able to converse in i.e. very limited advanced level reading or writing (albeit spoken without accent) really counts as a second language.
And I completely agree with joga, one complete language is better than two partial languages. Mastery command of a language used builds one's confidence and certainly is seen rewarded in terms of those top jobs in the professional working world.
Please support our advertisers:
ah paenme, you only want to hear what suits you...
look i have seen enough people who have mastered multiple languages to perfection (especially CEOs). in fact i think these days, you cannot become CEO of a big corporation if you don't master at least two languages - if not three.
Please support our advertisers:
Haha, I don't think I am the one who only wants to hear what suits, I am all open to listening to facts and studies with statistics supporting the opposing view, but I have not been given much...
"look i have seen enough people who have mastered multiple languages to perfection (especially CEOs)."
What is "enough", what percentage of CEOs are we talking about? A few actual names and companies would help.
Please support our advertisers:
well for a starter, i believe it's fair to say that almost every ceo of a hk company speaks at least two languages...
same for most european countries.
Please support our advertisers:
joga
16 yrs ago
Now this if getting ugly! I think everyone is being a bit tough on paenme. He/she has a strongly held view he/she wishes to debate. The question is is it ALWAYS an advantange to learn a second language at a young age or can it SOMETIMES become a hurdle. If it is a hurdle is it a hurdle that can give you match fitness later in life or will it just slow your momentum. Until we have a definite way to calculate individual potential everything is just anecdotal. However you can't go wrong putting a lot of thought into how you will bring up your children. When you debate your view you open yourself to other ideas and opinions which is a good thing isn't it? The only other comment I have left to make is, I hope Cara just had a bad choice of phrasing and doesn't really mean anyone who is unable to master a second language is an imbecile.
Please support our advertisers:
"The question is is it ALWAYS an advantange to learn a second language at a young age or can it SOMETIMES become a hurdle."
In my opinion, it is always an advantage.
I am with cara. I refuse to groom my kids to be CEOs. If they want to be, fine. If they want to drive a taxi or whatever, fine. As long as they work towards what they want to do and don't just coast, I'll be happy.
"You have again described those well below or above average folks (and those are likely to be small percentages), they are not the ones we are talking about here."
Really? You keep talking about people getting "top jobs".
Please support our advertisers:
Trying to get a sense of how many CEOs of global fortune 500 regularly use and benefit from two or more languages. Anyone with some factual data?
I see that the top three countries of global fortune 500 are the US (140), Japan (68) and France (40). I would guess typically US and Japan CEOs have very limited use of a second language, which means the percentage of CEOs that may be bi/multilingual is probably below 20%. And when these CEOs (or top politicians) get together they are likely to communicate in one language, and whoever is the best user of that language is most likely to benefit from winning debates/negotiations (I did not make this up, Economist published an article on this).
One can certainly train him/herself to be "nearly perfect" in more than one language, but are they really beneficial all the time, especially when it comes to leadership positions, and a possibility such mastery of languages may come at a price of lesser skills in other areas (because no one has more than 24 hours a day)?
cara, for the top jobs I would say you must have (note these are not absolute, they are relevant when compared with the best users competing with you for those top jobs):
1)
2)
3)
4) don't need to be impeccable, but should be comparable to the best users competing with you.
6) not just to conduct meetings, but also conduct them as well as the best users competing with you.
5) is impossible for anyone. 7) not need for mastery in Shakespear etc, but language is part of a culture, so an appreciation will enrich the underlying communication.
Say if my child is a great natural talent in all sports, since I believe my child's potential of learning is limitless, I train him/her to do tennis, football, basketball, and swimming starting from a young age and expect that he/she grow up to be as good as the best guy in each of these sports, am I being a bit unrealistic? If that is true with sports (and others), why is it not so with languages?
I do have two school-aged children so this is not a topic thought up just to get everyone excited. I have contemplated on this for quite some time and have not put it up till now exactly because I knew how this view (unfortunately also a fact) would get people worked up.
Please support our advertisers:
"You have again described those well below or above average folks (and those are likely to be small percentages), they are not the ones we are talking about here."
"Really? You keep talking about people getting "top jobs"."
Through hard work in many other areas, not multilingual abilities.
Please support our advertisers:
"as far as what jobs my kids will be suited for? who knows? if they want to drive a taxi, so long as they are happy with it, then that is ALL that matters to me.... i couldn't give a flying rat's a** about my kids becoming a CEO/CFO etc... "
"I am with cara. I refuse to groom my kids to be CEOs. If they want to be, fine. If they want to drive a taxi or whatever, fine."
Then why force them into learning a second language? As far as I know most kids resist learning a second language (not to the extent of having to study, read and write). Let them be partially good in all, but not completely good in any. In fact, if your child aspires to be a taxi driver, by all means multilanguages will probably serve him/her better.
Please support our advertisers:
"Then why force them into learning a second language?"
Because if they decide not to become taxi drivers or gardeners, but want to become pilots, or astronauts, or lawyers or whatnot, the second language (and the third, and fourth) can be a big help. Yes, I know you disagree.
Also because languages are key to understanding cultures. This enriches their education.
