English as the Official Language, Revisited
---
Catallarchy has a post critical of the "English as Official Language" movement, which I support and about which I have blogged previously.
The Catallarchy post has four prongs:
1. "Historically speaking, all the previous immigrant waves in the United States were absorbed into the English language without this measure."
--But that's exactly the problem: providing multi-lingual education and government services are a powerful disincentive to assimilation. In olden times people learned English because they had no choice. Today they do, and they're making that choice, to their own detriment and the detriment of the civic fabric.
2. "Who really cares anyway? The large influx of Spanish speakers into Atlanta has produced, in addition to a larger, more dedicated labor pool, one extra step in ATM transactions, the one where you press one button for English and one button for Spanish. Even if English becomes the official language, there will still be a demand for Spanish language service, and since I can't imagine that the law would prohibit it entirely, that step will still be there."
--This is a complete non sequitur. No one gives a hoot about ATM buttons or that Univision and Telemundo are available on cable. It's about government documents, ballots, translators in court and other government agencies, and bilingual education in public schools. And it's not just about two languages, it's often about dozens of different languages. This has proven to be quite expensive.
3. "For people who worry that people who don't speak English will start demanding legal services in other languages, they can take it easy. Cases like this have come up in LA County, where there are lots of immigrants (assaulting the titanic California economy like icebergs, no doubt), and last I heard, they were still going to English-speaking courts."
--This is simply inaccurate as a matter of fact. Government at all levels spends (wastes?) tremendous resources catering to non-English-speaking citizens and immigrants. English-speaking courts, with taxpayer-provided translators, and schools that will only hire bilingual teachers, are not something I "take it easy" about.
4. "The most abstract reason, but the one that first came to my mind when I saw the legislative agenda, is that if the government at some level declares English the official language within its territory, won't they have to start controlling English?"
No, they won't. This assertion is so bizarre that I can't really respond to it. Yes, language evolves, yes there may be such a thing as "legalese," yes in some parts of the country it's "soda" and in others it's "pop" -- so what? How would making English the official and exclusive language of government change any of that or complicate matters any less than allowing any and every language on earth to be used?
English should be the exclusive language of American government, if for no other reason than for economic efficiency. I accept the premise that there are other reasons to advocate "English first," and that some of those reasons might not be entirely positive (e.g., anti-Mexican bigotry). But the honest justifications far outweigh the dishonest ones.
Related Posts:
"You Want patatas fritas With That?"
Lingua Arabica?
"I Would Whip Them Hard for That"
The Catallarchy post has four prongs:
1. "Historically speaking, all the previous immigrant waves in the United States were absorbed into the English language without this measure."
--But that's exactly the problem: providing multi-lingual education and government services are a powerful disincentive to assimilation. In olden times people learned English because they had no choice. Today they do, and they're making that choice, to their own detriment and the detriment of the civic fabric.
2. "Who really cares anyway? The large influx of Spanish speakers into Atlanta has produced, in addition to a larger, more dedicated labor pool, one extra step in ATM transactions, the one where you press one button for English and one button for Spanish. Even if English becomes the official language, there will still be a demand for Spanish language service, and since I can't imagine that the law would prohibit it entirely, that step will still be there."
--This is a complete non sequitur. No one gives a hoot about ATM buttons or that Univision and Telemundo are available on cable. It's about government documents, ballots, translators in court and other government agencies, and bilingual education in public schools. And it's not just about two languages, it's often about dozens of different languages. This has proven to be quite expensive.
3. "For people who worry that people who don't speak English will start demanding legal services in other languages, they can take it easy. Cases like this have come up in LA County, where there are lots of immigrants (assaulting the titanic California economy like icebergs, no doubt), and last I heard, they were still going to English-speaking courts."
--This is simply inaccurate as a matter of fact. Government at all levels spends (wastes?) tremendous resources catering to non-English-speaking citizens and immigrants. English-speaking courts, with taxpayer-provided translators, and schools that will only hire bilingual teachers, are not something I "take it easy" about.
4. "The most abstract reason, but the one that first came to my mind when I saw the legislative agenda, is that if the government at some level declares English the official language within its territory, won't they have to start controlling English?"
No, they won't. This assertion is so bizarre that I can't really respond to it. Yes, language evolves, yes there may be such a thing as "legalese," yes in some parts of the country it's "soda" and in others it's "pop" -- so what? How would making English the official and exclusive language of government change any of that or complicate matters any less than allowing any and every language on earth to be used?
English should be the exclusive language of American government, if for no other reason than for economic efficiency. I accept the premise that there are other reasons to advocate "English first," and that some of those reasons might not be entirely positive (e.g., anti-Mexican bigotry). But the honest justifications far outweigh the dishonest ones.
Related Posts:
"You Want patatas fritas With That?"
Lingua Arabica?
"I Would Whip Them Hard for That"
All Related Posts (on one page) | Some Related Posts:
Posted by KipEsquire on
17 March 2005
To comment on this post, please visit the new blogsite.
