<p>“I think Mao unified the country in this aspect, and the engine of modernization you see in China today wouldn’t have taken off if people can’t even talk to each other.”</p>
<p>Let’s hear it for another supporter of Mao and the Little Red Book! Next it will be “Raise high the banner of our fearless leader, and uniter of the country, Enver Hoxha!”</p>
<p>The President and the Republicans have made themselves perfectly clear in plain English, haven’t they? ;)</p>
<p>Weenie your box was full. My basic response it that it’s the same old conservative -liberal different viewpoint and there is no point in debating. We all have our minds fixed as we have different assumptions about the world and government. I can say education is a primarily state issue and most states are doing well at it despite all the horror stories. Just look how much harder it is to get into a decent college these days. Kids are working hard. Maybe too hard in some cases.</p>
<p>I can stand making English our “official language”, but I can not tolerate forcing non-English speakers into learning English. Nor do I accept the idea of “forcing immigrants into assimilating into our culture”. That’s such a vague idea, really.</p>
<p>Actually, firewalker, the brouhaha is all about whether English should be called the “official language”, the “national language” or the “common and unifying” language. And it’s all BS. “Official language” apparently is a non-starter, for some reason, so it’s all about “national language” which has no actual meaning or legal significance, or “common and unifying” which… well, ditto. It’s just political grandstanding to appeal to the yahoos. ChuckNorris put it best: “This is a meaningless jingoist political game.” I might have chosen “nativist” or “xenophobic” over jingoist, but it’s all in the same ballpark: meaningless posturing by unprincipled politicians appealing to fear and hatred of “others”, but without any actual real-world significance other than to fan the flames of bigotry and self-rightrousness.</p>
<p>P.S. I think everybody should learn to speak, read and write English. But that’s not the point, is it? That’s just the excuse for the political grandstanding.</p>
<p>I don’t think it’s grandstanding at all. The implications are huge. Ballots are currently printed in many languages. Street signs, civic instructions, etc. The need for translators has mushroomed in our courts and hospitals. It is a huge burden that is currently being carried by both the public & private sector. Ultimately, proclaiming an official language and being able to step back from the current practice of full accomodations to all foreign speakers is the goal. The primary step toward assimilation and success in America is learning the language.</p>
<p>In the past, those who were too stubborn to learn English clustered together in ethnic enclaves & refused assimilation. Today, the ethnic enclave is demanding that the US accomodate them. What’s wrong with this picture?</p>
<p>Stickershock, the laws under consideration would have no effect on ballots, streets signs, etc. Courts and hospitals will still need translators, regardless of the “national language”. Doctors need to know where it hurts, judges need to know if the defendant actually understands what he’s agreeing to. If they don’t speak English, you need a translator. That’s why it’s all grandstanding. I agree with you that it is to the advantage of the country - and specifically of the non-English speakers among us - for everyone to learn English, as quickly as possible. But you’ve been duped into believing that those are the implications of the proposed laws. Neither will actually speed the English-learning process along. You are the target voter of the politicians who proposed them - you have been successfully pandered to by politicians eager to exploit your feelings about non-English speakers.</p>
<p>—An added note: When thinking about the “ethnic enclave” it’s important to remember that the second generation of immigrants - that is, the children of those who came here from other countries - overwhelmingly are fluent in English already. Studies’ results vary from 93% to 98%. By the third generation they are 100% English fluent, with a minor portion who even speak the old language.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I so agree! I was in a London hospital when someone who had been part of a group of tourists was rushed in. The patient was in pain, and worse, did not speak any English. It took a while for the staff to locate someone who could communicate with her (in French, it turned out). The patient was from Turkey and had a burst appendix.</p>
<p>I haven’t been duped by anyone. I’ve followed this issue for years. This is what I stated: “Ultimately, proclaiming an official language and being able to step back from the current practice of full accomodations to all foreign speakers is the goal.” I think you misread that statement if you think I’m assuming the current proposals will accomplish this immediately. Baby steps first.</p>
<p>I’m unaware of any other country that makes the accomodations to non-native speakers that the US does. We can’t accept this growing burden and we have every right to expect immigrants to adapt to our norms, culture, & common language if they wish to come here.</p>
<p>I’ve been in hospital situations where no translator was available. Patient & family often become enraged that communication suffers. Advocacy groups & lawyers have been involved. If non-English speakers have no incentive to learn English, and in fact are assured by advocates that only a racist culture would insist on acquiring language skills, they often chose not to. </p>
