When at a financial impasse, one is often forced to make tough decisions and, in the process, reaffirm or reallocate one’s values.

The Cap Times recently reported that when faced with budget cuts, Sherman Middle School decided the best path is one sans French 1, concluding that it is relatively too blas? to keep around. The principal explained that a renewed emphasis on curriculum basics necessitated phasing out French in favor of other de rigueur courses like math. D?j? vu – I think I’ve heard this argument before.

It’s easy to scapegoat languages when tightening financial belts. I mean, if it’s not Mandarin or Spanish, a language must just be a chic hobby and have no utility, right? Au contraire. Sherman Middle School has committed a faux pas that will only inhibit student minds.

For starters, how many of you actually learned English grammar in school? Personally, everything I know about correctly using my native tongue I learned from studying foreign languages (OK, except conjunctions, I learned those from Conjunction Junction). Learning how to use a semi-colon may cause you ennui, but using one wrongly on a cover letter just might prevent you from getting an interview. 

“But students can still study languages like French in high school and college,” you might retort. True, but language study should start young. As we all know, foreign languages become harder to learn as we get older, so the earlier one starts, the better.

“But French no longer has a raison d’?tre in schools. It’s not as common or useful anymore,” you might further object. A language’s status should have no bearing on a student’s access to it. For example, why the hell should anyone ever want to study a globally minor language like Chechen? It’s not like Chechen translators might come in handy in the case of a bombing or anything. The need for a nation to be able to translate an uncommon language can arise when you least expect it, but when you most need it.

Sure, students ought to be good at math, but not to the exclusion of bilingualism. Aren’t we a “diverse” country formed from a “melting pot”? When it comes to languages, we statistically lag behind this self-asserted “diversity.” Seventeen percent of citizens are considered bilingual here in the U.S., while 56 percent are in Europe and 38 percent are in Britain, according to Fran?ois Grosjean, the author of Bilingual: Life and Reality.

And, of course, there’s the fact that speaking a foreign language can enrich one’s life in invaluable ways. If I hadn’t studied Norwegian, I likely wouldn’t have been able to stand on the land my ancestors emigrated from this past summer. That’s worth a hell of a lot more to me than speaking a language solely because it’s useful in a corporate setting. You shouldn’t not study Spanish because it’s common, but you also shouldn’t study it for the sole reason that it’s a common language.

? propos, languages are a lot more than just grammar. They don’t just communicate words, but ideas, culture and a bon vivant lifestyle. You can’t judge a language by its usefulness in commerce, because there are so many benefits that can’t be described in any language.

We live in a global world. We can hop online and interact with redditors in France in an instant. We can Facebook with friends in Germany in less time than it takes to load Google Translate. Our opportunities to cultivate a foreign language are exponentially growing, yet, for some reason, we are continually losing sight of the value of an institutionalized diversity of languages.

So next time you’re out for haute cuisine to celebrate Mardi Gras after enjoying film noir and the garcon comes by and suggests his favorite hors d’oeuvre, followed by the soup du jour and dessert ? la mode, realize your day might not have been the same if it wasn’t for French. It’s time we reconsider how we value languages; it’s time for an appreciation renaissance for all tongues, regardless of their status.  

Reginald Young ([email protected]) is a senior majoring in legal studies and Scandinavian studies.