One nation, one language? Would making English the nation's official language unite the country or divide it?
Pub:U.S. News & World Report
Detail:Susan Headden. 119.n12 (Sept 25, 1995): p.p38(5). (2057 words) From Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center.
For a Sherman Oaks, Calif., election worker, the last straw was hanging campaign posters in six languages and six alphabets. For a taxpayer in University Park, Texas, it was a requirement that all employees of the local public utility speak Spanish. For a retired schoolteacher from Mount Morris, N.Y., it was taking her elderly and anxious mother to a Pakistani doctor and understanding only a fraction of what he said.
As immigration, both legal and illegal, brings a new flood of foreign speech into the United States, a campaign to make English the nation's official language is gathering strength. According to a new U.S. News poll, 73 percent of Americans think English should be the official language of government. House Speaker Newt Gingrich, Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole and more than a third of the members of Congress support proposed federal legislation that would make English America's official tongue; twenty-two states and a number of municipalities already have English-only laws on the books.
Like flag burning and the Pledge of Allegiance, the issue is largely symbolic. Without ever being declared official, American English has survived--and enriched itself from--four centuries of immigration. It is not much easier for today's Guatemalan immigrant to get a good education and a good job without learning English than it was for his Italian, Polish or Chinese predecessors. And at best, eliminating bilingual education might save about a dollar per student per day. But many Americans are feeling threatened by a triple whammy of growing economic uncertainty, some of it caused by foreign competition; rising immigration, much of it illegal; and political pressure to cater to the needs of immigrants rather than letting them sink or swim. "Elevating English as an icon," says author and bilingual expert James Crawford, "has appeal for the insecure and the resentful. It provides a clear answer to the question: Who belongs?"
Nation of strangers. There is no question that America is undergoing another of its periodic diversity booms. According to the Census Bureau, in 1994 8.7 percent of Americans were born in other countries, the highest percentage since before World War II. More tellingly, at least 31.8 million people in the United States speak a language other than English at home. Of the children returning to urban public schools this fall, a whopping one third speak a foreign language first. "It blows your mind," says Dade County, Fla., administrator Mercedes Toural, who counts 5,190 new students speaking no fewer than 56 different tongues.
English-only advocates, whose ranks include recent immigrants and social liberals, believe that accommodating the more than 300 languages spoken in the United States undercuts incentives to learning English and, by association, to becoming an American. Massachusetts offers driver's tests in 24 foreign languages, including Albanian, Finnish, Farsi, Turkish and Czech. Federal voting rights laws provide for ballots in multiple translations. Internal Revenue Service forms are printed in Spanish. And in Westminster, Calif., members of Troop 2194 of the Boy Scouts of America can earn their merit badges in Vietnamese. "It's completely insane," says Mauro Mujica, the chairman of the lobbying group U.S. English and himself an immigrant from Chile. "We are not doing anybody any favors."
Pulling the plug. The proposed official-English laws range from the barely noticeable to the almost xenophobic. A bill introduced by Missouri Republican Rep. Bill Emerson would mandate English for government use but provide exceptions for health, safety and civil and criminal justice. Although it is the most viable of the bunch, it would change the status quo so little that it begs the question of why it is needed at all. The most extreme official-English measures would pull the plug on what their sponsors consider linguistic welfare, ending bilingual education and bilingual ballots.
Advocates of official-English proposals deny that their measures are draconian. Says U.S. English's Mujica: "We are simply saying that official documents should be in English and money saved on translations could go to help the people learn English. We're saying you could still take a driver's test in another language, but we suggest it be temporary till you learn English."
U.S. English, which reports 600,000 contributors, was founded by the late U.S. Sen. S.I. Hayakawa, a Japanese-American linguistics professor, and boasts advisory board members such as Saul Bellow and Alistair Cooke. The group was tarred eight years ago when its founder, John Tanton, wrote a memo suggesting that Hispanics have "greater reproductive powers" than Anglos; two directors quit, Tanton was forced out and the group has been rebuilding its reputation ever since. Its competitor, English First, whose founder, Larry Pratt, also started Gun Owners of America, is more hard-line.
Defenders of bilingual education, multilingual ballots and other government services ask whether legal immigrants will vote if there are no bilingual ballots. If foreign speakers can't read the street signs, will they be allowed to drive? Such thoughts bring Juanita Morales, a Houston college student, to tears. "This just sets up another barrier for people," she says. "My parents don't know English, and I can hardly speak Spanish anymore and that's painful to me."
