Latin or modern languages for 4Y olds?

[Manoxlon]

I would like my kids to learn an additional language and I'm struggling with whether it should be Latin or a "more useful" (whatever that means) modern language such as Mandarin or Spanish. I am leaning towards Latin for the intellectual rigour and the potential ease with which the kids can pick a Latin-derived language of their choice to learn in their teens. The obvious argument against Latin is that it's dead and nobody speaks it, so ultimately what's the point.

I would also take into consideration that if you would start your child on, say, Spanish or French, then they are very likely to have to start all over again at some point in their education, because they will be in a class where all or some of the kids have never learnt that language before. At least my DS has found this a bit frustrating.
I think I'd go for something like Italian, definitely in a small group setting, and additionally try to find an Italian babysitter or nanny or whatever, if you really want your child to achieve something in the language. Don't expect much from one hour-a-week lessons!

Have to say that my dc have both been lucky enough to be taught MFL at school - but there has been a strange policy of changing language each year so that actually although they may have a general interest in languages by age 11, they will have zero fluency.

Personally I didn't start MFL until year 7 and went on to do A levels in French and German and study languages at university.

Am completely horrified at the idea of a 4 year old studying Latin. But think it could work to do some kind of group MFL activity - but you have to be realistic that an hour a week from age 4 will not lead to fluency at 11 unless the parents are bilingual. It may give them a headstart at senior school but nothing more.

Latin in senior school- now there is something worth doing. It's at the root of so many other languages.

MFL rather than Latin at that age. If you do go on to a classical language, I've found Greek to be more 'useful' than Latin, but both if possible.

Really, as others have said, secondary language acquisition is best facilitated by mirroring the process of primary language acquisition. So, whatever MFL you speak best, regardless of its 'usefulness', will be the best one to expose your dc to, with plenty of practice at home. And books, dvds, holidays etc.

When I was a MFL teacher (before being made redundant when languages were made non-compulsory for GCSE), there was a large scale study which came out (around 2008?) showing that children who had learned no MFL in primary and started as beginners in Year 7 were of an equal standard with children who had done the same MFL from Reception by the time they got to the end of Year 8. Basically, learning an MFL just in a 30 min/hour lesson a week might help your dc in some non-measurable way, but they won't actually acquire any sort of fluency in the language unless there is long and frequent exposure to the language in a natural setting.

By the way, the ease of picking up a Romance language after studying Latin, which you mention, works both ways. Having studied a Romance MFL will help them to pick up Latin later on.

The kid is 4
they are still getting their head around their OWN language

before the age of 10, teaching dead languages is just pretension

My 8 year old is learning Latin, but it is at her request. (apparently she needs to be able to read the magna Carta in the original by the time she is grown up so should start now!!)
I know plenty of younger children who start with French or Spanish at nursery or reception with songs, games rhymes etc which gives them the belief they can learn languages quite early on.

Starting French in nursery with songs and games can also lead to an association of foreign language with infantile activity, repetition, and boredom, putting a child off language learning for life. I know MFL teachers who want to see it banned in nurseries and primary schools for that reason.

What an extraordinary thread! I'm a massive fan of Latin, but I can't believe no one has mentioned what would be my main objection ie that it's not a language you speak. My DCs were both trilingual at 4 - but only orally. They are like little parrots at that age - but that wouldn't really work with Latin (unless you are going to send him to church I suppose).

It is useless to learn Latin at this age. I say this even though I am a supporter of learning Latin, just not at this age.

At this age the most important thing is to get the child interested and ideally having opportunities to use or at least hear the language. Assuming she has equal opportunities in all of the mentioned languages then I would go for Mandarin.

I chose Mandarin because: is very simple grammatically, for a native English speaker the problem with Mandarin is pronunciation, this can easily be overcome if it is learnt early enough, where I live (UK) the most common foreign language I hear spoken is Mandarin.

Where I live it is surprisingly difficult to find Mandarin classes so my 7yr old DC does most of his Mandarin studies via Skype,with a teacher in Beijing. I would not recommend online studying for a 4 year old, however.

Actually just snorted with laughter. Four year olds learning Latin...

Actually just snorted with laughter. Four year olds learning Latin...