<p>I won’t even travel in Europe on vacation without a dictionary to help me communicate. (Unfortunately, I’m pretty bad at it. Waiters & shopkeepers have usually put me out of my misery & spoken English.) I would NEVER be presumptuous enough to move overseas and speak English exclusively while demanding translators to meet my every need.</p>
<p>Regarding ethnic enclaves: Grandma Nona from Sicily who still speaks no English after living here for 60 years is not uncommon. The difference between her & the new immigrant is the sense of entitlement. While Nona may miss out on much of what the US has to offer by clinging to her old world enclave, she is not asking any of us for anything. She would never venture out to a hospital or court without a trusted relative to translate. The new immigrant is encouraged to view the US as a nanny state. If they don’t come with a list of demands in hand, some advocacy group quickly gets them up to speed.</p>
<p>I think you’re projecting a lot onto new immigrants as a group and the loathesome “advocacy groups” you ascribe such power and influence to. While I’m sure there are “advocates” who spout off such nonsense (just as there are nativist advocacy groups which advocate “sending them all back where they came from”) I know new immigrants and their children, and I haven’t observed the attitudes you describe - from any of them. </p>
<p>
“Often?” Where the heck do you get that from? Non-English speakers have every incentive to learn English. That’s why virtually all children of non-English speaking immigrants do exactly that. I think your belief in the difference between Italian grandma Nona and “the new immigrant” is anecdotal and emotion-based - and wrong. The “new immigrants” are acting just like the old immigrants did - and being greeted by the same animosity and accusations the old one were in their day as well, I might add. Yes, it’s frustrating to have to deal with someone in a communication-dependent situation who doesn’t speak English - I’ve very much aware of that. But to elevate that frustration into a gesture of official national disdain towards them - which is the only actual significance of the “national language” proposals - is just venting, not working towards improving the situation.</p>
<p>Of course the US makes more accommodations to immigrants than other countries. We are a nation of immigrants and their offspring. We have and always have had a much greater portion of our population being first and second generation immigrants that other nation. It would be irrational for our practices to fail to reflect that fact. Just as Canada has to deal with the whole French/English thing, your policies should reflect your reality. And the reality is, we have a lot of new neighbors who didn’t grow up speaking English. They have to deal with it, we have to deal with it. The good news is - pretty much all of their kids will speak English – whether it’s declared “the national language” or not.</p>
<p>“Often?” Where the heck do you get that from? Non-English speakers have every incentive to learn English.</p>
<p>Come to Northern New Jersey. Your eyes will be opened, I assure you.</p>
<p>Of course the new immigrant families you KNOW are embracing American culture, not looking for special breaks, and contributing their talents to our country. These immigrants actively seek out contact, friendship, & employment ralationships as part of the natural assimilation process. Do you think the immigrants who have been drawn into the La Raza mindset are accepting invites to your backyard bar-b-q?</p>
<p>Declaring an official national language is an important step toward reigning in an out-of-control situation created by incremental accomodations of foreigners. I have immigrant friends who have escaped Castro & Ceausescu & just plain old poverty or intractable class systems in various countries. All speak fluent English, whether thay arrived as children or adults.</p>
<p>This is a ploy to get our conversations off of the illegal war, wire tapping of Americans, the outing of our CIA agents, the absurd rise in oil prices and profits, the failure to provide decent health care and to control drug company profiteering and the massive amount of debt this Republican Administration has gotten us into…If I woke up one morning and the majority of Americans spoke Italian, or Gaelic or Spainish, I wouldn’t want them declaring their language to be the national one.</p>
<p>Lets focus on the war, the debt, the need to change congress.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.tlfq.ulaval.ca/axl/amnord/images/usa_Oncle-Sam-langues.jpg[/url]”>http://www.tlfq.ulaval.ca/axl/amnord/images/usa_Oncle-Sam-langues.jpg</a></p>
<p>Behind the strong -or sarcastic- image, it is undeniable that a strong debate about linguistic protectionism, linguistic imperialism, or linguistic Darwinism still exists. One often quoted source is Linguistic Imperialism by Robert Phillipson. </p>
<p>Here’s an example of his positions:
</p>
<p>In addition, one could be interested in the statement of David Rothkopf, in his “Praise of Cultural Imperialism”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The importance of English being the only official language seems to transcend our borders.</p>