Go it alone, the hard-liners reply, the way our grandfathers did. But these advocates don't mention that there is little, if any, evidence that earlier German or Italian immigrants mastered English any faster than the current crop of Asians, Russians and Central Americans. And it's hard to argue that today's newcomers aren't trying. San Francisco City College teaches English to 20,000 adults every semester, and the waiting list is huge. In De Kalb County, Ga. 7,000 adults are studying English; in Brighton Beach, N.Y., 2,000 wait for a chance to learn it.
The economic incentives for learning English seem as clear as ever. Yes, you can earn a good living in an ethnic enclave of Chicago speaking nothing but Polish. But you won't go far. "Mandating English," says Ron Pearlman of Chicago, "is like mandating that the sun is going to come up every day. It just seems to me that it's going to happen."
What worries many Americans are efforts to put other languages on a par with English, which often come across as assaults on American or Western culture. Americans may relish an evening at a Thai restaurant or an afternoon at a Greek festival, but many are less comfortable when their children are celebrating Cinco de Mayo, Kwanzaa and Chinese New Year along with Christmas in the public schools. In Arlington, Va., a classically trained orchestra teacher quit the public school system rather than cave in to demands to teach salsa music.
But diversity carries the day. The U.S. Department of Education policy is not simply to promote learning of English but also to maintain immigrants' native tongues. And supporters of that policy make a good case for it. "People ask me if I'm embarrassed I speak Spanish," says Martha Quintanilla Hollowell, a Dallas County, Texas, district attorney. "I tell them I'd be more embarrassed if I spoke only one language."
Language skills. That may be what's most disturbing about the English-only sentiment: In a global economy, it's the monolingual English speakers who are falling behind. Along with computer skills, a neat appearance and a work ethic, Americans more and more are finding that a second language is useful in getting a good job. African-Americans in Dade County, now more than half Hispanic, routinely lose tourism positions to bilingual Cubans. Schoolteachers cry foul because bilingual teachers earn more money while monolingual teachers are laid off. "There is no way I could get a job in the Los Angeles public schools today," says Lucy Fortney, an elementary school teacher for 30 years.
The proliferation of state and local English-only laws has led to a flurry of language-discrimination lawsuits and a record number of complaints with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Ed Chen, a lawyer with the San Francisco office of the American Civil Liberties Union, says clients have been denied credit and insurance because they don't speak English. But courts increasingly have endorsed laws that call for exclusive use of English on the job. Officials at New York's Bellevue Hospital, where the vast majority of nurses are Filipino, say an English-only law was necessary because nurses spoke Tagalog among themselves.
Other employers have wielded English-only laws as a license to discriminate, giving rise to fears that a national law would encourage more of the same. A judge in Amarillo, Texas, claimed a mother in a custody case was committing "child abuse" by speaking Spanish to her child at home. Another Texas judge denied probation to a drunk driver because he couldn't benefit from the all-English Alcoholics Anonymous program. In Monterey Park, Calif., a citizens' group tried to ban Chinese signs on businesses that served an almost all-Asian clientele. In Dade County, a since-repealed English-only law was so strict that it forbade using public funds to pay for court translations and bilingual signs to warn metrorail riders against electrocution.
Though it is not intended as such, the English-first movement is a reminder of a history of prejudice toward speakers of foreign tongues. Many American Indians were prohibited from speaking their own languages. The Louisiana Legislature banned the use of Cajun French in public schools in 1912, but instead of abandoning their culture, many Cajuns dropped out of school and never learned English. French was finally allowed back in the schools in the 1960s. As recently as 1971, it was illegal to speak Spanish in a public school building in Texas, and until 1923 it was against the law to teach foreign languages to elementary school pupils in Nebraska. At Ellis Island, psychologists tested thousands of non-English-speaking immigrants exclusively in English and pronounced them retarded.
Champions of diversity say it's high time Americans faced the demographic facts. In Miami, with leading trade partners Colombia and Venezuela, businesses would be foolish to restrict themselves to English. If emergency services suffer because of a shortage of foreign-speaking 911 operators, it is downright dangerous not to hire more. As for embattled teachers, Rick Lopez of the National Association of Bilingual Education says: "Why should we expect students to learn a new language if teachers can't do the same? We have to change the product to fit the market. The market wants a Toyota and we're still building Edsels."
