What's the opinion on this? I really don't know here I stand on it. I lean towards "against", but I see the point of those who push for it. Any opinions on it here?
Hobbes Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
English is the lingua franca. Why would anyone wanna settle on it being merely yet another amongst many national languages?
Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
I see no need for this. Its feels jingoistic to me and exclusionary. Why not just learn Spanish (or whatever other language is in use in your area)? It's not that hard. Why do people act like one language is better than many? The more the better! Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
tell that to the Austro-Hungarians.
Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
"Why not just learn Spanish (or whatever other language is in use in your area)? It's not that hard."
Speak for yourself. My mother speaks hebrew in the home, and I know diddly. I took a year of spanish in high school, and 2 semesters in college, and failed, despite working my ass off. Language can be very difficult to learn, unless you are immersed, and for many of us, thats simply not an option.
That said, i'm not in favor of a national language.
Posted by Christine (Member # 8594) on :
Lately I've been leaning toward bing in favor of English as a national language. I'm not sold one way or the other, but generally I think it would be best, since so much is nationalized, that we all speak the same "official" language. This does not preclude people speaking whatever language they want, but it does, for example, keep schools from having to cater to speakers of countless languages. I know in some areas there are schools that have to contend with dozens of languages being spoken by their student body.
As for me learning a second language...to be honest, I've tried a couple of times but there is so little opportunity to practice in this country because English is so common, that it's hard to learn and easy to forget. I used to speak passable French but now I can barely remember how to wish you good day. Spanish is the most common language in this country, other than English, but even that wouldn't help my mom remember it thirty years after she graduated with a major in Spanish. So I actually disagree that it's easy to learn or retain a second language in this country unless you are a part of a culture that actively speaks a non-English language in the home.
Anyway, definitely open to hearing both sides of this, if anyone is honestly really opinionated. Most people I talk to don't care that much. Come to think of it, neither do I. Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Paul Goldner: Language can be very difficult to learn, unless you are immersed, and for many of us, thats simply not an option.
Even immersion never really did the trick for me.
quote:Originally posted by Paul Goldner: That said, i'm not in favor of a national language.
Entirely agreed.
Posted by cmc (Member # 9549) on :
I looked up jingoistic (because i had no clue what it meant...) and got patriotic out of it.
I think a National Language can serve to unite us as Americans. We speak English here.
Come, Assimilate, Make a better World with us...
Just please learn English while you're doing it.
I think patriotism is good. I don't think a National Language is bad... I'm not trying to say people should have to leave everything they come from (literally or 'heritage-aly') behind. I just think a definite common language would be a good thing.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Christine: Lately I've been leaning toward bing in favor of English as a national language. I'm not sold one way or the other, but generally I think it would be best, since so much is nationalized, that we all speak the same "official" language. This does not preclude people speaking whatever language they want, but it does, for example, keep schools from having to cater to speakers of countless languages. I know in some areas there are schools that have to contend with dozens of languages being spoken by their student body.
I don't understand how making English official would in any way help with this issue. I believe it would actually make things worse, as it would be yet another excuse to cut funds for bilingual education.
Posted by The White Whale (Member # 6594) on :
But why stop at a national language? Doesn't that just fall into the same category of many of our other national opinions: "we're right 'cuz we're the US, and everyone should do it our way!!!"
If an international committee got together and figured out the best language that would make international relations better for everyone, I would hop on board an learn that language. I know there are some groups trying to learn a new mixed language (Esperanto, for one), but it doesn't have international backing, so I think it would be a waste of time to try to learn something that probably won't be any good.
And it is also very hard to learn a language when you're not a child (at least for most people). If we were taught from the beginning two languages (like whatever native language you have and some global Common language), and everyone did it, not just small, independent groups, it would have much more of an impact. I would teach my (not yet conceived) children the international language in a heartbeat.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
I think everyone should have to know English, it's in everyone's best interest for them to know it, but at the same time I'm leery of a program that might try and brush away ancestral roots, many of which are tied to languages.
I've talked to my cousin before, who works at a hospital, and she's told me that a lot of the time they'll get in people who don't speak English and when she asks them if they have allergies or what's wrong, they'll keep saying "I don't know" in Spanish. It's dangerous, and in the end more expensive I'd venture to guess as well.
So I think everyone should speak English, but I'd be afraid that making English the national language would just be a foot in the door to destroying the heritage of people who come here that speak different languages.
People always talk about assimilating into America like we're the friggin Borg. "Your technological and biological distinctiveness will be added to our own." In other words, we're going to erase everything you used to be in order to make you American, so learn English and fit in. I think it's alright to want to add their distinctiveness to us, more along the lines of the many different threads making up the tapestry that is America type argument. But I don't think they should have to give up where they came from in order to do it.
What benefit does making English the national language really have anyway? What does it change? If the law doesn't make something better or protect something, then why bother having it?
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
If someone could tell me what "national language" meant I could venture an opinion on it. Does it mean the language our government conducts business in? Then English is already the national language.
Does "national language" mean that the government can use other languages to communicate with residents and citizens? Then it's an impracticable and hostile thing to want to do.
I have no problem recognizing that English is the base language for government business - law and regulation drafting, the default language in court, etc. Most uses of other languages are translations from something in English, something that will be translated to English as it is heard/read by the relevant government entity, or a particular extra service provided in areas where it's needed (such as Spanish-speaking clerks at the DMV).
English undeniably has a more central place in this country than other languages. Is "national language" simply supposed to be a codification of that?
Until someone can tell me what it actually means, there seems little point to the discussion.
Posted by The White Whale (Member # 6594) on :
There are benefits to having a common language. In emergency situations, control or proper help can be given with confidence when those giving directions are sure that everyone speaks a common language.
And we talk like assimilating into America is like assimilating into the Borg, because sometimes that's how policies or people believe. The American system rarely caters to those who don't speak English. Only after a long time, and a lot of arguing and legal battles, that policy gets changed to accommodate those who speak different languages.
I would be comfortable knowing that everyone spoke the same language that I did, and if I was in a large group of people that spoke the same language that I did, I would be more confident in claiming that everyone should learn my language. But it doesn't make it right.
Posted by Sterling (Member # 8096) on :
In recent history, schools punished students who were members of Native American tribes for speaking their own language. This has been a contributing factor in some of those languages becoming extinct, and others nearly so.
I cannot help but feel that, with English already being the primary language of the vast majority of the population, any bill or law making English the "official national language" would be used for the worst purposes by the most xenophobic elements of our culture.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
Once you are in adolescence and later, learning another language to the point of fluency is extremely difficult. I think it's very flippant of you, Tatiana, to act as if it's so easy that we all should do it. There are numerous studies on language acquisition that bear this fact out - once you are past childhood, learning a new language is very hard. And, unless you start very young, you'll never speak a second language without an "accent" because you just don't know the phonemes of the other language. Very few and privileged are those so linguistically gifted they can speak multiple languages fluently and accentless.
I think we should make an effort to teach the children of immigrants English, and put a lot of effort into bilingual education, especially in the early years. Every student should be taught in English primarily, with ESL teachers on hand to help facilitate the move from the native language into English. I agree that having a common language for legal, business, and emergency services is beneficial, but I don't see how making English the "official" language enhances that effort at all.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Belle: I think we should make an effort to teach the children of immigrants English, and put a lot of effort into bilingual education, especially in the early years. Every student should be taught in English primarily, with ESL teachers on hand to help facilitate the move from the native language into English. I agree that having a common language for legal, business, and emergency services is beneficial, but I don't see how making English the "official" language enhances that effort at all.