"As far as I know most kids resist learning a second language (not to the extent of having to study, read and write)."
This is news to me. My kids didn't even know they were bilingual until they were about 2½-3. It was (and still is) perfectly natural to them to speak different languages to different people.
Please support our advertisers:
Z
16 yrs ago
Anecdotes, of course, are not data, but here's mine:
My daughter [3y6m] started kindy in her third language 6 months ago. At the time, she had been speaking this language intermittently with her father, who is not a native speaker, but it was definitely her THIRD language -- she was much less fluent than in the other two. Just last week, her kindy teachers had a conference with her father to report on her progress. In their opinion, she is already linguistically advanced [vocabulary and grammar] for her age when compared to children whose parents were both native speakers of this language.
Now, if you want data, I can suggest a book that I found very helpful as I was thinking about these issues. Be forewarned, it's a bit academic. Called Raising a Bilingual Child by Barbara Pearson
http://www.amazon.com/Raising-Bilingual-Child-Living-Language/dp/1400023343/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1273065324&sr=8-1
Please support our advertisers:
788
16 yrs ago
"Also because languages are key to understanding cultures. This enriches their education."
And enriches lives. I think this is key. There is so much beauty in written and spoken words.
Please support our advertisers:
When I read the OP post, it instantly reminded me of a friend who thought the same and asked me about what my plan was. His theory was that learning one language first (say Chinese) at an early age will give the child an "edge" or advantage (in Chinese) over those that try to learn Chinese and English at the same time. I don't doubt that might be true. It's just common sense that if you practice something for a longer and more focused period of time you will be better at it. Several years later I asked I asked my friend how his son was doing and he said he was fine except that he was shocked that his son didn't even the simplest of any English words. Then he scrambled to find a tutor for him.
I guess if you are set on helping your child be perfect in a language to get him to a top job, by all means train him intensely in that language. I think I understand the OP notion of an "excellent" user of a language versus just fluency in speaking and reading. But I think much of the excellent users ability comes from their own personalities, experiences and other influences and not just education or training. Wit, humour, poetry, persuasiveness etc...is rather a creativity I think. While de Bono says creative can be taught, it's not that easily learnt.
I will bring up my daughter in a bilingual environment, trilingual if I can, simply because at a young age her brain can take it. I'm don't care if she gets a top job or is the leader of a nation. My number one priority is that she has a happy childhood which I believe is what God intended for all children. I am very aware that this is easier said than done in HK due to the mom beside you who is enrolling her child to learn this and that so that they can impress at a school interview and get into a school that caters to rich, pampered and overprotected brats (unfair generalization...). Oh yes, they are smart and ultracompetitive and have their career already mapped out but I truly believe something is lost along the way. Not sure what to call it. Let me digress a bit more and I'll close. The pressure and rush to get our kids ahead is killing the joy of childhood, of parenting. Kids are a part of society (duh), citizens that have rights and privileges just as seniors do, but a child does not have the ability to say "no" to what you put them through. I will read that last line again just to remind myself lest I forget when I follow the crowd. I shut up with this cliche: let kids be kids.
Please support our advertisers:
I'm not really sure your meaning of:
1. average person
2. best users of a language
who is to judge? what standards are you going by?
often i encounter many native speakers of a language who are using their language worse than a non-native speaker. does fluency equal 'best'? does fine usuage of grammar and vocabulary equal 'best'? the guidelines are so broad and unclear, it undermines what you're trying to say.
in the end, practice makes perfect. once they have acquired the fluency and skills in both languages, as long as they keep up usage of both on a regular basis, they can surely maintain mastery of both languages.
Please support our advertisers:
I don't know how many of you worked on a managerial level in a corporate/professional world, I can only provide my own experience and observations. I was hoping others in similar work environment can share with me their observations and thoughts and it looks like I am not going to get any.
There is no doubt plenty of benefits being a bilingual (I know I am one myself), but as far as corporate careers go (for those who never intend to have coporate/professional jobs this may not apply) the second language is not likely to help and in fact may hinder your ability on the first language. Since learning a second language takes part of one's capacity, the ability to master the primary language will be limited. That is just pure fact and logic.
There is not an easy answer on what's best for a child as most of us cannot foresee what our children will grow up to be. For certain jobs being bi/multilinguals will benefit, for others the ability to be one of the best commanders of a common language is essential. The way I see it though, as more and more developing countries with a focus on having their citizens learn English (China being one), the benefit of being able to use the common language as well as the best users will eventually outweigh that of being a multilingual, at least for those top jobs in the corporate/professional world.
Please support our advertisers:
being bilingual can have other benefits outside the 'corporate/professional world' as you mentioned.
i don't see why your focus is always just in the working world.
Please support our advertisers:
I think we have already discussed "best users", it is relative when compared with the most well versed in your profession, if you work in a corporate world.
And do you use a second language, in terms of speaking, reading and writing at a very high level? If not, then you may have just proved my case.
Why am I pre-occupied with getting a "top job"? Boy I wonder if that has something to do with me being in a profession where those jobs are what people hope to end up with on their career track (understand most people don't get there, and there are other reasons besdies language that are roadblocks)? If my career is important to me (and I understand it is not for many others), why would I not care about my titles and the added benefits that come with them?