<p>Xiggi, you’re right as to the global scope of the significance of English fluency. The advantage of speaking English is not limited to those here in America; anyone seeking to better their position in life anywhere in the world is wise to learn to speak, read and write English. I don’t think there’s any question that English is the lingua franca of the modern world, not because of laws requiring it, but because of commercial reality. Politicians striking mock-heroic poses in “defense” of English are just grandstanding. French politicians have tried to keep English from creeping into the French language, but that has not kept French citizens from learning to speak English (when they want to!)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>My new hero for asking the right questions…</p>
<p>I want people who live in the US to speak/learn English for their OWN SAFETY.</p>
<p>I can’t imagine trying to quickly communicate an emergency situation to someone if I couldn’t speak English. If my child was seriously injured or sick or if I had to be able read instructions on a medicine bottle, I would need to be able to speak and read in English so that I could provide or get the best care for my child (or whoever). </p>
<p>If I was out somewhere and my child got lost, it would be hard for me to communicate with good people to have them help find him if I couldn’t speak English.</p>
<p>I also know that it is just not practical to expect everything (product labels, signs, directions, menus, ballots, forms, etc) to be available in several different languages.</p>
<p>On another thread which featured Nat’l Merit Finalists, some kids from Puerto Rico mentioned how much harder the PSAT is for them because they are taught in Spanish. </p>
<p>Since P.R. is part of the USA and the people are natural American Citizens, I have to admit that I was surprised that in this day and age that the kids would not be taught in English so that they can easily become part of the “global economy” with the states and the rest of the world. Since they are American Citizens, by birthright, they easily move from P.R. to the states (and do) just as another citizen moves from California to Alabama. </p>
<p>Shouldn’t these American Citizens be taught in English so they can be fluent???</p>
<p>Do you agree?
I thought the precept of WANTING to come to America is to join our culture,contribute to our society and be enriched by it? Seems to me learning English is the first step toward that.</p>
<p>(exception granted for 93 year old grandma from Sicily/name a place to be with the rest of her family.)</p>
<p>Can anyone tell me where, other than in Puerto Rico, kids are NOT taught in English? Isn’t it the law in California (the state with the most Hispanic immigrants) that they be taught in English? Aren’t they taught in English in New York, where all Regents exams are in English? </p>
<p>In fact, independent of state law and practice, doesn’t Title III require:</p>
<p>“The purpose of Title III is to ensure that limited English proficient (LEP) students, including immigrant children and youth, develop English proficiency and meet the same academic content and academic achievement standards that other children are expected to meet. Schools use these funds to implement language instruction educational programs designed to help LEP students achieve these standards. State educational agencies (SEAs), local educational agencies (LEAs), and schools are accountable for increasing the English proficiency and core academic content knowledge of LEP students.”</p>
<p>"WASHINGTON - Despite the brouhaha the Senate has caused with its immigration bill, making English the “national language” of the United States will not change current laws, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said Sunday. </p>
<p>Gonzales, adding to his comments last week that the legislation was not necessary, said the Senate measure is purely symbolic.</p>
<p>On Sunday, Gonzales said the confusion was an issue of “semantics.”</p>
<p>“The president has never been supportive of English only or English as the official language, but certainly we support the fact that English is the national language of the United States of America.”</p>
<p>Frankly, I’ve never met an immigrant child who didn’t want to learn English. Not one - and I worked for a decade with migrant laborers. The only thing I see are folks who want to rub their noses in the fact that they haven’t learned it yet…Oh, and the unwillingness of taxpayers to invest in proven programs to ensure that they will in fact learn English.</p>
<p>I have been getting my nails done at a salon owned and operated by Vietnamese. The owner speaks English–barely. The others hardly at all. They’ve been in this country since the 1980s. They all work long hours: the salon is open 6 days a week until 7pm every day. Their interaction with the customers is limited and does not give them much opportunity to learn more English. And when they get home, they are bone tired, but have myriads of things to do.</p>
<p>I don’t know how many saw the documentary Spellbound. There’s a Mexican ranch hand whose daughter is competing in the spelling bee and hoping to make it to the national level. The ranch hand has been in this country for 20 years (as of 1999); his boss praises his willingness to work hard. But the ranch hand speaks very limited English. Asked why he did not learn, he replies: “Cows don’t speak English.”</p>
<p>There is an assumption that immigrants don’t learn English because they don’t want to, or because they want to stick with their own kind. The nail salon workers are with American customers all day-long, but they don’t have much opportunity to practice English on these customers. As for the ranch hand, he is right, cows don’t speak…English.</p>
![http://www.tlfq.ulaval.ca/axl/amnord/images/usa_Oncle-Sam-langues.jpg[/url]](http://www.tlfq.ulaval.ca/axl/amnord/images/usa_Oncle-Sam-langues.jpg%5B/url%5D){kind=link}