I agree entirely.
Posted by Morbo (Member # 5309) on :
cmc, jingoism is the rotten underside of patriotism: where love of country becomes hatred of other and xenophobia. I am a patriot but never rarely (never?) a jingoist.
quote: Jingoism is chauvinistic patriotism, usually associated with a War Hawk political stance. In practice, it refers to sections of the general public who advocate the use of threats or of actual force against other countries in order to safeguard a country's national interests.
English is the defacto national language. But codifying it as the national language through law would be, as Tatiana says, exclusionary and counterproductive. I agree with Belle and Rivka that ESL and bilingual education is the way to go.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
Virtually no immigrant doesn't want to learn English. (Not counting people who immigrate when they are in their seventies to die with their families.) Failing to learn English severely curtails your opportunities and makes you forever a stranger in your own country. Creating a national language doesn't create an incentive where one is lacking. It is simply one more statement, in a time when immigrants are portrayed by some as the bogeymen, of "We don't like you; go the hell away."
Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :
When they suggested that English be the official language, Miami practically rioted. They were setting domino tables on fire in the streets!
The nice thing about living in Miami is that it's so close to the United States...
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
You know, the sad thing is that people will read your posts and believe you . . .
Anyway, IIRC correctly, that amendment already passed in Florida, back in '92 or '93. That's why we now have no ESOL kids in Florida schools, everybody speaks English, and you can go to a grocery store and order your damn bread in English! It solved everything!
Posted by Hobbes (Member # 433) on :
Well Icarus, you've convinced me, I'm now for English as the National Language. A succsesful trial run and all...
Hobbes Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Icarus: Anyway, IIRC correctly, that amendment already passed in Florida, back in '92 or '93. That's why we now have no ESOL kids in Florida schools, everybody speaks English, and you can go to a grocery store and order your damn bread in English! It solved everything!
Huh. Funny that it didn't work here in California then. Posted by Juxtapose (Member # 8837) on :
My great-grandparents spoke mostly Japanese with enough English to get by.
My grandparents speak both languages more or less fluently.
My father only knows conversational Japanese.
I know almost none.*
We don't need English as the official national language to make assimilation work. What we need to do is be patient and let it work at its own pace. Trying to rush things, IMO, will just make the process more difficult.
*This is despite taking years of Japanese classes while I was in grade school. Learning a second language is supremely difficult for me, and I'm always impressed by people who are bilingual.
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
quote:Originally posted by Hobbes: Well Icarus, you've convinced me, I'm now for English as the National Language. A succsesful trial run and all...
Hobbes
It doesn't seem that having more than one official language has harmed (or been painful to the population of) other countries, as far as I know. It certainly isn't problematic for Canada to have all government items -- and most publically sold private ones, for that matter -- in both French and English.
Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
It's odd to me that people are saying it's too hard for them to learn a second language, so they expect first generation immigrants, who probably work crazy impossible hours at low paying jobs just to survive, and many of whom have little or no schooling in their own languages, to do something that's too hard for them to do.
Then they want to throw the immigrants' kids into a situation in which they're at a vast disadvantage (a school which is taught only in a language they don't understand) and expect them to just catch up with no help and no outside tutoring, when they have parents who can't help them with their homework.
Is something wrong with that picture?
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
As far as I can see, the same people who are saying that learning another language is difficult are endorsing bilingual education and are against limiting everything to English. Seems pretty consistent to me.
Posted by Juxtapose (Member # 8837) on :
Only that I'm not sure who is saying that.
Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
My adopted son Sasha emigrated to the U.S. at age five speaking only Russian. He said all the kids around him in school were speaking English, which sounded to him like growling and yapping, and he felt like he was the only cat in a world full of dogs.
The point is that it's hard enough as it is. Immigrating, giving up everything about your home culture and coming to a strange new world, is difficult. Imagine doing it with no training at all, no education, no context in which to see the bigger picture. Immigrants and their kids deserve to be given whatever welcome, whatever assistance, the community can afford to give. Making English the "official language" just says to them "go away and leave us alone, it's your problem".
Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
rivka, your position does make sense. I was talking about people who think the opposite, that it's too hard for they themselves to learn a second language so immigrants and their children should be required to just know English without anyone spending any resources to teach them.
It's also not very reasonable to say "it's hard to learn a second language because we don't get any exposure to other languages here" therefore "we need to make English the official language to prevent the possibility that we'll be exposed to other languages here".
Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tatiana: It's odd to me that people are saying it's too hard for them to learn a second language, so they expect first generation immigrants, who probably work crazy impossible hours at low paying jobs just to survive, and many of whom have little or no schooling in their own languages, to do something that's too hard for them to do.
Then they want to throw the immigrants' kids into a situation in which they're at a vast disadvantage (a school which is taught only in a language they don't understand) and expect them to just catch up with no help and no outside tutoring, when they have parents who can't help them with their homework.
Is something wrong with that picture?
So what's the deal, we should all learn every language? I see where you're coming from, but we seem to be talking like there are only two languages: english and "immigrant". I'm Canadian, so I don't necessarily know everything about the situation in the States, but here in Canada we have two "official" languages, English and French. What does that mean? Well, government activities are conducted in English or French. Labels and signs are in English and/or French. Schools are taught in English and/or French. What it doesn't mean is that immigrants are prohibited to come here without knowing the language, that they must leave their cultures at the door, or that I can't walk down a street in Toronto and here many different languages. Tell me if any of this is all that different from the States. I don't know if there's a significant difference between an "official" language and a "national" language though.
What I'm saying is that making English the national language in the U.S. probably won't change a thing, since for all intents and purposes it already is. Besides, I personally wouldn't move to any country and expect to get by without speaking whatever language the majority does. Why would I expect everyone to know my language?
Oh, and as for school, that's what ESL/ELL programs are for.
quote:Making English the "official language" just says to them "go away and leave us alone, it's your problem".
Just wanted to add, as someone who lives in a country where English is an "official language" but still receives a huge number of immigrants, that's just silly. Who comes to the US and doesn't know that they'll be at a disadvantage if they can't speak English?
Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
neo-dragon, ESL programs are what is at issue. The effect of saying "English is the legally mandated official language of the U.S." would be to cut funding for bilingual education, have official government forms be only in English, and so on.
Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
Again, not so in Canada, so I can't see why that should happen in the States.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Because it HAS happened that way in individual states which have passed such laws/amendments.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tatiana: I was talking about people who think the opposite, that it's too hard for they themselves to learn a second language so immigrants and their children should be required to just know English without anyone spending any resources to teach them.
I don't see anyone in this thread advocating that position.
Posted by enjeeo (Member # 2336) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tatiana: I see no need for this. Its feels jingoistic to me and exclusionary. Why not just learn Spanish (or whatever other language is in use in your area)? It's not that hard. Why do people act like one language is better than many? The more the better!
Even if English was the official national language, people would still be wise to learn another language, especially one that's commonly used where they live. That's just realistic living.
I think the bigger question is, how big a percentage of the population has to speak another language before that language is added to the list of official languages? For the US this is obviously going to be an issue with Spanish as the demographic shifts that way. Citizens are more informed and more participatory when they understand more, and getting official information in their first language is very valuable for that.