Completely aware Obama did not write his own speeches, but being able to deliver them so well is part of the language training as well. Even on just speech deliveries, I doubt he could have done them so well if he had grown up using a second language.
Please support our advertisers:
This is a tough one. I can see both sides.
I am a mother of a bilingual (maybe trilingual) child so I understand what Cara and axpatguy are saying but I used to have a high flying career in a big multinational company too so I understand what paenme is saying.
Paenme is right, for me, being fluent in English was important when I was pursuing my career. I didn't have the confidence to speak up at meetings because I was not as fluent in English as my colleagues and this did affect my career. My chinese is not up to scratch as well despite being Chinese, I cannot read nor write so when I started pursuing my career in HK, this affected my career as well. Knowing both at "secondary" level is not enough when you want to pursue a high flying career in either countries. And why do we want a high flying career for our kids? Because this will make us proud, because let's face it, a high flying career = money. Money cannot buy happiness but struggling financially won't make you happy either. Similarly, being in a high flying career doesn't mean you won't be unhappy either, you could be very rich and very happy. We all hope that our kids will do well career-wise.
But........
My daughter isn't fluent in both either. Her maternal grandparents comment on her broken English and her paternal grandparents comment on her lack of ability in Chinese reading and writing. However, she is truly bilingual in that she can switch back and forth in both English and Cantonese quite easily when talking. With my daughter, I am agreeing with Cara and axpatguy.
I think it is beneficial that she's able to speak both languages eventhough they are not at "native" level. She's also learning a third language at school - mandarin and she's being tutored for it. I think it is great because she's able to expose herself so much more to all three cultures because she knows the language and can talk to people in all three places. She will become more "worldly". And if you are English and can speak Chinese, you can also land yourself with a top job in China because you can liase with the locals and you can understand the business culture more.
And I agree that kids should be kids, not be trained to be their parents' robots but unfortunately the trend in HK is leaning towards creating robots with kids being forced to be what their parents want them to be. I feel increasingly pressured to follow the trend so my kid isn't left out and at the bottom of the class. My kid gets ONLY mandarin and swimming, unlike her friends with a thousand and one activities. I feel guilty that she's not doing as many as her friends but I also feel guilty for sending her to two classes because I want her to have fun also.
Anyway, I think both sides are valid arguments.
paenme, just wondering... what language then have you chosen for your kids?
Please support our advertisers:
"he way I see it though, as more and more developing countries with a focus on having their citizens learn English (China being one), the benefit of being able to use the common language as well as the best users will eventually outweigh that of being a multilingual, at least for those top jobs in the corporate/professional world"
People have been saying for at least 150 years that a common language that everyone learns will become ever more important. It still hasn't. I'm not holding my breath for the next 150 years. Who knows, by then we might all be speaking Mandarin, or Arabic, or English, but we'll still speak other languages. 300 years ago the main world language was probably French. Before that is has been Spanish and Latin.
Anyone here speak Esperanto? That was supposed to dissolve language barriers. Again, not holding my breath.
"There is no doubt plenty of benefits being a bilingual (I know I am one myself), but as far as corporate careers go (for those who never intend to have coporate/professional jobs this may not apply) the second language is not likely to help and in fact may hinder your ability on the first language. Since learning a second language takes part of one's capacity, the ability to master the primary language will be limited. That is just pure fact and logic."
No it is not fact and logic. It is your opinion. It can be argued either way. If you ask me, I disagree.
If a person wants to be a "top level" executive and is willing to commit to the hours and hard work, I don't see lack of perfect fluency stopping them. My wife certainly doesn't speak perfect English. It has improved significantly in the last 15 years, but it is still not "good native speaker" standard. This has not braked her career one bit. On the other hand there are plenty of perfect speakers who aren't willing to put in the effort. Their careers are on hold.
Please support our advertisers:
"There is no doubt plenty of benefits being a bilingual (I know I am one myself), but as far as corporate careers go (for those who never intend to have coporate/professional jobs this may not apply) the second language is not likely to help and in fact may hinder your ability on the first language. Since learning a second language takes part of one's capacity, the ability to master the primary language will be limited. That is just pure fact and logic."
maybe i haven't followed your posts enough, but what languages are you talking about here? are you native english and wonder whether your kid should learn mandarin as well?
the issue on hand is that english has been the dominating language in the business world for the last maybe 40-50 years, but things are complex and changing. so it could well be that mandarin will become equally important, or french, or german, or spanish?
the issue for languages and success is not just about fluency and ability to express yourself. in today's world, one of the most important skill is the ability to manage across cultural boundaries. cross-cultural management, you might say.
one observation i have made in this regards is that native english speakers are some of the most clumsy people when managing across cultures. and i have a strong sense that it's because they never had the pressure or chance to learn another language and through that another culture.
