Is the English language a measure of intelligence? 

By Salisu Yusuf

I was drawn into this debate by Abubakar Shuaibu Rimi when he mentioned my name under the status update of one of his Facebook friends on the above subject. Rimi wanted to hear my side of the argument. I am not supposed to say something on this issue because it’s my area of specialisation. But I am writing on it to make some clarifications.

First language is a name given to either native speakers or those who acquire a language from early childhood; I mean those whose parents are non-natives but who are exposed to the language after birth. So first language is learned successfully during childhood without the need for a formal setting. First language is, in fact, acquired (acquisition), not learned, because a child is endowed with what linguists call LCD, a natural gift endowed by God so that a child will automatically acquire any language he’s exposed to.

The first language is learned with less effort because the acquirer acquires it subconsciously, as he’s not even aware of grammatical rules.

 A second language learner, on the other hand, is someone who learns a language later after acquiring his native language. It’s usually through the formal setup and is leaned consciously with a lot of effort. While the first language is natural, the second language is a gift(intelligence), as the learner learns it consciously aware of grammar and can talk of the rules. 

Second language learner is intelligent because:

In second language learning, the learner grapples with linguistic elements such as grammar, syntax, phonology, phonetics, sociolinguistics, morphology, semantics, etc. Whenever he’s speaking in the target language, he’s conscious of almost all of them, yet you say he’s unintelligent!

When learning a second language, the learner must scale cultural barriers and embrace certain new cultural elements in the target language. In other words, he must acculturate by bypassing what linguists call social and psychological distances.

Part of the learner’s acculturation is to learn how to use the new target language independently of his mother tongue,  even though traces of his first language can be found in his expressions.

A second language learner must be intelligent enough to fight certain linguistic impediments such as systematic errors, mistakes, language interference, transfer, and interlanguage and learn the language, not his own.

A second language learner must pass certain difficulties to learn, especially when he passes 15 years, as his linguistic receptors in the brain are becoming strained, therefore, making learning more difficult. 

The question ‘Is the English language not a measure of intelligence?’ may only be applicable to native speakers because they have learned the language since childhood and in their linguistic environment. Even this claim is contestable. This is because not all speakers of a language communicate with it efficiently. A select few do. For example, if the late Ɗan Masanin Kano or the former Emir of Kano, Muhammadu Sanusi II, addresses a Hausa audience in Hausa, people tend to listen because any one of the two masters the art of speaking even in Hausa. Can you call any one of the two dull? 

So not only the English language, which isn’t our language, even a good Hausa speaker is intelligent because an unintelligent man can’t organise his words to impress an audience. Also, a good native/non-native Arabic speaker is also intelligent enough to organize his words to communicate impressively, so also is a Hausa native who communicates in either Fulfulde, Yoruba, etc.

Generating some linguistic elements such as grammar, phonetics, phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics, etc and combining them to negotiate meaning isn’t an unintelligent job. Not all language users combine the spoken and written expertise of language. The Hausa oral skills of Ɗan Masanin Kano, for example, wouldn’t be a sign of dullness but intelligence.

In other words, reaching linguistic “competence and performance” (the ability to combine sounds and meaning to communicate) even for native speakers isn’t a simple act of a simpleton, for not all language users are endowed with the skill to communicate well.