Australia's national language is English, but we have multi-cultural government policies that try to bridge the gap for non-English speaking citizens. Immigrants get free English lessons and there's a free translation service available whenever you are dealing with government departments. You call a number and someone who speaks your language then calls the department and translates for you. Pretty cool I think. Posted by Hobbes (Member # 433) on :
I guess my concern would be, does not having English as the national language reduce the motivation for schools to get children who don't speak English, learn it? Or in other words, my concern is, could not having it cause us to graduate more children who are completely unprepared for life in the United States? I met someone who only speaks Spanish, he worked close to 20 hours a day, six days a week with no vacation and was still living on the poverty line. His wife said the only other job he could find had similar attributes but the working conditions were worse. Now if this is true or not, I've never looked for a job speaking only Spanish, but I know that both the claims of job conditions and income were true having observed it myself. How bad it is may be up for discussion, but I think we can all get behind the fact that not being able to speak English makes one very unmarketable in America.
I spent 9 months in France when I was in Kindergarten; I went to a bilingual school, and in the nine months there picked up about as many words as I have fingers. Of course I didn't have the motivation that my future job possibilities depended on my learning French, but on the other hand, how many kindergartners do you know that would be motivated if they knew that? I think the kind of schooling and programs that are available make a big difference as to if the children learn the language, and if there's a feeling that they can get out without knowing it (a feeling for both teachers and students) that could be a problem. So we go back to the question, does the lack of the law, cause that feeling?
Hobbes Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka: Because it HAS happened that way in individual states which have passed such laws/amendments.
Maybe, but the US is like Canada in that the population is so diverse that I don't every see it becoming an English only club. Maybe in the past, but not now. It's not like, say Japan, where probably 95% of the population is ethnic Japanese.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Hobbes: I guess my concern would be, does not having English as the national language reduce the motivation for schools to get children who don't speak English, learn it?
*jawdrop* Seriously?
You mean, the fact that the teachers, administrators, and parents are all well aware that lack of English skills will limit the kids' options isn't enough? Making it a LAW is the missing piece???
Do you know anyone who works in bilingual education or with ESL students? I know many. Trust me, motivation is not the problem. Insufficient funding -- and laws taking more and more funding away -- is the problem.
Posted by Hobbes (Member # 433) on :
quote:Do you know anyone who works in bilingual education or with ESL students?
No, that's exactly why I asked the question. This isn't anywhere near any of my areas of my expertize, that's why I'm asking questions, because I recognize I know nothing about the subject.
Hobbes Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by neo-dragon:
quote:Originally posted by rivka: Because it HAS happened that way in individual states which have passed such laws/amendments.
Maybe, but the US is like Canada in that the population is so diverse that I don't every see it becoming an English only club.
You misunderstand me. I don't think such laws would actually discourage immigration. I think they would (directly or indirectly) further strip funding from ESL programs, cause government agencies to stop making available official forms in languages other than English, cut funding for translators, etc.
I don't just English-only laws are a bad idea for immigrants. I think they are a terrible idea for everyone who hopes that all the immigrants in this country have the ability to be good, productive citizens.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Hobbes, I'm not amused. I'm stunned. I apologize -- this has been a huge issue in my state for many years.
Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
Why can't the opposite be true with regards to ESL? I mean, if English were the national/official language, perhaps the government would have more incentive to help citizens learn it? Or maybe I'm just being naive.
Posted by Hobbes (Member # 433) on :
Sorry Rivka, I'd already edited my post because I realized the words I used could be rather biting ones, and I certainly don't intent to employ such tactics, and certainly not with you!
Hobbes Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka: I don't see anyone in this thread advocating that position.
At least one poster is in this thread, and it's an idea that's quite common in local communities. I agree with you, rivka, that we don't need to cut funding for bilingual education.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by neo-dragon: Why can't the opposite be true with regards to ESL? I mean, if English were the national/official language, perhaps the government would have more incentive to help citizens learn it?
If that became true, I'd sign up for it in a heartbeat! Unfortunately, all the rhetoric I've heard every time some political group or politician bring up the issue is about cutting funding to ESL programs, not printing official forms in other languages, etc.
Hobbes,
Tatiana, I don't know if I'm the one misreading other people's posts or you are, but I'm not seeing that. I do see several posters with vague, open-ended statements that can be read a multitude of ways.
Posted by guinevererobin (Member # 10753) on :
I'm all for both making English the national language, and for ensuring there is bilingual education for kids in the schools - with a big push to get them schooled up and into regular English-only classes as quickly as possible - and giving free ESL and literacy classes to adult immigrants.
People need to be able to communicate with each other, with governmental departments, etc, and having one official language simplifies that process. We might be able to provide translations on street signs and government forms for a second language, but we're never going to be able to provide translations for all possible languages, so we're then going to be excluding immigrants who are in the minority from the advantages experiences by other immigrants. That doesn't seem to really level the playing field, either.
Give immigrants all the help possible in learning English. And give them the credit for being able to do so, to adapt to our culture rather then protecting them from it. Most of our ancestors managed... I'm not descended from Mayflower pilgrim, my people got over here and figured it out. We didn't give up our culture (at least not until becoming completely mongrelized), but we picked up American culture in addition.
Posted by Rappin' Ronnie Reagan (Member # 5626) on :
quote:Originally posted by guinevererobin: We didn't give up our culture (at least not until becoming completely mongrelized), but we picked up American culture in addition.
Do you think that current immigrants aren't doing that?
Posted by rollainm (Member # 8318) on :
And what happens in twenty years when the majority of the population speaks Spanish?
Posted by guinevererobin (Member # 10753) on :
quote:quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Originally posted by guinevererobin: We didn't give up our culture (at least not until becoming completely mongrelized), but we picked up American culture in addition. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you think that current immigrants aren't doing that?
I'm saying that requiring them to learn English, rather then allowing them to function (outside their own homes) in their native language, doesn't detract from them maintaining a sense of their original culture.
Posted by cmc (Member # 9549) on :
cruising down to post after seeing morbo's response... haven't read past that...
I agree that bilingual education is excellent. The more ways you (general you...) have to express yourself, the better.
At the same time, however, I feel a common ground - common language - common understanding of letters strung together - could help.
I say this because... I speak English. I speak Spanish. I speak both well, but English is my native tongue and I'm sure I know it much 'better'. I've lived a few places, I've known many people. Some of the people I know speak the English I've known my whole life differently than I learned to speak it.
The differences between dialect and region vary so greatly in and of themselves... A different language is an even larger variable.
I don't have a problem if America has or doesn't have a National Language. I just feel if there were to be one, English should be it. Not to eliminate all the languages it's come from - just to establish one for Us to start from.
/rambling
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by guinevererobin: People need to be able to communicate with each other, with governmental departments, etc, and having one official language simplifies that process.
This is the part I don't understand. Suppose I waved my magic wand right now, and English officially became the language of the land.
What would change?
Would the immigrants who have been trying to pick up the language as best they can magically now read, write, and speak it fluently? Or would the government simply make it more difficult for them than it already is?
Posted by Lissande (Member # 350) on :
quote:And, unless you start very young, you'll never speak a second language without an "accent" because you just don't know the phonemes of the other language.
I agree with the sentiment that language learning past childhood is challenging, but I have to categorically disagree with this statement. Hard doesn't mean impossible.
--
And I agree with the posters who wonder what codifying English as the "national language" would accomplish - it is already the common language. No, not everybody speaks it, but typically, if you want to talk to someone (outside your own community), you will need to do it in English, even if it's bad English.
I think that immigrants should be encouraged (and provided with more resources) to learn English not because it's The Law but because it is in their best interest - better job, education, access to public services, etc. Providing those resources is, in fact, in the English-speaking community's best interest as well.
I don't see the push to make English the national language as a move in that direction, however. My feeling is that it more plays into the xenophobic fears of the segment of the population feeling threatened by immigration and afraid of losing its majority status. Which I take strong exception to.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:What would change?