Please support our advertisers:
joga
16 yrs ago
There many factors to consider such as personality, skill sets and ambitions that make this such a perplexing question. My husband as an example would be considered a top level executive with a top level salary to match works in company where the primary language is english although this is not his first language. However in saying this his job isn't heavily reliant on his verbal ability, more on thought process and numbers. Although I think he would be considered by most extremely successful career wise we will never know if he would have been even more so had he only spoken one language. Of my children, all teens oldest being 19, 3 of the 4 speak one language fluently and a second language to varying degrees of proficiency and then there is my much loved, multi talented, beautiful, kind hearted imbecile who just doesn't seem to have the knack but has lots of other knacks, so we can't see it ever holding her back. She is an extremely expressive person and she gets terribly frustrated when that side of her personality is gagged by her lack of english ability. I cannot imagine the damage I would have done to her soul had I demanded she speak a second language. I don't think there is one right way and as my children approach young adulthood the only advice I can give parents of young children is be careful of thinking that there is a 'without question' answer because you may too be lucky enough to have a multi talented, beautiful, kind hearted imbecile.
Please support our advertisers:
joga
16 yrs ago
back again, sorry I find this all so interesting I can't stay way. Food for thought... It also a makes a big difference if the two languages of choice are both latin born languages. I would expect it is easier than maybe english and chinese. Also introducing a new script adds a whole new degree of difficulty to the equation. I started learning my second language as a teen and now have the required proficiency for my country to trust me with government translations that could cause no end of cross border tensions should I slip up ;) So you don't necessarily need to start young. cheers.
Please support our advertisers:
Some quotes from the OP:
“…average, first group is below average and the second may be above…”
“That is, you're likely not be as good as the best native users of the languages used in the professional world and may cost you the top jobs.”
“Economists had an article about how …”
“…in their native language English.”
“…so there should be a lot less "work cultural" differences.”
“Languages are like any other skills, the more you use and study it, the better you get.”
“…you can devote all your time to perfect each one of them.”
“…I train him/her to do tennis, football, basketball, and swimming…”
“There is no doubt plenty of benefits being a bilingual…”
Ironic really.
Some more comments:
“Even here the highest managerial/leadership positions have been steadily lost to Westerners that are generally native and some of the best users of English.”
Wow, what city are you living in/planet are you living on? Most of the taipans have left (and the expat package is a dying entity) and what you will actually find is that the highest positions are now going to locals or overseas born/educated Chinese. Can’t give you the exact stats which you have asked for but it’s just an observation having been here for a few moons.
“But to be, say, the head of a nation or the CEO of a large multinational, the ability to master the language in all fronts is crucial.”
Hmm... In Hong Kong, Li Ka Shing (and sons), Vincent Cheng, Peter Wong (HSBC), Ian Shiu, William Chau (Cathay Pacific).
Heads of nations: Robert Mugabe has bigger plums in his mouth than the Queen and his first language isn’t English. Gloria Arroyo in the Philippines managed to get to the top as a non-native English speaker (not that I’m saying either of these two are role models). And the list could go on…
“Hong Kongers, for example, pride themselves being able to use both Chinese and English, the truth is on average their English is not as good as Americans or British and their Chinese is not as good as those from China or Taiwan.”
Which just shows the OP’s ignorance of the languages used in Hong Kong, Taiwan and the mainland.
“You have again described those well below or above average folks (and those are likely to be small percentages), they are not the ones we are talking about here.” Er, didn’t you say, “the head of a nation or the CEO of a large multinational”?
“And when these CEOs (or top politicians) get together they are likely to communicate in one language...” Never heard of an interpreter? You don’t think Putin and Obama have a good old chin wag about nuclear disarmament in English do you? Maybe you do.
“As far as I know most kids resist learning a second language…” Of course, there aren’t any kids out there with parents from different cultures who are brought up speaking two languages at home.
“…the benefit of being able to use the common language as well as the best users will eventually outweigh that of being a multilingual…” Yeah, so when you’re at your boardroom meeting with your bilingual Chinese counterpart who starts talking to his colleague and calls you a schmuck, who’s being outweighed?
Oh dear paenme, oh dear.
Please support our advertisers:
"one observation i have made in this regards is that native english speakers are some of the most clumsy people when managing across cultures. and i have a strong sense that it's because they never had the pressure or chance to learn another language and through that another culture."
Excellent point. Well said.
Please support our advertisers:
mayo
16 yrs ago
Although I don't wish to moot your point I believe both Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and Robert Mugabe were schooled in english and english is their first language.
Please support our advertisers:
"Which just shows the OP’s ignorance of the languages used in Hong Kong, Taiwan and the mainland."
Afraid I am not the ignorant one here. Exactly what languages you think are used in these places? Cantonese v Mandarin? They are exactly the same language - Chinese! Cantonese and Mandarin are just somewhat different spoken dialects of the same language.
Of course Li Ka Shing is the CEO, it's his own company! More objective examples - there are three global fortune 500 companies in HK, the CEOs of two of the three are Westerners.
"Never heard of an interpreter? You don’t think Putin and Obama have a good old chin wag about nuclear disarmament in English do you? Maybe you do."
You have just argued my point. Putin and Obama do not need second languages to be the heads of a nation, they had other more important skills to learn. Let the interpreter learn the second language.
