I REFER to Sunday's report, 'Game for Chinese class?' While I appreciate the commitment by the Ministry of Education (MOE) to help students enjoy their Mandarin classes, I do not understand what is so wrong with the current teaching method. Aren't all languages taught in similar ways?

Which language learning does not involve memorisation? How else do you expand your vocabulary if you do not memorise, especially if you do not live in an environment that uses that language?

Unless your home environment allows you to be immersed in Mandarin, there is no other way than to memorise. And because of the unique writing system, how else do you remember how to write those thousands of characters except with practice?

In our local universities, foreign languages are taught by reading passages in textbooks and learning grammar rules through repetition and memorisation of sample dialogue. I believe private institutions use similar methods.

How different are these methods from how our schools teach Chinese?

I believe the difference lies in the individual's motivation and attitude. Learning Mandarin was never a choice for Chinese students, whereas in the universities and other language schools, foreign languages are taken by choice, usually because of interest, hence the motivation.

However, Mandarin was 'forced' on every Chinese student, whether he liked it or not. And in wilful, childish rebellion, many chose to shun Mandarin.

As for attitude, I believe there is still a strong subconscious mentality that Mandarin is for the uneducated and the educated speak only impeccable English. With such an attitude, no amount of coaxing or coercion is going to work. If the motivation and attitudes are not there, no strategy by MOE will last long.

Wu Zhi Zhen (Ms)

This article was first published in The Straits Times.