Would the immigrants who have been trying to pick up the language as best they can magically now read, write, and speak it fluently? Or would the government simply make it more difficult for them than it already is?
If history is any indication, it would only have negative effects.
A few months ago, the official Utah web site took down some helpful Spanish web sites because it was feared that even having such web sites was illegal because of the official English language laws in Utah.
quote:Originally posted by Lissande:
quote:And, unless you start very young, you'll never speak a second language without an "accent" because you just don't know the phonemes of the other language.
I agree with the sentiment that language learning past childhood is challenging, but I have to categorically disagree with this statement. Hard doesn't mean impossible.
You're talking about two different things. Somebody can be quite adept, fluent even, in a language, and still have a strong accent.
I agree that learning to speak a new language without an accent is practically impossible for many adults. I also believe that I am one of them.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka:
quote:Originally posted by guinevererobin: People need to be able to communicate with each other, with governmental departments, etc, and having one official language simplifies that process.
This is the part I don't understand. Suppose I waved my magic wand right now, and English officially became the language of the land.
What would change?
Would the immigrants who have been trying to pick up the language as best they can magically now read, write, and speak it fluently? Or would the government simply make it more difficult for them than it already is?
Well, it is to be hoped that with a law actually stating it, people would see that the country is serious. It is also to be hoped that the government would then take further steps to help the populace pick up this tedious language. Making English the official langauge does not mean remove all helps written in another language.
Look, I say this very matter of factly, it is an advantage to be able to speak English. Tons of doors open if you can speak it. For Europeans to do commerce, their children often learn two languages in school, they just have to. In China there are mandatory English classes, and that's a foreign language! They don't learn it because there are a millions of English speaking immigrants in the country, they learn it because that's the language of business worldwide.
I know how hard it is to learn a second language. If people moving here or being born here are having trouble learning it, I don't think the answer is to slacken our demands that they learn English but to revise our programs designed to integrate immigrants and their children.
edit: Oh and Rivka, can I just say I love the way you speak English? It's fun to listen to.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
English is already the national language. Which is awesome.
Making it official is the thing that I think is a Bad Idea. I wrote a paper junior year of high school about the arrogance of America, which, I claimed, was typified by our stubborn expectation that everyone speak our language.
Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
quote:Originally posted by neo-dragon: Again, not so in Canada, so I can't see why that should happen in the States.
If the U.S. were going to emulate our language laws, English and Spanish would both be official languages. The Canadian example doesn't apply to mandating a single official language in America.
Posted by Lissande (Member # 350) on :
quote:quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Originally posted by Lissande:
quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- And, unless you start very young, you'll never speak a second language without an "accent" because you just don't know the phonemes of the other language. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree with the sentiment that language learning past childhood is challenging, but I have to categorically disagree with this statement. Hard doesn't mean impossible. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You're talking about two different things. Somebody can be quite adept, fluent even, in a language, and still have a strong accent.
I agree that learning to speak a new language without an accent is practically impossible for many adults. I also believe that I am one of them.
You are quite right, some people are adept or fluent in a language that they still speak with a foreign accent. Does this mean that ALL people who are adept or fluent in a language speak with a foreign accent? It is that assumption I disagree with - SOME people, and I believe my husband and I are among them*, ARE capable of learning a language as adults and speaking without a discernible accent. It isn't impossible.
* He started learning English in his late teens (16-17? nearly 15 years ago) and now passes for Oklahoman. I started learning Czech at 23 and though I haven't reached the goal quite yet, after four years and two months people often don't realize I am a foreigner until I tell them. If you deal strictly with accent, as you mention, not grammar slips or odd phrasing (for example reading from a text, reciting a poem, singing, etc.), I am essentially indistinguishable from a native speaker. I expect this will only improve with time.
So, basically, the fact that SOME people can't do it, in the same way that I can't dance, doesn't mean that NO ONE can. Know what I mean?
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by El JT de Spang: English is already the national language. Which is awesome.
Making it official is the thing that I think is a Bad Idea. I wrote a paper junior year of high school about the arrogance of America, which, I claimed, was typified by our stubborn expectation that everyone speak our language.
A few thousand years ago China was faced with this same dillema. Now it probably was not a good idea that Emperor Qin Shi brutally conquered all the provinces, but unifying the written system is the only reason China is the country it is today. In the late 1800s - early 1900s the modern Chinese government decided to make Mandarin the official language of the country. People still learn their local dialects, and there are hundreds in addition to the major provincial dialects, but they ALL learn Mandarin in school. Provincial government offices are staffed by natives so they can speak both languages, but the population by and large can all speak Mandarin. If they did not have that the country would be chaotic.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote: Making English the official langauge does not mean remove all helps written in another language.
It has in the past.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:If you deal strictly with accent, as you mention, not grammar slips or odd phrasing (for example reading from a text, reciting a poem, singing, etc.), I am essentially indistinguishable from a native speaker. I expect this will only improve with time.
I was the complete opposite -- I had much better grammar (enough to be told that I was fluent), but my accent was awful. If I had lived there for 20 years, I expect that my accent still would have been bad.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head:
quote: Making English the official langauge does not mean remove all helps written in another language.
It has in the past.
In the past looking after minority groups meant enslaving them and keeping them ignorant so that they would not destroy themselves with the misapplication of education.
Doesn't mean that application is the only definition of the concept, "Taking care of minority groups."
Incidentally my Chinese has a strong Taiwanese accent, and attempting to implement a proper Beijing accent would take me actually living there before it would come naturally. I have to try and fake it even if I want to be partially successful at it.
Posted by Lissande (Member # 350) on :
Now, let it be clear, I'm not saying my grammar is bad. My grammar is very GOOD, enough so that when I slip up (either say something I know is wrong because I've built up too much momentum to stop, or creatively talk my way around a concept I don't know the specific phrasing for) it can catch people off guard. It's just that my way of phrasing something will give me away on average more often than my way of pronouncing or inflecting it. It's 'cause language has so many dang words...
I have known people like you describe, with good communication skills in general but horrendous accents. It's bad when I can hear the Louisiana accent in a language I don't even speak. I don't quite grok it, but I know it exists.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade:
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head:
quote: Making English the official langauge does not mean remove all helps written in another language.
It has in the past.
In the past looking after minority groups meant enslaving them and keeping them ignorant so that they would not destroy themselves with the misapplication of education.
Doesn't mean that application is the only definition of the concept, "Taking care of minority groups."
I have seen nothing to indicate that if English were made an official language of the U.S. that things would be any different.
Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :
quote:...everybody speaks English, and you can go to a grocery store and order your damn bread in English! It solved everything!
Unless you want to buy Cuban bread, in which case you have to resort to simply pointing.
I don't think everybody realizes the humor in that statement. There have been days when I've gone from morning 'til bedtime without speaking a word of English around here.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
quote:I agree with the sentiment that language learning past childhood is challenging, but I have to categorically disagree with this statement. Hard doesn't mean impossible.
And that would be why I clarified that people who could do it were rare - certainly that it isn't impossible but it's also much more difficult than Tatiana's "It's not that hard!" comment flippantly indicated.