Many Americans still value the melting pot: General Mills's new Betty Crocker is a digitized, multiethnic composite. But Skokie, Ill., educator Charlene Cobb, for one, prefers a colorful mosaic. "You don't have to change yourself," she says, "to make a whole thing that's very beautiful." The question is whether the diverse parts of America still make up a whole.
Related material on U.S. News Online on CompuServe. Free start-up kit: (800) 510-4247.
A LANDSLIDE FOR OFFICIAL ENGLISH
A rising tide
A larger share of Americans were foreign born earlier in this century, but their numbers are again on the rise.
Foreign born residents as share of U.S. population
1900 13.6 percent
1910 14.7 percent
1920 13.2 percent
1930 11.6 percent
1940 8.8 percent
1950 6.9 percent
1960 5.4 percent
1970 4.8 percent
1980 6.2 percent
1990 7.9 percent
1994 8.7 percent
USN&WR--Basic data: U.S. Census Bureau
American voters who favor making American voters who favor making English the official language of government (for instance, printing government forms only in English):
FAVOR: 73 percent OPPOSE: 23 percent
Voters who favor legislation that would prohibit bilingual election ballots and swearing-in ceremonies:
FAVOR: 50 percent OPPOSE: 43 percent
U.S. News poll of 1,000 registered voters conducted by Celinda Lake of Lake Research and Ed Goeas of the Tarrance Group on Sept. 11-13, 1995. Margin of error: plus or minus 3.1 percent. Percentages may not add up to 100 because some respondents answered, "Don't know."
DEFENDING THE MOTHER TONGUE
English not spoken here
Most of the 6.7 million non-English-speaking people in the United States live in the Southwest, south Florida and New York. So far, 22 states have enacted English-only laws.
[Map is not available.]
Note: Demographic data as of 1990 census and laws as of August, 1995.
Source Citation
Headden, Susan. "One nation, one language? Would making English the nation's official language unite the country or divide it?" U.S. News & World Report 25 Sept. 1995: 38+. Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Web. 30 Jan. 2010.
37 comments:
I think a national language would only unite our country in so many different ways. We would all be able to communicate with eachother without there being any misunderstandings. It would also make it easier for us to get to know one another when we can all speak the same language. There is no way it could divide our country when it's making everyone in our country something in common. Not having a national language would divide our country because it would seperate people from being able to talk to eachother preventing us from working together or interacting with each other.
Ale F
Period: 7
I feel that a national language would unite our country. This country was founded on immigrants, but, in order to have a more united union, the United States needs one national language. It would make the country more efficient not having to be, "hanging campaign posters in six languages and six alphabets" or have street signs with different languages. To be successful in America you need to be able to speak English. Many politicians believe such as, "House Speaker Newt Gingrich, Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole and more than a third of the members of Congress support proposed federal legislation that would make English America's official tongue; twenty-two states and a number of municipalities already have English-only laws on the books". I am not saying you have to be fluent in English upon arrival to the United States, but immigrants should make an effort to learn English. When an American leaves the country and goes somewhere like France for a long period of time, they are going to learn how to speak French, to be accepted, and successful. Like the saying when in Rome do what the Romans do, so I feel that if you are not in your native country, you should learn how to speak, the native tongue. This would make everyone in the United States be able to communicate with each other. By not having a national language would separate us, and communication would not be as good. So, by having English as the national language, this would unite the country.
A national language would unite rather than divide our country. I agree with Ale’s point that a national language creates a uniform level on which all can communicate all necessary information, thus connecting the diverse population. In the article One Nation, One Language…, Susan Headden writes “It is not much easier for today's Guatemalan immigrant to get a good education and a good job without learning English than it was for his Italian, Polish or Chinese predecessors” (Headden). I agree that any immigrant would have a difficult time in school if they are not able to speak the common language of the people. If the United States were to have a national language, this would require immigrants to learn this language (most likely English) for school. This first would be a difficult task, but after they (the immigrant) will be able to use this language in further schooling and the work place. This would unite the work place making communication amongst workers not a setback. The final effect will be all United States citizens working together on one level towards a better life.
Adam M.