"Of course, there aren’t any kids out there with parents from different cultures who are brought up speaking two languages at home."
Actually you have just described my family, and yes both of my kids resist studying, reading and writing the second language.
Please support our advertisers:
"People have been saying for at least 150 years that a common language that everyone learns will become ever more important. It still hasn't. I'm not holding my breath for the next 150 years."
Chances are none of our children will be around in 150 years. Meanwhile English, I am afraid, is here to stay for probably at least the next few decades (the period that matters to our kids).
"My wife certainly doesn't speak perfect English. It has improved significantly in the last 15 years, but it is still not "good native speaker" standard. This has not braked her career one bit."
Can't say I believe this. She is either not high up enough (leadership level) where near perfect communication becomes extremely important, or she is working for a local company where English is not regularly required.
Please support our advertisers:
@mayo
“Although I don't wish to moot your point I believe both Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and Robert Mugabe were schooled in english and english is their first language.”
Not sure what your point is mayo. There are several thousand children in Hong Kong who are schooled in English here and several thousand more who are schooled overseas in English. That doesn’t make English their first language.
@OP
“Exactly what languages you think are used in these places? Cantonese v Mandarin? They are exactly the same language - Chinese. They are only somewhat different spoken dialects of the same language.”
Same language? Have you ever seen some Hong Kongers struggling with their dodgy Putonghua when trying to speak to someone from the mainland? “Somewhat different spoken dialects” is a bit of an understatement. And, just to clarify, there are different dialects across the whole country so it’s ignorant to list just Cantonese and Mandarin. And the written script in the mainland is different from traditional Chinese used here, which in turn is different from the traditional Chinese used in Taiwan.
“There are three global fortune 500 companies in HK, the CEOs of two of the three are Westerners.”
Compare the boards of those companies now and with the boards from 20 (maybe even 10) years ago. I think you’ll find the non-native speakers are becoming more and more common (again, no stats that you would like to see but just a hunch). And compare the Fortune 500 today with 20 years ago. How many HK-based companies were there?
“Actually you have just described my family, and yes both of my kids resist studying, reading and writing the second language.”
Read my post because I didn’t talk about “studying, reading and writing the second language”. What I said was “brought up speaking two languages”. If the two languages are used side by side, I don’t see how one can be the “second language”.
Please support our advertisers:
lil mo
Your post was a response to my original comment where I discussed resistence at the "studying" level, not "spoken" level. To you knowing a second language seems to stop at "conversation" level which is not what we are discussing here. I would say though, even the effort and time put in learning to just "speak" a second language takes away one's capacity to learn the primary language.
Mandarin and Cantonese are indeed just different dialects, the written language in HK and Taiwan are exactly the same. For a HKonger to learn to speak Mandarin is definitely hugely less effort than learning a different, say Western, language.
There are indeed different dialects in mainland, but almost all mainlanders speak Mandarin. Simplified characters are used in Mainland, but if you read Traditional, it is not at all difficult to read Simplified.
"Not sure what your point is mayo. There are several thousand children in Hong Kong who are schooled in English here and several thousand more who are schooled overseas in English. That doesn’t make English their first language."
I think what mayo meant is that English is their primary/dominant language.
Please support our advertisers:
mayo
16 yrs ago
Sorry I thought I made my point clear. Although agree I with what you said these people aren't good examples because I believe their first language is English as it is for many Hong Kongers who went to international schools. Your first language tends to be what you received your schooling in regardless of the language your parents speak or official language of your country.
Please support our advertisers:
Z
16 yrs ago
It seems that there are two topics being discussed here as if they were one.
The first, does learning a second language on average negatively impact linguistic skills in the first: the data strongly suggest that if anything, learning a second language positively impacts linguistic skills in the first. I read a review, not the actual paper, but my recollection was that it went something like this: when comparing the results of a standardized test measuring linguistic skills in the native language, the mean result [average] was higher in the bilingual group as compared to the monolingual group. Now, this may seem counter intuitive to some people, but to me it seems spot on: bilinguals exercise the language bits of their brains more than monolinguals.
The second, can learning a second language negatively impact linguistic skills out on the tails [both high and low function] is harder to answer. Anecdotally, the person that I encountered with the best written English communication skills during my career as a scientist was not a native speaker, but was a foreign graduate student. He stood out because he had an amazing ability to state complex ideas very simply and clearly.
Actually the second point doesn't seem to be what the OP really wants to know. As I am reading between the lines, the OPs concern is that learning a second language may negatively impact the English language skills of the OPs children, and by extension, may negatively impact the ability of the aforementioned children to climb the career ladder and make lots of money so that they can afford to hire caretakers for the OP during the OPs dotage.
As for that, I'd say that above a certain threshold, language skills are not as important as people skills - and in our ever-shrinking world, people skills are more and more likely to include the ability to see from the point of view of multiple cultures.