It's not a matter of intelligence or of effort, but rather what sounds you can discriminate. Spanish has five vowel sounds I believe, while English has more than twice as many. It's very difficult for native Spanish speakers to differentiate between certain English vowel sounds. That can be overcome, yes, but it takes years of work unless one just has a naturally gifted ear. And the same goes for English speakers trying to learn Spanish, or any other type of second language acquisition. In every case it's not a matter of just learning a new vocabulary but a new set of phonemes and that's very, very hard for most people after a certain age. And beyond the phonemes and vocabulary it's also learning new morphology and syntax. Unfortunately, we don't teach linguistics really except at the University level so most Americans don't have a good grasp on how their OWN language works, much less a different one.
I love studying linguistics and the structure of the language and because of that considered getting certified in ESL instruction. I abandoned the idea purely because my ear is SO BAD. I have a hard time discriminating among sounds in my own native language, and I know I would not be good at the phonemic awareness part of the job that is so essential to good ESL instruction.
My linguistics professor swore it's a skill I could develop, but I still believe I would have struggled there. *shrug*
Posted by guinevererobin (Member # 10753) on :
quote:quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Originally posted by guinevererobin: People need to be able to communicate with each other, with governmental departments, etc, and having one official language simplifies that process. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the part I don't understand. Suppose I waved my magic wand right now, and English officially became the language of the land.
What would change?
Nothing, in particular. As I also stated in my post, I would be in favor of officially making English the national language, AND offering immigrants assistance in learning that language.
However, the "what would it change?" argument goes against you as well. What it would change, since English is still required to communicate and function in society anyway? It would simply clarify that yes, if you come to this country, you need to learn English.
Which is common sense. But increasingly, nowdays, we seem to need to codify common sense. Obviously, immigrants are going to try and learn English. I understand your concern that in some cases, a national language might be used as an excuse to reduce educational opportunities for immigrants, but it doesn't logically follow from the premise of a national language.
quote:If the U.S. were going to emulate our language laws, English and Spanish would both be official languages. The Canadian example doesn't apply to mandating a single official language in America.
Why Spanish? This goes back to my earlier complaint about conveniancing some immigrants while leaving others disadvantaged, rather then leveling the playing field (as ESL and literacy tutoring for all would do).
About half of the population of legal immigrants in 2003 came from just ten countries, and Mexico was first on that list with 116,000 immigrants, with India second at 50,000, the Philipines at 45,000 and China with 41,000, etc etc... how do immigrants from India, the Philipines, and China benefit from not having English be the official language? (from migrationpolicy.org)
If English WERE the national language, then certainly each state could adapt to their particular population, since some will have higher concentrations of immigrants from particular areas, and could have translators available for them to assist them. That seems like a states right issue.
BTW, in terms of the two official languages in Canada... I have to say that when I visited Quebec, I didn't think I'd need to know any French (even though I usually study up on the language of any country I'm visiting), and I found myself miming all weekend long. Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: Look, I say this very matter of factly, it is an advantage to be able to speak English.
Which is precisely why the majority of people don't need laws to encourage them to learn English.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
It's like rooting out obesity by removing all support structures from our society for people who are too fat.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
Jon Boy: Maybe not, but when the minority is becoming as large as the hispanic population is, those laws need to be put into place. I am not at all for taking down government websites that are in Spanish, or officers of the law who work in hispanic neighborhoods learning Spanish. What I am afraid of, is that we will not stave off the veritable tower of babel complex which will likely develop if integration is not strongly pushed.
Schools should all be teaching in English; no ebonics, no spanish, etc. If the school wants to conduct business in another language because it is more effective, make English classes required in the curriculum; with graduation stopped if the class is failed.
MPH: That's hardly a valid comparison, obesity is not a culture that in of itself has value.
Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
What evidence do you have that the Hispanic population in the US is resisting integration or will start to resist integration if it continues to grow?
Posted by neo-dragon (Member # 7168) on :
quote:Originally posted by twinky:
quote:Originally posted by neo-dragon: Again, not so in Canada, so I can't see why that should happen in the States.
If the U.S. were going to emulate our language laws, English and Spanish would both be official languages. The Canadian example doesn't apply to mandating a single official language in America.
That's a good point, but for all intents and purposes French is the official language in one province (Quebec) and English is for the rest of the country. And considering that as of 2006 Quebec "forms a nation within a united Canada" (whatever that means, I assure you I have no idea), it's not too hard to imagine there being only one official language. Pretty much all of our French speakers are localized in one place. ESL/ELL programs are still well funded (to my knowledge) and seen as very important for people who speak neither official language. Anyway, is having two official languages out of the question in the States?
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jon Boy: What evidence do you have that the Hispanic population in the US is resisting integration or will start to resist integration if it continues to grow?
What kind of evidence would you find admissable? I could certainly produce groups whose sole purpose is to create isolated communities where the schools, local governments, etc are all run in Spanish. Or groups that want Spanish taught in all public schools, like French in Canada.
Or are you only accepting evidence that indicts the latino culture entire?
Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
I want evidence for this "veritable tower of babel complex which will likely develop if integration is not strongly pushed." You made a claim; I asked for evidence. That's all.
Posted by Dobbie (Member # 3881) on :
quote:Originally posted by aspectre: English is the lingua franca.
The problem with the French is that they don't have a word for lingua franca.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:MPH: That's hardly a valid comparison, obesity is not a culture that in of itself has value.
And how does that invalidate my comparison?
Yes, I know that the two situations aren't exactly the same in every detail. If they were, they'd be the same situation.
But how does that difference matter in this context? How does the value of the culture change the effects of making English the official language of the US?
Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
What I think we need is priorities.
Which of these is more important?
1) Strengthening the unity of the US by mandating that English be the official language?
2) Insuring that we don't create a slave class of non-English speakers.
3) When I am driving in an area with many Spanish Only speakers, the guy driving that delivery truck full of Gas knows that the Stop Sign says Stop. It seems its easier to put Spanish for Stop on the sign next to English for Stop, than it would be to insure the driver could read the English.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jon Boy: I want evidence for this "veritable tower of babel complex which will likely develop if integration is not strongly pushed." You made a claim; I asked for evidence. That's all.
Read the paragraphs with heading, "A New Spoils System." Though the author thinks that our "trashy pop culture" will ensure English dominance in America, he does mention that those from the poorer classes tend to not integrate well in American society. Higher employment opportunities are still abysmally low for Hispanic workers, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United_States#Race ^^ Scroll down to "Race."
I want to believe that bilingualism is increasing in the US. But that can only be so if English is a mandatory class in schools. I can accept that immigrants in their 20s or older might not be able to learn English no matter how hard they try. They need to live in communities where they can make it by speaking Spanish. But their children HAVE to learn English, that way the percentages of bilingualism will increase to mutually beneficial levels.
If economic/educational levels remain low, then Hispanic immigrants will form tight knit communities that will increase in size but remain almost impervious to integration. These eventually turn into cities and even provinces that hold their distinctness in the highest regard. Again by having the children of immigrants learn English, and learn it well they increase their economic opportunities and this discourages Retro-Acculturation.
I mean I already cited China. Look what they had to go through to become a nation of bilingual citizens. Even today there are villages where they have a local dialect that is COMPLETELY different then the local dialect of the village just over the mountain. Had the Chinese government not put it's foot down and forced Mandarin (just one of the dialects, but the language of Kings) in schools, China would be severely handicapped in today's world economy. As it was, it only became the most powerful empire in the world because Qin Shi Huang Di imposed a uniform system of writing on the entire country. That way people who could not speak to each other could still write to each other.
While Hong Kong was a British Colony there was not a strong effort to assimilate or amalgamate the population. To this day the Hongkies who speak English speak it fluently at best and passingly at worst. Almost without exception the ones who are decent to amazing all had English in their curriculum at school. The ones who had the option to learn English but could graduate from school without it almost always go through life without the ability to communicate with English speakers.
