It would make better sense to rephrase as "Does fluency in a second language make it easier to learn a third?" and assume that music is a second language in that question, and that "fluency" in music is more than just "can carry a tune".
Singers have no more connection to music than any other musician (and it could be argued that they, as a group, have less connection to music than musicians of more harmonic or chordal instruments, but let's ignore that for now).
Music, as a language, has considerably more depth and scope than the words that someone sings. Suggesting that singers are the only musicians who would benefit linguistically is entirely missing the point.
I suggested singers because they have more control on voice and that can (possibly) help on pronunciation of some sounds present in foreign languages that don't exist in their native language.
Comments
No, no, no.
It would make better sense to rephrase as "Does fluency in a second language make it easier to learn a third?" and assume that music is a second language in that question, and that "fluency" in music is more than just "can carry a tune".
Singers have no more connection to music than any other musician (and it could be argued that they, as a group, have less connection to music than musicians of more harmonic or chordal instruments, but let's ignore that for now).
Music, as a language, has considerably more depth and scope than the words that someone sings. Suggesting that singers are the only musicians who would benefit linguistically is entirely missing the point.
I suggested singers because they have more control on voice and that can (possibly) help on pronunciation of some sounds present in foreign languages that don't exist in their native language.