Yeah, that's just stupid and they can't, can they?

Except that all the Roman kids 2000 years ago did it.

4 year olds basically need exposure to a language to pick it up. Preferably conversationally. If you can get someone to talk to them in that language for a few hours per week, they will pick enough of it. And keep practicing it.
That's what happens with bilingual children.
But, it's harder with older children, and more formal teaching is required.

I am English, speak English as my mother tongue and went to the French Lycée in London aged 4. I was pretty much immersed in French at school from the moment I started. I was fluent within about a term, albeit with the normal vocabulary of a 4-5 year old.
Learning French as a very young child has stood me in massively good stead. I flew through Latin and Spanish at secondary school (English state school) and can work my way around a menu/bus time table etc in most Latin based languages. Although I now rarely have an oppurunity to speak French these days, it comes back completely within a couple of days of being it France.

All my nephews and nieces grew up in different countries, and became fluent in French/Welsh in Reception. I can't think of a possible reason that learning a foreign language young can be detrimental.

I also agree with the poster who said that there is a lot of assumed "basic knowledge of French" in the UK. It's also the default foreign language taught in most schools. DS is starting now in Year 2.

France is local to us to the UK. Useful language and also somewhere they could potentially move to.
I certainly love speaking it and it has got me a job.
I found it easier than German too!

All of in favour of immersion at a young age - that's how my DCs got started with their languages. But Latin is not a language that you hear - in fact no one is entirely sure what it would have sounded like. So easy for Roman kids to pick up 2,000 years ago when that is all anyone spoke, but not so easy now. Learning Latin involves translating from written Latin into English (not the other way round). It also requires a fairly detailed understanding of grammar - both my DCs have found it much easier to get their heads round Latin than I did having been schooled in French (where grammar is taught in detail). For a four year old I would choose a language you can pick up by listening and copying - four year olds are brilliant at this. It doesn't really matter which one - if they can get one at an early age it will be much easier to add more later (ime).

Hels71, my 8yo too. It's not pretension doing Latin - it's me finding a way to occupy him when he's sent home from school for behavioural problems and discovering he loves it. A bright 8yo can get a lot out of it.

Latin might indeed be a good option for an 8 year old with no proper access to MFL.

Immersion at 4 definitely works but singing songs and playing games for half an hour day is not proven to help a child learn a language. Unfortunately it can actually put children off, particularly if they get to play more interesting games in their native language.

Singing songs and learning rhymes ought to be part of learning any language, pre-reading. But, more importantly, lots of repetition of key phrases is what is going to set the sounds and lexicon of a language in the brain.

That sort of utilitarianism is so limiting in modern business, Bobochic.

When I was on holiday in the Dalmatian Islands, every evening while the parents worked in restaurants and bars, their kids sat by the boats hawking trinkets they had made.
By the time they were 10 most could speak/understand English, Italian, German, Hungarian, Russian
because they had a reason to learn them.

Teaching a dead language to little kids for the sake of it is a waste of time and effort.

Only on mumsnet would you hear someone talking about 4 year olds learning Latin....!

And only on mumsnet would you hear someone talking about 4 year olds learning MFL. Unless they are bilingual. DDs are but even with a native speaking mum, my 4yo only has a passive understanding of the language. She used to say words in her second language when she was two. But once she started in sentences, she's fully english. From my own experience, I'd say paying for lessons is totally pointless. The only 4yo I know that speak in their second languages are the ones with grandparents who don't speak english. They are remarkably quick in the uptake that their parents understand english.

I am a plurilingual parent bringing up plurilingual DC having worked in plurilingual business contexts for years. I do have an inkling of how language acquisition works

HeadDreamer - the DC in my real life are, on average, a lot better at languages than the DC I hear about on MN!

Well obviously Bobochic, as you never tire of telling Mumsnet how superior you are in general, it stands to reason the kids you know would also be better at languages. They're probably better dressed too and just generally a higher class of human being.

Calm down. Since when were posters on MN not allowed to disagree with other posters for fear of illustrating their greater knowledge?

Perhaps not of the needs of modern enterprise though, if you've been outside the workplace for several years, Bobochic? It's important to be current and abreast of contemporary trends in skill sets in the European business context.