Hispanic people are not going to just learn English if there is not one of two things.
1: Clear and frequent economic opportunities for those who learn English.
2: Mandatory requirements of English fluency in the educational sector.
I think #2 creates #1.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: Maybe not, but when the minority is becoming as large as the hispanic population is, those laws need to be put into place.
Why? If there is such a large fraction who speak Spanish, maybe there should be laws passed forcing all English speakers to learn Spanish?
And if you say "We were here first," I'm going to ask how those Iroquois lessons are going.
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: Oh and Rivka, can I just say I love the way you speak English? It's fun to listen to.
O_o Are you referring to my Yiddishisms, or . . . ?
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
I think BB is saying that with such a large minority, it makes it easier for them to live in enclaves where there's no real impetus for them to ever learn English. Their kids would likely learn it from schools, but the parents could go to work and grocery stores etc in the enclave and never have to speak a word of English. The problem with that doesn't become apparent until there's a run in with law enforcement officials who aren't bilingual or there's a medical emergency.
Ethnic groups, at least around here, and I think in a lot of cities, just like in the early 1900's organize themselves in insular enclaves. It's why Detroit has a Mexicantown, Greektown, and as Lisa once colorfully put it, Dearbornistan (which doesn't work anyway, because they are Iraqi Christians or Kurds by and large, Chaldeans, not Persian, where the -stan suffix comes from).
Anywho, at least half the people at the restaurant I work at are bilingual. Most of the kitchen staff is Spanish speaking originally, and most of them also speak English. And there are a lot of Chaldeans too who speak a myriad of different languages, like Assyrian or Arabic. They all speak those other languages at home, but all speak English at work.
I think the argument for making everyone speak English but not having everyone else speak Spanish is that the Spanish speakers are still the vast minority, especially if you count just the ones who don't speak English, and forcing 300 million people to learn Spanish would be prohibitively expensive. The idea would be to create a common language for efficiency and safety's sake, and since the grand majority already speak English, it just makes the most sense to have everyone learn it.
I would think making English the national language would mean that it would ensure money be made available so everyone could learn it, but it seems experience flies in the face of that logic.
I should also add, that I think starting in elementary school, kids should have to learn a second language. It doesn't necessarily have to be the same language, in fact I think we should have different schools all learn different languages all over the place, and they should have to learn it all through high school. It would be economically advantageous, and I think you could make a great argument for national security too.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: I think BB is saying that with such a large minority, it makes it easier for them to live in enclaves where there's no real impetus for them to ever learn English. Their kids would likely learn it from schools, but the parents could go to work and grocery stores etc in the enclave and never have to speak a word of English. The problem with that doesn't become apparent until there's a run in with law enforcement officials who aren't bilingual or there's a medical emergency.
Absolutely true.
And I ask again: How will making English the official language help?
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
Oh I agree with you there, making a law that says "English is the national language" does nothing by itself. You could probably even just brush it off and say the entire measure is merely symbolic. But as people in this thread have said, the practical application of this type of law has actually made it harder for foreign speaking people to adapt to US culture and to learn English.
Making English the national language does nothing, unless the second part of that act is: "And funding will be provided to help all non-English speaking citizens and residents learn English and adapt into American society as productive and individual beings without losing their cultural heritage."
Without the second part, firmly mandated, the first part is either useless or destructive, but it's anything but helpful.
I'm trying to think of an acronym that'd fit into either the BABEL Act or the ROSETTA Act. Something about the Bilingual Accountability and something English Language Act, but I can't make the first part work.
Making it the official language would be a peace offering to Republicans who are probably out to just score points with a xenophobic far right base. The second part is the meat, and I think with some haggling, Democrats could get Republicans to go for it without alienating their own base.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: Making English the national language does nothing, unless the second part of that act is: "And funding will be provided to help all non-English speaking citizens and residents learn English and adapt into American society as productive and individual beings without losing their cultural heritage."
Personally, I'd strongly prefer the latter without the former.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
As would I. Especially since the finale of the latter would make the former happen naturally as a result.
But I suspect that getting the latter without the former would be a near political impossibility with the current make up of the Congress and Oval Office. It might be necessary to get Republicans to go along with funding the measure, and I think it's something we could live with. Like we've all said, it doesn't really do anything does is? And the real meat would be the second part anyway.
A nice third part would be an anti-exclusion clause saying something like "Making English the national language will in no way illegalize or hinder efforts to communicate bilingually with American citizens and residents." In other words, just because English is the national language doesn't mean we immediately stop all outreach programs to help non-English speakers get by in our English words.
Posted by Lissande (Member # 350) on :
quote:And that would be why I clarified that people who could do it were rare - certainly that it isn't impossible but it's also much more difficult than Tatiana's "It's not that hard!" comment flippantly indicated.
Sorry, Belle - I did see that clarification, but I still felt it was an exaggeration. Basically I guess I think Tatiana is underestimating the difficulty while you (and others with similar views) overestimate it. But point taken. Posted by Kama (Member # 3022) on :
a lot of my university teachers spoke english with a perfect accent. I doubt they were immersed as children. It's not impossible but for me it would be just too much effort and I'm not bothered enough.
I agree about the phrasing, Lissande. It's not that it's incorrect, but sometimes you just use the words the way no native speaker would. (Generic you of course, I never heard you speak Czech )
Posted by Lissande (Member # 350) on :
Exactly - it's not just knowing the words, but how to combine the words in the one way out of twenty possibilities that people actually use. It's that that makes people think I'm Czech but grew up abroad and maybe returned as an adult.
Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
I'm not saying that it's a snap to learn to read Don Quixote in the original. What I mean is that there are probably two dozen phrases that would give us the ability to interact on an everyday level. I don't think everyone needs to be able to argue the epistemology of logic in two languages, but you can learn to say how are you, how much is this, can I help you, where is the restroom, what is your name, pleased to meet you, would you like a soda, thank you, I'd like a cheeseburger without peanut butter, no thanks, ice cream makes me pregnant, and other common phrases. That you can learn in about an hour. Then the more you know the easier it is to learn more. That's what I meant when I said it's not that hard. Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka:
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: Maybe not, but when the minority is becoming as large as the hispanic population is, those laws need to be put into place.
Why? If there is such a large fraction who speak Spanish, maybe there should be laws passed forcing all English speakers to learn Spanish?
And if you say "We were here first," I'm going to ask how those Iroquois lessons are going.
Lyrhawn more or less understood what I am afraid Hispanic communities will do. There are far fewer strictly Spanish speaking individuals in the country right now, and so it makes more sense to have them all learn English right now. If nothing is done in about 50-100 years and reproductive trends are taken into account, I would argue that everyone needs to start learning Spanish in schools.
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: Oh and Rivka, can I just say I love the way you speak English? It's fun to listen to.
quote:O_o Are you referring to my Yiddishisms, or . . . ?
I actually don't recall hearing you say any Yiddishisms, but I like the accent you put on words. My own accent is pretty bland.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Ah. It's my lingering New Jersey accent. Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
quote:Originally posted by neo-dragon: ... ESL/ELL programs are still well funded (to my knowledge) and seen as very important for people who speak neither official language.
As an aside, I actually went through those programs in Ontario. I would say that they are actually more effective than regular English classes. That said, I still despise having mandatory French lessons *shakes fist*
From an early age, I just never saw the point in learning such an irrelevant language especially when my skill at learning languages is pretty low. I would have been better served by learning Mandarin or even reinforcing my Cantonese.