An anecdote from my husband's career: he is a non-native speaker of both Russian and Mandarin, and he was helping to broker a deal between a group of mainland Chinese and a group of Russians. During the negotiations, which were held in English and lasted for more than a year, there were at least three separate instances where the deal looked like it was going to fall through - not because the parties were far apart in their objectives, but because of cross-cultural barriers [one culture would take as an insult a provision that the other culture took as normal]. In the end, my husband was able to say to each side [in their own language] "this thing that is insulting to you seems normal to them because of xyz cultural reason" and " this thing that seems normal to you is insulting to the other guy because of abc cultural reason." Given that he has lived in both societies, he was able to find solutions that didn't offend anyone's cultural sensibilities. Would better English skills have helped either side? Not at all.
Please support our advertisers:
Z
16 yrs ago
Oh, and in my experience living here on the mainland, I'd say that it is absolutely not true that most mainlanders speak putonghua [mandarin]. Almost all of the under 30 set understand it, but they don't necessarily speak it well, and you don't need to go very far off of the beaten path to run into large populations that don't speak any putonghua. Back in my home country, I used to crack up every time my Chinese graduate student buddies resorted to writing down what they were trying to say because they couldn't understand each others' difanghuas.
Please support our advertisers:
Kindergarten teacher at a CHinese/ENglish Bilingual school here.
My head is spinning trying to read this. There are so many random points and comments from left field I keep forgetting what OP was OPing.
THe children I teach are getting a true bilingual education - every area of learning takes place in two languages 50/50. There are MANY benefits and possible drawbacks (need more research here). The same for a monolingual education.
If PAENME is speaking specifically about a HK child growing up studying in a bilingual school. THen talk about that. I am not sure why people are bringing in OBama or Mugabe as examples - maybe I missed something?
What is the defenition of a bi-lingual education? Would the children I teach be better off hearing and learning only their mother tongue (first language)? I am not sure - like I said, both have their pros and cons - but i dont think it will stop someone mastering one or more languages.
I know there are many mulitlingual people who have mastered a language - I can think of dozens of authors - anyone from Nigeria (my area of interest) as they are born into a non english speaking family, attend nonenglish speaking kinder then attend what I can only imagine to be a bilingual primary and secondary, then University in ENglish. Many would speak a dialect of ENglish in the streets when conversing with someone from a different tribe. Then go home to family and speak a language other than ENglish. PAENME - is this what you regard to be bi-lingual? SO would prize winning novelists from this context not be "mastering" a language?
Interested to hear your thoughts on this. SOrry if it is a confusing post but...my head is spinning after reading the above!
Please support our advertisers:
"one observation i have made in this regards is that native english speakers are some of the most clumsy people when managing across cultures. and i have a strong sense that it's because they never had the pressure or chance to learn another language and through that another culture."
"Excellent point. Well said."
As opposed to what other native language speakers? Where I work the bilingual managers cannot be bothered dealing with other countries in the region. It was not until the native English speaking leadership came in this started to change.
Please support our advertisers:
OAshanghai
Glad you are here. I am not sure whether you have taught the bilingual school long enough to see how the English use of these children, when they grow up to be adults, compares with the English use of others (of similar socio-economic background) who have grown up studying only English? I understand there is a wide range in people's language talent/abilities, I am not interested in the exceptionally good or bad (should be small percentages), so comparison on average would be best.
Please support our advertisers:
"As for that, I'd say that above a certain threshold, language skills are not as important as people skills - and in our ever-shrinking world, people skills are more and more likely to include the ability to see from the point of view of multiple cultures."
No one said people skills are not important, but you can't demonstrate people skills without the language skill. And often the people perceived to have the best people skills are the best communicators.
Please support our advertisers:
"you want to know about AVERAGE people, yet you are comparing them to the "best users" of the language...i highly doubt that the "best user" of a language is average..."
Read the thread carefully, Axptguy already said the samething which I addressed - AVERAGE in language talent/abilities, this is what you are born with and that you have not much control over. "BEST USE" can still be achieved for many with average language talent through hard work and if they are not bogged down by a second language.
Please support our advertisers:
Ed
16 yrs ago
Please let's not insult other members and keep the discussion civil and constructive
Please support our advertisers:
Oh Ed ... insulting can be such fun!
But anyway, as Cara says, the OP does seem to be getting a bit mixed up here, first talking about people becoming CEOs and heads of nations, and then talking about "average" people (whatever they may be).
What does seem clear to me is that the OP has asked a question and does not seem to be listening to people whose views don't fit with the answers he/she would like to hear. Fair enough but it does seem a bit pointless asking the initial question.
"Where I work the bilingual managers cannot be bothered dealing with other countries in the region. It was not until the native English speaking leadership came in this started to change."
That may have nothing to do with linguistic ability but simply a cultural attitude to work.
OAShanghai - great post and fully agree with you. But there is a difference between having bilingually educated kids and kids brought up (immersed) in two cultures. They aren't the same thing though language ability is the major cross over.
Z - two great posts which I completely agree with. Thanks.
Please support our advertisers:
madtown
I don't disagree with what you said, other skills are equally and frequently more important than just language skills. However, given all else is equal (and I understand you can argue nothing else is ever equal), in the professional world most bilinguals that I know (some educated and worked in the West for many years) feel that if our English had been at a native level comparable to the best users of the language at the workplace, our careers would have definitely been helped significantly.
