When I look back on my experience I wonder if I wouldn’t talk because, like Rajani, I though it was useless, not because the language was dead but because I knew that the family could speak English therefore I did not need to try to speak French (Canagarajah 4)? Or was it also like Sedaris where I was ridiculed for lack of knowledge about the language therefore causing me to get embarrassed or upset? I asked this question in my first essay narrative but left it a little ambiguous for the reader and for myself. But as I write this essay look back I realize that it was a little bit of Rajani and a little bit of Sedaris. Rajani helps support my claim that if I understand the language it is good enough and that I do not need to speak it, while Sedaris shows the true underlying reason why I do not want to speak publicly. Although Rajani makes a good point I don’t fully agree with it after reading Sedaris. Sedaris shows that if you understand that you should try to speak because it can help learn a culture and make friends (Sedaris 173). While Rajani believes that you don’t need to speak the language to understand the culture (Canagarajah 4). I believe that if you can speak the language it will bring you closer to the culture because it will help you understand how people think and act the way they do.