Posted by Amilia (Member # 8912) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tatiana: I'm not saying that it's a snap to learn to read Don Quixote in the original. What I mean is that there are probably two dozen phrases that would give us the ability to interact on an everyday level. I don't think everyone needs to be able to argue the epistemology of logic in two languages, but you can learn to say how are you, how much is this, can I help you, where is the restroom, what is your name, pleased to meet you, would you like a soda, thank you, I'd like a cheeseburger without peanut butter, no thanks, ice cream makes me pregnant, and other common phrases. That you can learn in about an hour. Then the more you know the easier it is to learn more. That's what I meant when I said it's not that hard.
The trouble with that is that then you have to be able to understand the answers. Example: I took Russian in high school. I can say, "Where is the restroom." It's a fairly simple phrase. However, if the answer is anything more than a finger pointing at a door, I am no better off for having asked.
Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
I know how to say "I live at the hotel" in Scottish Gaelic and "David's car is in the river" in Welsh. Not exactly the most useful phrases.
Posted by Javert Hugo (Member # 3980) on :
quote: It's not impossible but for me it would be just too much effort and I'm not bothered enough.
Besides, I really like your Polish accent. Eddieee Posted by Kama (Member # 3022) on :
Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
Amilia, when you know those two dozen phrases, you can learn more as you go. For instance, the first time in Guatemala I ordered a cheeseburger without mayonnaise, I said "pero, no mayonaise" and the waitress corrected me to "sin mayonaise". After that whenever I wanted food without something, I knew to say "sin". The thing is, you have to know enough to begin. Once you are willing to use the other language at all, you pick up more with almost every conversation.
In a paper mill in Texas I asked a worker where was the Coke machine, and he said "no comprendo" thinking that was the end of it. Then I thought about it and came up with "donde esta la maquina del Coca Cola" (probably very silly sounding, but got the idea across -- oh and "Coca Cola" and "okay" are understandable in every language). He was like "lalalalalala abajo lalalala la otra planta lalalala" with hand motions. It's like that far side cartoon of what we say and what dogs hear. I picked up just a few words, but I knew he said something about down or underneath or something and the other plant. So I went downstairs and across to the other building and sure enough, there it was! It's SO MUCH FUN when you actually communicate! It's a great thrill.
Anyway, you don't have to understand much at all. People are quite kind and willing to speak slowly and use baby talk for the sake of the ignorant gringa. From each successful interaction you will pick up one or two new words, and soon you'll be quite fluent. It's truly exciting and fun.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
A friend of mine when to, I can't remember where, some Caribbean Island where only like 2% of the population speaks English out in the rural areas where they were. Well she didn't know that, and they had to have people translate for them.
She said she thought it was funny that people other than Americans spoke very loudly and slowly like you're an idiot when they know you don't understand them.
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
quote:Originally posted by Kama: a lot of my university teachers spoke english with a perfect accent. I doubt they were immersed as children. It's not impossible but for me it would be just too much effort and I'm not bothered enough.
I sincerely doubt that a native English speaker would think those professors spoke with a perfect accent. I've worked with University professors from all over the world and many of them from non-English speaking countries do speak excellent English but with out exception they have a non-native accent unless they lived in an English speaking country before they went through puberty.
There have been numerous studies of this and the actual brain physiology involved is well documented. As an infant, your brain begins to sort sounds into different categories. Sounds which have a meaningful difference within the language the baby regularly hears get mapped to different parts of the brain while sounds that are similar but whose difference isn't meaningful within the language all get mapped to the same area of the brain. This mapping remains plastic until adolesence. As you go through puberty, this mapping becomes permanant. As a result, nearly all people who learn a language after puberty will have some non-native accent.
I've know a number of immigrant families who had children of different ages when they came to the US. What you find is that those children who were prepubescent when they moved to the US, speak with a native accent. Those who were in their early teens have a slight accent. Those who were in their later teens or early twenties speak very clearly understandable English, but with a clearly identifiable accent. The parents who were over thirty when they immigrated typically have a very thick accent.
I'm sure that there are exceptions, there are to every phenomenon involving the human brain. But such exception are rare. For nearly all adults, learning to speak a language without an accent is physiologically impossible. Their brains have lost the ability to distinguish certain sounds.
For example. I speak fluent German. I've lived in both Austria and Germany. I've spent the last five summers working at a University in Germany. I've read both scientific and literary works in Germany, done some translation, and taught classes in German. Yet there are some sounds in German that I simply can not hear properly. For example german has a short 'a' as in the word "Stadt" and a long 'a' as in the word "Staat". The difference between the two is solely in the length of the vowel. The problem is that this difference is small and is within the normal variability of the sound in American English. I've tried again and again but I simply cannot hear any difference between the words unless people exagerate it far beyond what is done in normal spoken German. And if I can't hear them unless they are exagerated, I'm sure that I can't say them correctly either.
I had some Thai students. In Thai land there are five different musical tones that are important in the language. When I've heard them demonstrated in lessons for English speakers I can hear the differences because they are always exagerated. But when my Thai student would speak them, I could never hear any difference at all.
Of course there is a difference between being "fluent" and being able to speak with a native accent. Fluency is a matter of being able to understand clearly and be understood clearly and this is something which can be achieved by most adults if they are willing to put in the time and effort. Although the older you get, the harder that gets as well.
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: She said she thought it was funny that people other than Americans spoke very loudly and slowly like you're an idiot when they know you don't understand them.
Speaking slowly, exageratedly and in simple sentences is exactly what people should do if they are trying to communicate with some who speaks very little of the language. Shouting doesn't make much sense, but if you've ever been in a foreign country where you knew very little of the language then I think you'll agreee that it really helps if people speak very slowly and in very simple language with alot of hand gestures.
I've done alot of bike touring in countries where I speak almost none of the local language. When you bike tour you spend alot of time going through small towns where most people speak only the local language and it's been interesting trying to communicate. I've picked up a fair bit of French while touring in France even though I've never studied it. In Poland this summer, we were able to get by with a bit of German, a bit of Russian, a bit of English and alot of hand gestures and a few words from a dictionary. Its amazing how nice people are when you try to be courteous.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
Oh I certainly agree with the speaking slowly part. I know enough French to where I could probably survive if I was dropped off in the French countryside, but I likely couldn't hold a conversation without a dictionary and a couple months of immersion.
But for the life of me I can't understand French people speaking at full speed. The words all blur together and I can barely pick out a couple words here and there, sometimes enough to gather the meaning, but when they slow way down I can usually understand or get the gist of what they are saying entirely.
The loudness part doesn't much help, but I'm sure we've all seen the stereotypical loud American speaking slowly as if loudness somehow makes you more understandable.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:Its amazing how nice people are when you try to be courteous.
And when you have cash to pay. Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head:
quote:Its amazing how nice people are when you try to be courteous.
And when you have cash to pay.
I've never offered anyone cash when I've asked directions.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
That reminds me of when I went to Atlanta, where people would commonly go out of their way to offer directions...and then pester you for bus money until you either pay them to leave you alone or outrun them.
Posted by the_Somalian (Member # 6688) on :
I agree with enforcing English in schools--learning the language should be a priority for young immigrant children who don't speak it yet. Accomodating these students with a bilingual education undeniably hampers their ability to absorb and learn English as a primary tongue.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by the_Somalian: Accomodating these students with a bilingual education undeniably hampers their ability to absorb and learn English as a primary tongue.
"Undeniably?" I deny it!