Please support our advertisers:
Actually now that I read your post again, I don't think I agree completely:
"Having a strong command of the English language, does not make you a good communicator and vice versa. What is of the utmost importance in career success is good communication skills. Not good language skills."
A strong command of a language "frequently" (note I did not say "always") results in good communication skills in that language. Poor language skills in a language are "frequently" perceived as poor communication skills "in that language".
Agree with what you said about George Bush, but like others you are choosing the "exception". "Most" U.S. presidents do/did have great language/communication skills.
Please support our advertisers:
I think social skills are extremely important, but I also think you are downplaying the importance of language/communication skills. Assuming you are working in a large multinational Western company, do you honestly believe that most of these so-so English speaking managers can make it to the very top (leadership level) through their sheer energy and enthusiasm?
Also don't forget for "most" people, poorer language skills directly affect their confidence level and tend to make them quieter and shier, which in turn reduce their energy and enthusiasm, which in turn help creating the perception of them having less "social skills".
Please support our advertisers:
Let's not forget cultural differences as well, in Japan too much speaking is a sign of weakness, not thinking deeply, thus is it a thoughtful decision? Not a lot of Japanese corporate CEOs speak a lot BUT, when they do open their mouth, it weighs more than anything. People tend to look at this culture as Japanese being bad communicators.
I worked 15 years in a multi national investment bank as a local hire in Japan. I grew up in the states where I went to the local school, hung out with the local kids doing crazy things together, even my parents think that I am different from them. But, the most useful language ability built up while working, reading the documents, getting burnt dealing in my second language.
In the end, I was the first local female to get a director title at an very very early age by pure chance, the corporate had a propaganda to promote local females in the gaijin(gweilo) macho world. I know for sure that it was NOT my language ability that promoted me as I was making so much contribution to the firm with my clients being 100% foreigners but, when it came to discussing business, I always had to go through my bigger male boss.
Please support our advertisers:
The bilingual colleagues I know all work hard and have very good social skills (or some of them would not have made it to senior management level in my firm), they are successful and relatively happy at their jobs. The point is - they could have been more successful and even happier with their careers if their primary language use would have been at a higher level.
It really depends on what you aspire to be with your life and careers, I think.
Please support our advertisers:
Exactly Cara, exactly. Head. Bang. Brick wall. (That may escape someone whose not perfectly bilingual and isn't the CEO or head of a nation. Oh well.)
Please support our advertisers:
Please support our advertisers:
I really did not come here for your unsupported opinions, but facts. Obviously you guys are not in any relevant positions to give any. Wrong site for me to come to. Chow
Please support our advertisers:
Chow? Is it dinner time?
When the OP contains such terms as:
"an average person's"
"compete with the best of"
"pale when compared with"
"an average person's limits"
It's kind of hard to provide facts when such vague terms are being bandied around. And it doesn't seem like you came here for unsupported opinions because the comments that people have given seem to have been roundly turned down.
And some credentials:
I'm completely bilingual/bi-cultural, speaking, reading and writing two languages and at home in either the country of my birth or the country of my parents' birth.
I'm in a cross-cultural relationship with a daughter who is being brought up with all the cultures of her parents and grandparents, and she doesn't have any issues (but she may not become Secretary General of the UN - what a failure!)
Translation/languages is something of a specialty (I won't go into the qualifications I and my partner have) so it was quite amusing to hear comments about Chinese/Mandarin/Cantonese.
Hmmm ...
Please support our advertisers:
so the great debate is over..after 70+ posts with no real conclusion other than realizing the OP only wanted to hear what he wanted to hear. but judging by the responses...the argument favours the multi-lingual learners. good job everyone. lets get a drink now.
Please support our advertisers:
Now? What have you been waiting for? I've been pished as a fart since noon ...
;-0
Please support our advertisers:
Paenme: "I really did not come here for your unsupported opinions, but facts. Obviously you guys are not in any relevant positions to give any. Wrong site for me to come to. Chow"
Give me a break. Where are YOUR facts paenme? All you have is anecdote and conjecture, same as the rest of us. As Shylok says, you are only listening to the parts you want to hear. You are not asking for advice. You just want to advance some sort of agenda.
Shylok: "so the great debate is over..after 70+ posts with no real conclusion other than realizing the OP only wanted to hear what he wanted to hear. but judging by the responses...the argument favours the multi-lingual learners. good job everyone. lets get a drink now."
Hear hear! Cocktail Hour is finally here!
Please support our advertisers:
Deleted....
Just saw that there are many posts before I hit the "submit" button.
Think this thread is closed or almost closing so I'll refrain and agree to a drink ;-)
Please support our advertisers:
Having worked in a bank that hires plenty of analysts and statisticians from China and India but has only native English speakers in executive roles, I can see where the OP is coming from. I don't doubt paenme has observed a lot, but it is how s/he draws conclusions from these observations that is debatable.