Class 7
I agree with Ale, in that a national language would only serve to unite our country through a common method of communication. In my current job experience, I have struggled to communicate with a number of different foreigners who do not know enough English even to buy a soda or say if they want butter or not on their popcorn. Sometimes when I go to Subway, it takes several minutes just to place my order because the person making the sandwiches cannot understand my English language. This is clearly not a sign that we are a united country, if we Americans cannot even speak to eachother. Part of our national identity is our diversity, therefore it is important for us as Americans to learn different languages. But likewise, it is important for foreigners to learn our language. Thus, as a country we should promote the use of English and teach immigrants our language. I completely agree with US English's Mujica: "We are simply saying that official documents should be in English and money saved on translations could go to help the people learn English. We're saying you could still take a driver's test in another language, but we suggest it be temporary till you learn English." Such a method makes it possible for everyone to understand important notices and regulations, but promotes the use of English throughout the country. If everyone learns English in America, it will convience and unite our country.
I agree with the sentiments of the four students who have posted their responses—that is, I agree that making English the official language would serve to unite the country. It is important to note that the proponents of this movement wish only to make English the official language of government. As U.S. English’s Mujica says, “"We are simply saying that official documents should be in English and money saved on translations could go to help the people learn English. We're saying you could still take a driver's test in another language, but we suggest it be temporary till you learn English." This would serve to streamline government and make the government run more cost-effectively, as there would only need to be one copy of every official document. This does not say that people can’t speak another language at their houses or to other individuals (as long as the discussion is not official government work), so the languages and cultures of the immigrants who speak languages other than English could still be practiced (albeit to a lesser degree) and thereby preserved. Of course, making English the official language of government would affect other facets of society—for example, it would probably work to eliminate or reduce the number of multilingual signs and menus—but these other changes would serve to further national unity. Although one of our forebears said that “we are a nation built by immigrants,” or something to that effect, another one of our forebears said, “A house divided upon itself cannot stand.” One language for government would create a common language among the people and would therefore allowed for increased communication between people of all backgrounds. Both Lewis and Anne put it well. In particular, Louis wrote, “I feel that a national language would unite our country. This country was founded on immigrants, but, in order to have a more united union, the United States needs one national language.” A national language would help to bridge the gap between different cultures and ethnicities, thereby making American more whole.
To the people who say that making English the official language of American government would be unfair to the non-English speakers, I would say to take a step back and examine the current landscape of society. Whether or not English is America’s official language is besides the point because English dominates almost every aspect of our society, from our national economy to politics. The article by US World and News Report states that “at least 31.8 million people in the United States speak a language other than English at home,“ but this means that about 300 million people—the vast majority of our population—do speak English at home. The article also cites the role of English in the economy, as Headden writes, “It is not much easier for today's Guatemalan immigrant to get a good education and a good job without learning English than it was for his Italian, Polish or Chinese predecessors.” Therefore, making English the official language would not have a large impact on about 90% of the population, would only mean the legitimization of something that could have been inferred previously (that English is the dominant language in America) but would serve to unite our country.
Upon reading the other students responses to the essential question I can only agree with all of them. A national language would certainly unite the country more than it is now, so I feel. Actually, according to a section of the post it is mentioned that, "According to a new U.S. News poll, 73 percent of Americans think English should be the official language of government." This evidence shows that I and these other students are not alone with our opinions and that nearly 2/3 of the country now feels that English should be the one and only language of government to unite its people. If you look at other countries from around the world such as France, or Italy, or Spain; those countries and many many others alike have one prominent language. I'm sure that there are no debates in France over making French unofficially the language of its citizens. To be quite frank with my ideals of this question, I find that if someone chooses to immigrate to the United States, my home country whether legally or illegally, that they need to learn our language which is and has been English dominant for centuries. It is an utterly putrid waste of government money to cope with foreginers disabilities in learning English. Perhaps before foreginers decide to come to the United States for new opportunities they should learn the language before hand.
Eric S.
Period 7
I also agree with Brian, Louis, etc in that making English as the official language of the United States is benificial to uniting our country. It is curious and illogical to me that Puerto Rico, a territory of the US, has a English as an official language when we in the US do not.
There are many benefits in making US a national language. One benefit includes the ability to communicate with fewer misunderstandings, as Ale mentioned. For example, I can remember times when I was ordering food in a restaurant, like Subway, and I had to repeat myself many times so the server, who barely spoke any English, could understand my order. Additionally, drivers who do not speak or read English are able to take a license test in a different language, but as the article asks, “If foreign speakers can't read the street signs, will they be allowed to drive?” Personally, I feel like they shouldn’t because drivers who cannot read the road signs won’t know what instructions they have to follow, thus making the road ways more dangerous for all.
