- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
Watching my wife’s nephews in linguistic action, I am acutely aware of my own responsibility to ensure my daughter growing up in Spain is at least bilingual. Start them young and save yourselves a fortune in both time and expense.
The longer you wait, the more difficult it becomes. My daughter has a great advantage in that, like her cousins, her mother’s native tongue is Spanish and her father is a native speaker of English.
She will grow up watching her cousins’ ability to switch from speaking to their grandparents in Spanish to their uncle in English. Often in mid-sentence.
The temptation is to think that bilingual or multilingual parents will pass on their language abilities effortlessly to their children much like their genetic code. The wonder that is the process of reproducing ultimately boils down to a milky discharge.
Indeed, every child has an innate ability to acquire language through listening and imitation. This is demonstrated by the fact that all children take more or less the same time to fully develop one language, regardless of the complexity of the language. They also make logical mistakes like converting the past of bring to brang that they certainly haven’t copied from their parents.
When it comes to bilingualism, however, you have to put in a lot more effort than many people are prepared to do. You have to insist that the bilingual child communicates in both languages. I can think of many examples where the parent speaks in the ‘foreign’ language and the children respond in the language of their friends. The children understand what is being said but prefer to answer in the language of preference.
Sadly, all this does is reinforce the child’s preference to speak in one language and when it comes to speaking the other parent’s language, with the passing of time, they become incapable of doing so. Much like learning a foreign language at school never to speak a word of it upon leaving the classroom permanently, you will quickly discover that your hours of learning have amounted to two worthless questions about where you can buy bananas and the nearest post office to buy postage stamps.
This is a shame because bilingualism offers more advantages than simply being able to communicate with a wider group of people. In order to speak one language, the bilingual child needs to block off the other language. When performing a task, studies have revealed that bilingual people are adept at switching quickly to another task, as this is a skill that they are constantly using.
People and, especially men, like to think that they are capable of multi-tasking. Watching the rugby and ignoring your wife sounds like multi-tasking but it is really only performing one task. Watch the guy in a meeting who prides himself on being able to look at his tablet and listen to the presentation and wants everybody in the room to know he is capable of performing both tasks. They could all be talking about him behind his back and he’d never realise.
My contention is that rugby is increasingly becoming monolingual even though we all like to think of our teams as being multilingual and able to perform different tasks simultaneously.
I don’t mean monolingual in a literal sense. I do feel that teams from non-English speaking countries are penalised to some extent by rugby’s insistence on using the English language. It intrigued me last year that the Pumas appointed a captain who is unable to speak English. It’s difficult to have a conversation with the referee or seek clarification with sign language and drawings in the mud.
What I mean by rugby is too monolingual is that too much emphasis is given to one particular style of playing. We all hear there are many ways to play rugby but implied in that is you play the style that suits you and we’ll play the style that suits us. There seems to be no admission that a team can play many styles to suit them at different times in any given game.
The language of power and set-piece platform have become the rugby equivalent of English as an international language. Defences have improved, size has grown and space has been cut down. Just like the American tourist who believes speaking English louder and slower magically transforms itself into a universal language, so too do many teams make the mistake of thinking that if you can’t smash your way over the advantage line, you’re just not trying hard enough.
Why do I need to learn another language when I can get perfectly get by using one? This one language is often likely to be English. As if learning a language were just about learning another way to say the same thing. Nothing about learning a different perspective on life, exposing yourself to another culture you would have otherwise blissfully gone through life ignoring. Nothing about the personal insight and more rounded perspective on who you are and where you come from.
When I look at what Wales and France are capable of playing and what they often serve up, I often ask myself whether they recognise how much more they could be. When Wales finally beat South Africa last year, I imagine their supporters were immensely relieved. Yet the manner in which they won was akin to telling a friend I told you that bird was going to take a big dump on my head.
Our resident South African loose-head Roarer is not advocating his countrymen change their official rugby language to that of New Zealand. He is pressing for some rugby dialects to evolve among the Springboks and to be able to switch from one language to the next at appropriate moments in any given game.
