Letters: Mixed views on compulsory te reo

PHOTO/GETTY

Jim Adams (Letters, February 4) calls Te Reo a "dead" language, which is an offensive description. He also refers to him being taught numerous other languages. He describes them as a waste of time, probably because he couldn't make a buck from them.

Language is the backbone of one's culture, values and beliefs. It is how we identify ourselves. It is the defining point that makes New Zealand unique to the world. However, this is too airy-fairy for many. Money talks so let me spell it out in dollars.

This paper reported in November 2016 that Rotorua has a $700 million per annum tourism industry with a projected forecast of $1 billion by 2030. Domestic visitors clocked up $400m per year last year and international tourists added $300m. Statistics NZ states that the Regional Tourism Spend for the Bay of Plenty for 2016 was $801m. As of March 2016, nationally the industry pulled in $12.9b GDP (5.6 per cent).

Te Reo has been fundamental to the local and national tourism industry. Jobs, rent or mortgages, taxes, rates, school books, a holiday or a picnic at the lake are possible because of Te Reo.

This is what Te Reo has given to the citizens of Rotorua and New Zealand. It does make money, it does contribute and tourists will always be hungry for the unique and inspiring culture it underpins. Te Reo as a core school subject makes sense.

WAIRANGI JONES
Rotorua

Realistic approach
Stephanie Arthur-Worsop's idea of adding Maori and sign languages to the list of compulsory school subjects (Editorial, February 2) is not a likely possibility.

Apart from the cost, lack of suitable tutors, and the mechanics of adding more subjects to the curriculum, there are learning conditions to consider. Enthusiasm is not enough to carry a student through to proficiency in speaking a new language.

Learning a language that is not spoken at home and in the community, is for many, a difficult task. A very good memory for words, which a third of the population does not have, and plenty of practice, are needed to make satisfactory progress.

Some teachers who are not specialists in the language field include Maori words and phrases when conversing with their pupils. This relaxed way of keeping a language alive is probably a more realistic approach than making it a compulsory subject.

Perhaps the future will include a New Zealand language that is a mixture of Te Reo and English.

HUGH WILSON
Rotorua