March 6, 2026

In February 2026, in conjunction with International Mother Language Day (21 February), two opinion pieces published in The Straits Times and Lianhe Zaobao by Daniel Chan (NUS Centre for Language Studies) examined a shared concern: how language learning and cultural vitality should evolve in an era shaped by artificial intelligence and digital transformation. International Mother Language Day, established by UNESCO to promote linguistic diversity and intergenerational transmission, provided a timely backdrop for reflecting on the purpose of language education in Singapore. 

In the Straits Times commentary, “With AI translation tools, what’s the point of learning different languages?”, Daniel Chan argues that the rise of increasingly sophisticated AI translation tools should not diminish the importance of language learning. While machine translation systems such as DeepL and Google Translate can render grammatically accurate sentences, they cannot capture the cultural nuance, emotional texture, and contextual sensitivity embedded in human communication. The article highlights that translation is not merely about substituting words, but about understanding tone, historical resonance, and relational meaning. 

Drawing on examples across languages, the piece shows how expressions of regret, apology, and empathy vary subtly between linguistic systems, revealing how language shapes thought and social interaction. When learners rely exclusively on AI, they may bypass the cognitive and emotional processes necessary to internalise these distinctions. The op-ed therefore warns against complacency in an AI-mediated world, arguing that language study develops analytical flexibility, intercultural competence, and intellectual autonomy; capacities that cannot be simply outsourced to algorithms. 

In a complementary vein, the Lianhe Zaobao article, “International Mother Language Day: Youth’s Voices Keeping Our Mother Tongues Alive,” turns to the vitality of mother tongue education in Singapore. It observes that whilst mother tongue remains a compulsory subject tied to high-stakes examinations, an overemphasis on grades may discourage experimentation and authentic usage. When students fear making mistakes, classroom participation becomes cautious, and language risks being reduced to examinable competence rather than lived practice. 

The article distinguishes between “language competence” and “language vitality”. Competence refers to measurable mastery of grammar and vocabulary, and vitality refers to whether a language is actively used in homes, social spaces, and digital environments. UNESCO’s emphasis on intergenerational transmission is cited as a key indicator of sustainability. The piece notes that Singaporean youth demonstrate creative linguistic adaptability on social media, blending languages and dialects in distinctive “rojak” forms, suggesting that language evolution rather than rigid preservation may sustain long-term relevance. 

Both op-eds converge on a broader theme: language is not simply a technical skill, but a living system tied to identity, empathy, and social cohesion. Whether confronting the risks of AI overreliance or exam-driven learning cultures, the central argument is that language education must prioritise internalisation, experimentation, and meaningful use. 

Read the articles here: Straits Times; Lianhe Zaobao