Berachot 13a

MISHNAH.
IF ONE WAS READING IN THE TORAH [THE SECTION OF THE SHEMA'] WHEN THE TIME FOR ITS RECITAL ARRIVED, IF HE HAD THE INTENTION HE HAS PERFORMED HIS OBLIGATION.

And this is even though he did not read it with its brachot, he has fulfilled. And so does Rabbenu Chananel explain.

And we say as well in Yerushalmi: Rabbi Abba said: This informs that the brachot are not me'akev [do not hold back fulfillment].

And Rav Hai Gaon za'l wrote that their order is not meakev, but he needs to read them both. And he deduces from that which the gemara said earlier, in the first perek (daf 12a): No, in reality, that he said Ahava Rabba and did not say Yotzer Or, and when he reaches the time, he will say it. And if so, what does it mean that brachot are not meakev? To beforehand. Thus, it is clear that the setama of the gemara matains that their order is not meakev, but if he did not say them at all, they are meakev.

And this that they deduce here in Yerushalmi Berachot that they are not meakev, this is in private, but in public prayer, they are meakev, like that which was above {11b}, that we teach, the memunah {appointed one, deputy kohen gadol} said to them...

Gemara:
The Sages learnt {in a brayta}: The reading of Shema is as it is written {that is, in Hebrew}. These are the words of Rabbi. And the Sages {Chachamim} say: in any language.

What is the reason of Rabbi? Scripture states {in the Shema, in Dvarim 6:6}:

ו וְהָיוּ הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה, אֲשֶׁר אָנֹכִי מְצַוְּךָ הַיּוֹם--עַל-לְבָבֶךָ.

6 And [they should be]these words, which I command thee this day, shall be upon thy heart;

as they are {in Hebrew} so shall they be.

What is the reason of the Sages? Since Scripture states {2 psukim earlier}

ד שְׁמַע, יִשְׂרָאֵל: ה אֱלֹקֵינוּ, ה אֶחָד.

4 Hear, O Israel: the LORD our God, the LORD is one.

-- in every language that you hear. But rather וְהָיוּ - And [they should be] - that you should not read it out of order, it is coming to teach.

And we establish {the halacha} like the Sages, firstly because an individual vs. the many, the halacha is like the many, and further that there is an anonymous statement in a Mishna like them, for we learn in a Mishna {the title Mishna of VeEilu Ne`emarin, the 7th perek of Sota - on daf 32a}:

And these are said in every language: the parasha of Sota, the confession of tithes, kriyat Shema, prayer {=Shemoneh Esrei}, grace after meals, the swearing of testimony, the swearing of the deposit

and it is established for us that in a case of a dispute between an anonymous statement in a Mishna vs. a dispute in a brayta, the halacha is like the anonymous Mishna. 

And furthermore, we say in proximity 'And the Sages hold like the one who said 'if he did not make it heard to his ear, he fulfills.' And so [in accordance with this opinion] do we pasken the hlacha later on (daf 15a). 

And further, because it stated here that Rabbi holds like Rabbi Yossi who said that he does not fulfill [if it did not reach his ear], and later on (there) upon the statement of Rabbi Yossi itself, it states 'Rabbi Yossi derives both lessons from it [that it can be in any language you understand and that it must reach your ear]. This is because he does not want to argue on the Rabanan, in accordance with whom is the halacha.

The Rif za'l wrote: This that we teach, tefillah in any language, these words are in the tzibbur, but in individual prayer {beyachid}, no.  For Rav Yehuda cited Rav {Shabbat 12b}: One should never ask for his needs in Aramaic.

And Rabbi Yochanan said: One who asks for his needs in Aramaic, the ministering angels do not heed him, for the ministering angels do not understand Aramaic.

I found in the Nimukei Talmidei Rabbenu Yonah, za'l, that he was astonished. Since tefillah in private is only said in Hebrew, how is the whole world accustomed to practice that women daven in other languages? For since they are obligated in tefillah, they should only daven in Hebrew.

And the Rabbis of Tzarfat za'l gave a reason to this minhag, and they said that since it was a tefillah that the tzibbur davened, we judge it like a tefillah of the tzibbur, and so an individual is able to say it in another language. And this that Rav Yehuda said that a person should not ask his needs in Aramaic, this is where he asks his needs such as that he has a sick person in his household or some other matter than he needs. But a tefillah which is established for the tzibbur, even where an individual davens it in his house, it is like davening with the tzibbur, that he does not need a translator before Hashem.

And to me it seems that this is not a question, that it is specifically this language [of Aramaic] which Rav Yehuda said that a person should not ask his needs. And so was asked in Tosafot (Shabbat, there, d"h she'ein) on this that is stated that the ministering angels do not understand Aramaic -- but do they not even know and recognize the thoughts in the heart of man? Rather, this language is disgraceful in their eyes to associate with.