Debate blog Categories at EUDC - are we worth less?
This years EUDC council debated on the problem about the names of the categories of debaters at EUDC. Until now we debated in the EFL (English as a first language) and ESL (English as a second language). It is understandable, that there are problems, because of the mix up of EFL that can mean English as a first language or it can mean English as a foreign lanugage, categories that are used at the WSDC and I believe also at the WUDC.
The solution that th EUDC council came up with is, that the EFL (First language) category should be named The Main break, and the other as it was, ESL.
I do have a big problem with this, because I believe that naming something Main means, that the other stuff is just not as important. That means, that the ESL break becomes the Secondary, or Auxiliary break. And this is just not acceptable.
There are other variations that could be used, but they just did not use them. Like for instance, they could call it ENL (English as a native language). They are native speakers, so there is a background for this.
There was a discussion on the names Closed and Open break, Open, because second language teams can break into the first language break, and it is not possible vice-versa. This naming is acceptable, but it is just not so natural, as the other names.
I believe that because of the respect of the second language speakers (a ESL team broke 4th on the first language break this year at EUDC), the council should reconsider this position and pick other names. I’m not sure what happened at the council, if anyone protested against that, but I do know that some ESL judges already work on using the MAIN names. We will see.
What is your opinion on that?
The Council agreed to call it MB only to avoid calling it English as a native language. The relevant thing here is that the WUDC council decided to rename the EFL category to ENL category– English as a native language in order to avoid confusion.
Firstly, in the constitution of EUDC there is no reference to EFL or ENL whatsoever. We decided to leave it that way and not to change anything. Why? Because calling it the ENL creates a lot of confusion. Right now if you are not an ESL speaker, you are automatically an MB speaker, but the term ” native” refers to.. well.. being native speaker, which, according to the EUDC and WUDC criteria is not that relevant. We give ESL status to people with a disadvantage in speaking English (not the other way around (meaning that if you are not a native speaker, you’re automatically an ESL speaker).
I don’t think calling it the main break is insulting or anything. I think it is important to name these categories by names that represent their meaning and point the best and the point of MB is that the best 16 teams, whoever the are, break and the point of ESL break is that the best ESL teams break.
I was there at the Council when this was discussed. What I remember being said is that adding an EFL (first) or mostly an ENL (native) category as there is at WUDC would add the complexity of having to determine who is a native speaker of English. And I tend to agree - no reason to add that hassle, you either have main break only teams or ESL teams, if they convince the relevant committee that they face language-related difficulties.
Plus, ESL debaters can break in the Main Break, as Leiden did at Tallinn Euros. Therefore it isn’t technically an EFL / ENL break, it is open to all teams.
I don’t think that having a main and an ESL break means that we are inferior of sorts, it only means that there is one break where all teams compete for the quarter-final spots and there is an extra ESL break for those of us who aren’t native speakers.
Ok, I get your point, and I can sort of agree with it.
Still, I believe, that there are better names out there…
General break?
But I get the point, and now I can start calling the categories this way, even if I believe, that there should be a change… But maybe somewhere in the future.
BTW, nice to have you here guys