To be or not to be...

I have always applauded the benefits of learning a second language, but when a colleague brought up the success of an activity she tried in class of changing a student`s Portuguese name to an English name, and how it allowed them to exercise the language in a new and fun way, it struck a sensitive chord. It stems from being an immigrant and having an unusual name, and dealing with the bullying and chiding over the years, the notion of changing a name in order to assimilate to a culture and society seems almost insulting. When the idea was brought up, I admit that it seemed peculiar to me since changing someone`s name might provide more confusion than stimulus to use the language, but there is some interesting scientific and surprisingly psychological explanations behind the experiment.

When one uses another language, that is not their own, there is an involuntary and subconscious shift in perspective. Evidence and analysis suggest that different languages push speakers to think differently. It is an exciting notion; the idea that one’s very self could be broadened by the mastery of two or more languages. In obvious ways (exposure to new friends, literature and so forth), the self really is broadened. Yet it is different to claim—as many people do—to have a different personality when using a different language. 

My initial research into the idea led me to the findings of an American linguist, Benjamin Lee Whorf, who maintained that each language encodes a worldview that significantly influences its speakers. The theory took shape in the form of “Whorfianism”. Naturally, there are its skeptics, but there are still good reasons to believe language shapes thought.

This influence is not necessarily linked to the vocabulary or grammar of a second language. Significantly, most people are not symmetrically bilingual. Many have learnt one language at home from parents, and another later in life, usually at school. Therefore, bilinguals usually have different strengths and weaknesses in their different languages—and they are not always best in their first language. 

For example, when tested in a foreign language, people are less likely to fall into a cognitive trap (answering a test question with an apparently obvious but wrong answer) than when tested in their native language. In part, this is because working in a second language slows down your thinking. It’s no wonder then that people feel different when speaking them, and therefore no surprise that they feel looser, more spontaneous, perhaps more assertive or funnier or blunter, in the language they were raised from childhood.

This made me rethink my stance about the exercise – could Americanizing names in fact allow students to be freer in the classroom and get over their insecurities of sounding less smart. Perhaps. After all, learning a second language is a daunting endeavor, especially for adult learners, and this insecurity could present a major roadblock for them to develop the language. So maybe changing your name could put you in a frame of mind to make mistakes and learn from them, and since I may no longer be Jair, and now Joey – I can get away with “Hey,how you doin’?”, something that maybe as Jair, I couldn’t.