All the studies I've seen (and a couple years back, when this was a huge issue in my state, I saw a LOT) indicate that bilingual education not only helps students learn English faster, it keeps them from falling behind in subjects like math, science, and social studies. The majority of students with severely limited ESL skills who are "immersed" in an English-only classroom drown.
Posted by Kama (Member # 3022) on :
quote:I sincerely doubt that a native English speaker would think those professors spoke with a perfect accent.
Rabbit, were the professors you worked with linguists? Specifically, linguists who teach phonetics? That might explain it -- you need to have a very good ear for sounds if you specialise in teaching it. The people I'm referring to are exceptions to the norm, I'm not challenging that. But they spoke with a perfect English accent(yes, it was confirmed by native speakers).
ETA: it involves hard work in the labs, for a number of years, listening to the sounds and trying to discern them, and repeat them, and on top of that you need to have a talent for it.
[ September 06, 2007, 03:41 AM: Message edited by: Kama ]
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
As anecdotal evidence, I can say that bilingual education definitely hampered my ability to learn English. Of course, it did not help that Cantonese was my first language and the two official languages being taught were English and French.
I guess my point here is that I suspect that bilingual education only helps learning English if the second language is actually the one spoken at home.
For the rest of us, it can really be a big waste of time that would better be spent somewhere else, like more English education, math, science, etc.
quote: The majority of students with severely limited ESL skills who are "immersed" in an English-only classroom drown.
This does not match my experience either, given that ESL as implemented in Ontario is essentially immersion in English with supplementary extra ESL classes (taught only in English) to teach grammar, vocabulary, etc. (And then required classes on top to teach the second official language, French)
[ September 06, 2007, 10:32 AM: Message edited by: Mucus ]
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Note my qualifier: "with severely limited ESL skills." Is that really true of the population you are describing?
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
I'm completely sure that we fit the group described in the_Somalian's post to which you are responding, "young immigrant children."
I interpreted your "with severely limited ESL skills" as being essentially the same, but with the caveat of limited or no English exposure at home. We definitely fit that group as well, given that my area was dominated by Asian immigrants whose parents often could not speak English very well at all.
So I think we fit the group you're describing, although you may need to define that group a bit more clearly before I am sure.
Posted by Omega M. (Member # 7924) on :
I support making English the only language in which the U.S. government is required to conduct business. In areas where there's a large population that speaks another language, government offices could conduct business in that language as well if they thought it would make things simpler. But it seems it would be a huge unnecessary expense to require every sign and document throughout the U.S. to be in both English and, say, Spanish just because some areas of the country have a large Spanish-speaking population.
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
I don't think the government is required to conduct business in Spanish right now, though some local governments might require themselves to (which is the same as doing it to make things simpler, since they can always reverse their decision), so it seems we're good on that count.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
Even states that have passed English Only laws, like Utah, have allowances for anything health and safety related, which for some reason includes any publications that generate revenue for the state. It's a pointless gesture, in my book. Throw in the associations of many languages with a religious tradition, and it starts to make me queasy. And who determines what is English? The Scrabble people? We'll wind up with a language academy like the French.
I mean, what's with having an official language that is named for another nationality? It places people of English descent on a different level from those who are not.
P.S. If we were to establish American as a language, part of its character would have to derive from the Webster's dictionary, where the form of language is determined democratically. Maybe. Mostly, I don't think we want a Federal Agency telling us how to talk, not because I'm an iconoclast, but because Federal Agencies are not famous for their clarity and style.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
I thought that if you learn one language well, picking up the second isn't a problem, within reason, and that the major problem occurs when the child doesn't learn any language well because the parents don't speak the primary language very well, either. For example, I have a friend who was raised by Ukrainian academics, moved here in later elementary school, switched over perfectly, and it was because he spoke his parents language with such precision. I know that anecdotes aren't worth much, but when you have a few friends who study theory, and another who blithely tells his story and it fits into the theory, I figure it may be relevant.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Irami, I have heard the same thing. However, I think it depends partially on how closely related the languages are as to whether your hypothesis will work. Languages that have similar sounds may be somewhat easier, while languages that are less related (for example where tonal or gutteral inflections are much more important) are more difficult, both to hear and to speak.
AJ
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
It also depends on the individual. I have friends who can pick up other languages easily and do so for fun (!), and others who (like me) find it very difficult.
Posted by Samuel Bush (Member # 460) on :
There seems to be a tone of, “You are being a mean and nasty bully if you want to require anyone to learn English.” That is not just the tone of some on this thread, but the tone of those who opposed the “Official English” propositions that have been proposed in Arizona over the last several years. (I’m more familiar with the AZ issue than the broader subject of this thread.)
But consider this: English is the defacto language of international air traffic control and maritime shipping. It is the defacto language of international commerce. At least two major countries I can think of strongly encourage, if not outright require, their people to learn English. (China and India) There may be many other countries that do this. I’m not sure.
Yet here in the good old US of A, we allow generations of people to get by without learning English. I don’t think we are doing them any favors. Oh sure, they can get by working at minimum wage at places like MacDonald’s and El Polo Loco in places like Phoenix, Tucson, and El Paso for the rest of their lives. But forget about getting a job that involves anything to do with any company that deals internationally - at least any job in that company except the lowest level at minimum wage or less. Janitors usually don‘t need to learn English. (And think about this the next time you call some company for customer support and end up talking to someone who has a marked Indian accent.)
Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for doing whatever it takes to get immigrants and their children the help they need - translators, bilingual ballots, bilingual signs, bilingual education, etc. to help them get the help they need and help to smooth their way. But, at the same time, I’m also all for getting them whatever encouragement and help they need to learn English as fast as they can. If they are going to live in the USA they are going to be way better off if they learn English. It may not seem fair, but it is reality.
I also think that schools throughout the USA ought to have languages other than English required subjects. (British-American folks like me would do well to learn other languages.)
As to whether or not English ought to be the official language of the USA, I don’t know. One thing I do wonder about, however, is this: Is having a common language in a country divisive or uniting? I know of countries which have multiple languages. Does this tend to unite the people or divide them into conflicting factions?
My own gut feeling is that when people can’t understand each other it tends to be divisive. I’m also not convinced that having a common language will automatically make them get along with each other. But I have the feeling that it does help toward that ideal.
But then I’m no expert on the subject so I just don’t know for sure. But I do wonder about it.
So anyway Hobbes, that's my opinion and rant on the subject. For what it is worth. Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
Samuel, I think requiring others to learn English is a good idea (if you give the resources they need to do so) but that's not the issue here.
Instead, making English the "official" language will just punish people who don't know English, and take away the help they already get to help them learn.
Posted by guinevererobin (Member # 10753) on :
quote:Samuel, I think requiring others to learn English is a good idea (if you give the resources they need to do so) but that's not the issue here.
Instead, making English the "official" language will just punish people who don't know English, and take away the help they already get to help them learn.
It's obviously common sense for immigrants to learn English if they want to suceed and assimilate, but how do we "require" anyone to learn English at present? I also still don't see how making English the national language punishes anyone, or why it requires reducing the resources available to help people learn.
And once again... what help do we provide to Chinese, Indian, African immigrants? Doesn't favoring one immigrant language over others send the message that some immigrants are less valued?
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
My grammar is very GOOD, enough so that when I slip up (either say something I know is wrong because I've built up too much momentum to stop, or creatively talk my way around a concept I don't know the specific phrasing for) it can catch people off guard. It's just that my way of phrasing something will give me away on average more often than my way of pronouncing or inflecting it. It's 'cause language has so many dang words...![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
I don't quite grok it, but I know it exists.![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)