Furthermore, there are major economic benefits of making English the major language of the US. As the article says, "Official documents should be in English and money saved on translations could go to help the people learn English." It is costly enough to print manuals, handbooks, etc in English, but having to print them in two or three languages ends up doubling or tripling the cost.
Finally, mandating that English be the national language fosters more equality and fairness in the workplace. Workers should be judged on their skills rather than what language they can speak. Injustices like this are the reason that, “Schoolteachers cry foul because bilingual teachers earn more money while monolingual teachers are laid off.”
All in all, making English the national language would unite our country because it would balance the playing field for workers, lower a burden on our economy, and allow us to understand each other better.
Ishan T. Period 3
I strongly believe that making English the official language would serve our country well. Having a national language would not divide any immigrants against others, or even against Americans. It just doesn't make sense. Take the biblical story of the Tower of Babel. People were united in trying to construct this mighty tower, but once God split their language, chaos ensued and the project was neglected because workers could not understand people standing right next to them. Even if this story is outdated or false, it brings up a good point; people are united by common communication.
Creating a national language would only allow us to understand each other, actually removing language barriers. Like Brian said, this mandate would not suppress immigrants or people that spoke another language; they could still speak it at home. The government would not force everyone to speak only English. We only want to create a uniform language for official documents and business. Why not mandate it? Enough people want to learn English and are doing so in order to get a job, education, and make a life in the United States. In a study conducted, "San Francisco City College teaches English to 20,000 adults every semester, and the waiting list is huge. In De Kalb County, Ga. 7,000 adults are studying English; in Brighton Beach, N.Y., 2,000 wait for a chance to learn it."
Clearly, people are trying very hard to learn English, so why not help them by making it a national language? Other countries do this as well. Take a look at China. The national language of China is Mandarin Chinese, but there are over 125 different dialects in other regions, all of which are completely different from each other. However, everyone learns Mandarin in school because this way people can communicate in Beijing and Hong Kong with one language, whereas before they would have been blocked by a difference between Mandarin and Cantonese. Everyone at home usually speaks Mandarin in school, and then returns home and speaks their native dialect, be it Cantonese, Tibetan, or "Shanghainese." Everybody in China is united by one, common language, so I really don't see the problem uniting Americans further with a national language: English.
I believe creating a national language would be a negative thing. One of the values that this country was founded on was freedom of speech, and this should transpire into the freedom of language as well. This country is made up of, and always has been made up of, people coming from many different backgrounds with many different native languages. While the majority of Americans speak English, making it our national language would not be fair to the minorities who were still here when our nation declared its independence. America is unique in the fact that is has no national language and there is no reason to change that. As the old saying goes, if it ain't broke don't fix it.
I feel that a national language would definitely help to unite our country. I agree with Ale, that making English the national language wouldn't divide our country in any way. Even for the citizens who only speak Spanish or another language, it will be an encouragement for them to learn English. "73 percent of Americans think English should be the official language of government" (Attached Article). Over three quarters of our country agrees that English should be made official, and that is much more than majority. The other quarter may consist of non-English speaking citizens who haven't even given it a shot yet. The country would be much more united, and would work together much better as a whole, as Adam said. Nowadays, everything is in English anyway, so even if it was made the official language, not that much would change. Immigrants need to learn English to be able to be successful in the United States now anyways, so the language being official isn't going to prevent them from coming to the country.
Andrew M
Period 7
I definitely think that a national language would unite our country. Right now, everybody knows the United States to speak english, so why not make it final? People are afraid that if we do that, America won't be multi-cultural, like its "supposed" to be. But if we just finalize the national language, there would be a lot less confusion. Those who want to come to America from other countries would know what language to study, and then by the time they are here, they'd know what's going on. The majority of the country speaks english, and we get annoyed with those who don't. But of course they don't understand because there is no official language in America, so people just think whatever. Life would be a whole lot easier if we just decided on an official language. Communication is key
I agree with Emily. We all know where we came from, but we don't want another tower of babel situation. We need to unify to one language so that we can understand each other. We strive to make everything easier, but allowing every language to pass for THE language of the united state's language will be making everything difficult. I'm all for people going with their heritage, but if you have to have a translator to speak to someone then things aren't becoming easier. We are multi-cultural like Louis said, but we need to separate our past with what is happening in today's world. We need a unifying language in order to maintain the technological advancement and attempt to raise the standard here in the united states. I'm all for spreading languages, but we need to understand each other.
Paige Olson
class 7.
