My observation from the sidelines ... and I was born in 1951, so my view goes back aways.

To my knowledge, these are the seminaries in North America which train traditional priests, or priests who offer the Tridentine Mass and provide the Sacraments in the traditional form.  Some here would not recognize all of these as being "traditionalist".  I'm thinking that those here of the "resistance to the SSPX" position may not be comfortable with sending a son with a vocation to any of these seminaries.

Bishop Sanborn's Most Holy Trinity Seminary, moved from Florida to Reading, PA.
Saint Gertrude the Great (Ohio); Their seminarians are with Father Carlos Ercoli at Holy Redeemer Chapel in Seattle.
CMRI: Mater Dei Major Seminary in Omaha, NE, a secondary campus in Persia, IA, and a Minor Seminary (high school) in Rathdrum, ID.
SSPV's Immaculate Heart Seminary Round Top, New York.
SSPX's St. Thomas Aquinas Seminary Dillwyn, VA.
FSSP's Our Lady of Guadalupe Seminary Denton, NE.
Our Lady of Mount Carmel Seminary Boston, KY (Bishop Joseph Pfeiffer, I'll leave it to others to decide if a "?" is needed in his title).

As for the language issue:  Theology used to be taught in Latin, and a mastery of Latin was required to be admitted to a major seminary (St. John Vianney is said to have struggled with this).  Off the top of my head I don't know when theology began to be taught in the vernacular languages, but I'm thinking it wasn't until the early 20th century.  Back in "my day" (born 1951), if one hadn't discerned a vocation by the 8th grade it was assumed they didn't have one, and that thought goes WAY BACK.  There was a seminary in Wisconsin that specialized in "delayed vocations", but that was mostly for men who because of family reasons (like they had to work to help support their family) or illness, not because they weren't figuring out a vocation until they were in their twenties'.

So, "back in the day" most men entered the minor seminary (high school), than two to three years of philosophy (college level).  They would have had six to seven years of Latin instruction before entering the major seminary for four years of theology.  They would have also taken instruction in Greek and sometimes Hebrew, plus perhaps a foreign language if they were going to do missionary work.

I took two years of Spanish in high school, which I had mostly forgotten when six years latter I went to Colombia for the Peace Corps, working with cattle producers.  After twelve weeks of language training and two years of service I could speak intelligently about livestock, forage and grain crops, farming in general.  I could read the newspapers, follow newscasts on the radio and television, order a meal, order cuts of beef at the butcher shop, negotiate with vendors in the market about the price of fruits and vegetables, negotiate an apartment lease, and carry on general conversations about current topics.  With this background I could not imagine attempting to comprehend the intricacies of the "Summa Theologica", let alone deliver a coherent sermon on correct doctrine, nor give sound counsel in the confessional.  The idea that a young man could take one of those crash language courses in French, spend maybe a year of two in France, and then be ready to master St. Thomas Aquinas ... I believe that would be very unwise.

If the resistance believes that it is the "true voice of tradition" I would think they will have to offer formation in either the native tongue of seminarians, or provide for seminarians to have a minimum of two very intensive language training before they begin their theological studies in a particular language.