I think a lot of posters, myself included, have difficulty accepting the OP's correlative view on language abilities and professional success because the OP has not differentiated language abilities from communication skills. While no doubt interlinked, one's command of the language is but one facet of communication. People who climb to the top of the corporate ladder tend to be effective communicators, which means they speak in ways that not only explain what they want but also PERSUADE others to want the same things. And being persuasive demands a whole host of abilities other than being good at the language. As sophisticatedly worded as some corporate speeches may seem, they are actually not entirely difficult for an English PhD student to re-create if s/he knows what to write. In fact, English majors' expansive vocabulary might even result in a better written speech, given that corporate people's choice of word is rather formulaic. In terms of communication, what corporate leaders have that English PhDs do not are the ideas behind the speech and the ability to time the delivery, and these judgments require more than mere command of the language.
"the second language is not likely to help and in fact may hinder your ability on the first language. Since learning a second language takes part of one's capacity, the ability to master the primary language will be limited. That is just pure fact and logic."
That's a pretty audacious statement. You can't call this a fact unless it is backed by extensive cognitive research, and even if you do the research results may still be contestable. Who says that one's capacity for language development is limited? Unless you are talking about a specific age range such as that of a toddler, I am taking the long-term view. It sounds like a cliche, but your mind is as expansive as you allow it to be, and people who like challenges--which often include CEOs--will agree with that statement.
Drawing from my own experience as someone who has lived on both sides of the world, I think people's language command is influenced more by the degree of immersion and their own linguistic propensity than the number of languages they know. For example, my brother and I (one-and-a-half years apart) both had to learn a second language when we immigrated, but only I retained native-level fluency in my mother tongue. Also, it matters which languages you are attempting. It is considerably more difficult to master both Mandarin and English than, say, Spanish and English.
Lastly, I do not know if it is possible to determine the level of your children's language abilities based on the kind of education provided. You can give them the best that you can, but children do not always turn out the way they are "supposed to." And the Obama example hardly fits the context. Your reaction upon seeing an excellent user of a certain language is that his lack of a second language contributed to excellence in his first???
Please support our advertisers:
The o.p. raised some big questions here. Without reading all the posts, let me suggest steve pinker's "the language instinct" and "the blank state".
If you ask me, monolingualism is a complete fallacy.
Please support our advertisers:
Actually the OP was pretty erroneous in the original post and follow up ones, changing the meaning of bi-lingual a few time.
True bi-lingual kids (grown with 2 languages since birth from mother and father) have been shown to have higher competency in each language that monolingual speakers. They also, in percentage terms, outperform monolingual people and become higher achievers. Plenty of information on this if you Google.
Bi-lingual as in the sense of HK kids learning English at school is different and is taking on a second language usually never achieving full bi-lingual capability. Some do, some are like human sponges taking on several languages and have huge linguistic capabilities. My wife speaks Cantonese, English, Hakka, Mandarin and Japanese. Her take on Cantonese and Mandarin, well as different as English and French despite a shared written language WHICH sometimes make no sense in Cantonese until you get to the last word.....! China likes to throw around words like dialect but the truth is these are different languages.
And one final last correction to the OP, not all mainlanders speak Mandarin. Just a couple of years back it was quoted, from China itself, that just over 50% of the population had any spoken knowledge of Mandarin. Food for thought there.
Please support our advertisers:
Few observations.
The "gift of gab" is imperative for anyone's ability to climb any ladder, whether corporate (not as a owner or family member of an owner), academia or governmental levels. The question is, does a native speaker have an advantage in developing the "gift of gab" over those who are not native speakers?
I am a bilingual person who lived, studied and worked in the U.S., and later in Asia. While my second language has opened MANY doors for me, it is really my strong command of English (relative to English-speaking people in Asia) that has secured promotions, growing responsibility and pay. And if I want to continue on climbing the ladder, I have to put much more focus on developing my own gift of gab in English (I don't have this ability in my second language), and I expect that developing the gift of gab in English (or any language) will be a life long journey.
This question should really be posed to bilinguals and trilinguals (in the working world) to see if they feel that they are lacking true domination in one language. And if they feel that they have a disadvantage at a workplace as a result. Anecdotally speaking, most of my English-as-a-second language friends express great frustrations. If I run into one person who is dominant in two languages, I have run into 20 people who are weak in both languages or strong in just one language. I am one of the 20 people.
As for my own kids, English will be the dominant language (in particular, in developing writing and social skills), but I will teach them second, third languages as hobbies, just as I would swimming or piano. Of course if I saw our future in China, I would choose Mandarin to be the dominant language. Either way, I believe that one language has to be dominant, and generally speaking, for most people, it is nearly impossible to be dominant in two or more languages, without sacrificing development in other academic areas.
Without the gift of gab, it's very difficult to hold high-level positions. And confidence in a language is a big part of gift of gab.
Please support our advertisers:
Ed will probably delete my post... but it sounds to me OP is resentful that HE himself is not white and was not promoted for a certain position :P Although I agree OP makes some good points, it does not look like he is looking for a real discourse with posters of opposing views on the subject matter. And no one is so hung up on a matter unless it is a personal matter.
Please support our advertisers:
< Back to main category
You must be logged in to be able to reply.
Login now
Copy Link
Facebook
Gmail
Mail