The only way you can successfully pull this off on the rugby field is to practise it in training and hone the skill until it becomes second nature. It’s being aware of your environment and adapting to the changing circumstances. But it’s also grounded in years of practice.
The problem is that all teams are guilty of slipping into a rugby language that fits them like a comfortable shoe. New Zealand last year displayed a preference for going wide before they earned the right up the middle. The space was not there and shovelling sideways is not the same as passing quickly out to somebody to exploit space.
When I was living in Paris, my Swedish flatmates were able to converse fluently in five different languages. On the metro train, I’d be aware that they had realised someone was listening in on their conversation because they would change to another language to confuse the eavesdropper.
South Africa’s match against Ireland last year showed the dangers of being transparent and monolingual. They insisted on ‘speaking’ through the language of the line out and the rolling maul only for Ireland to be there waiting with a transcript of what the Springboks were about to say before a word was spoken.
Contrast that with New Zealand against England, who were having a hard time expressing themselves in the open spaces. They switched in the second half to guttural grunts up the middle and England found it hard to adjust their own game to combat that change.
People often talk about New Zealand possessing an ability to change gears in a match. This implies that they do the same thing but with greater intensity and speed. New Zealand’s consistency, in my opinion, can be attributed to their versatility and ability to switch up play because they have practised those different situations and know the right times to make those changes.
Committing more players to a ruck, coming up in defence in greater numbers and changing the angle of attack may not amount to much in terms of style. It may appear imperceptible on the field but therein lies the strength. When you look at the impact in Brisbane last year with how New Zealand approached the breakdown and defence and how that translated into attack, Australia struggled to adapt.
Contrast that with Sydney, and New Zealand was as ineffective as switching to the required wet weather language as the poor Argentinian opera singer who was cajoled into singing the Australian anthem and the nerves or lack of practice seemed to get the better of him.
Similarly, the Wallabies’ away game in South Africa – where Australia put on probably their best defensive and forward play for 60 minutes – saw an inability to express themselves in any other form than resolute defence. The holes eventually came, much like they did in the Wales game against New Zealand.
Teams like Wales, Argentina and Scotland have all recently put in performances that have contained oppositions, but they are at their most threatening when they push the envelope and inject some variety into their game. It is not a question of changing their style but, rather, a question of recognising the right time to change styles.
South Africa, England and Australia are examples of teams who can be successful playing a certain way but in a way that is to their detriment.
South Africa beautifully chose the opportune moments to catch New Zealand by surprise in Ellis Park but against Ireland they gave up points to show off their traditional strengths.
England can overpower Australia’s scrum like no other team but can’t impose themselves at scrum time against other sides to anywhere near the same extent.
Australia can see the likes of Israel Folau and Tevita Kuridrani light up the Wallaby attack but that just creates the demand for similar style performances when the situation doesn’t call for it.
The trick is knowing when to change the language mode setting and practising those changes in training. It is not a matter of whether you will need to make those changes to adapt to a specific environment but training for those moments when you need to make those changes. When game time comes, the more comfortable and adept you are to making adjustments, the more likely you are to be able to make them.
How many of us travel to a foreign country armed with a phrasebook and convince ourselves that we are ready for a wide range of situations, only to find ourselves out of our comfort zone and in a fit of panic withdraw into our mother tongue and beg for mercy?
The players who make up your rugby squads certainly lean you towards a certain style. However, the make up of the opposition facing you also leans them towards a certain style of play that will negate your own. How comfortable are you in their rugby parlance? How aware are your players of the best time to express themselves and how many ways are they capable of doing so?
Join The Roar rugby editor Christy Doran, former Wallaby Matt Toomua and a cast of regular and special guests as they look at the biggest issues in the game on The Roar Rugby Podcast. If you’re looking for great odds on the next game check out Aussie bookmaker PlayUp. Chances are you’re about to lose. Set a deposit limit.