Unlike many responses to this blog, I believe that a national language would divide our country rather than unite it. Although the idea of easy communication sounds promising, we are forgetting that our country was built on immigration and foreign culture. We cannot segregate ourselves from non-English speaking citizens just because their language is a minority. It would be hypocritical of us to start forcing these people to speak English because we all have foreign ancestors who emigrated to the United States without the need to know English. There are many bi lingual countries on this earth that accept their mix of languages and take the time to communicate with them. If anything, our country should be encouraging the study of different languages such as spanish or french in order to widen our area of communication. We need to start facing the fact that sometimes work is required to communicate with other people.
I agree with most of the previous responses that making English the national language would help unite the very diverse population. As Brian mentioned, this move would work in two ways. First, it would eliminate the need for multilingual signs and menus and the confusion that results from them. Additionally, it would create a sense of unity because language would be the one aspect of life that all of the diverse people could share. This is very important because it helps create an American “identity.” The downfall of this identity is that many immigrants will feel as though they are losing their own identities. As Louis stated, this nation was founded by immigrants, so we do not want immigrants to feel as though they are not allowed to express themselves anymore. It is highly likely that will be some resentment by immigrants if English is made the national language.
Although there will be resentment, it seems as though we are really trying to help the immigrants. As Adam stated, immigrants struggle to succeed in their American educations due to the language barrier. Learning English would only help them, as education is very important for many immigrants (and always has been). The willingness to help these immigrants was further stated by Mujica. He said, “We’re saying you could still take a driver’s test in another language” until you fully learn the language. Therefore, the system is very flexible and seems to truly have only good intentions. Since it is also supported by 73% of Americans, I feel as though making the English language the national language is a necessary move.
Drew R
Class 3
I believe that a national language would bring our country together because at times of crisis and need, there would be no problems with communication. If there were many national languages in a country, there would have to be more time and effort put in to accomidate for all of those different languages. Signs, money, television, books, would all have to include all of the languages. If there is one national language it will make the country more calm and collected and have many more positive aspects in the long run
while having English as a national language would have the obvious benefits of allowing everyone to communicate, it would simply further alienate non-English speaking immigrants. While I believe that English should be the official language of our country, I don't think that it would make any more untied than we are at present. If anything, it would cause those who fight for immigrant's rights to become upset with the government and protest the decision.
that being said, 73% of the country wants the national language to be English. In an election, a majority of 60% is considered a landslide victory. I think this must be also taken into account when considering English for the national language.
I feel as if a national language will lead to division within our country. The reason I feel this way is because without the diversity of language we may loose sight of other things connect or are very similar to the controversy with a national language. Although I agree with Ale and Lois that a national language would be easier I disagree when Ale says that without a national language we are preventing ourselves from working together and interacting, I think that it is inspirational and note worthy that our country has made it so far without a national language. Our ancestors and even immigrants have suffered and worked very hard to found and create our country, and I believe that something as simple as not defining a national language is a simple way to show respect for the different cultures that have created our country.
I agree with Ale that making our official language English would make communicating easier but not necessarly for the better. With understanding comes conflicts and very diverse opions. I'm on the fence with this topic because there are alot of pros and cons for both sides of the argument. A pro for having everyone speaking the same language would be having something in common. A con would be conflicts of opions. A pro for everyone speaking there own language would be diversity a con would be miscommunication and those treating America no different then back home. "Champions of diversity say it's high time Americans faced the demographic facts. In Miami, with leading trade partners Colombia and Venezuela, businesses would be foolish to restrict themselves to English." This is important because our leading traders and supporters speak different languages so it's important for people to communicate with them. Also if we are forcing immigrants from these places to speak English they might stop trade with us. Another big issue is if everyone starts speaking English not just a native tougne is lost but a culture as well.
Audra
Class 7
I think that it would be a good idea to make english the national language. It would definitely bring our country together. I think a lot of native born English speaking Americans are hostile toward immigrants who don't speak english, it is unfortunate but at the same time, there should be more oppurtunities for immigrants to learn English. As Americans, we need to be more proactive and learn other languages, especially Spanish. Most Europeans speak several languages, and as an American, it is embarassing to have to admit you only speak English. And being so close to the mexican border, we both need to do our parts to learn the languages. I think if we had a national language it would settle a lot of controversy, especially in the workplace. Leahb period 3
I think a national language would unite us. We could all understand what were saying instead of speaking in 25 different languages. We would feel like one as a country, united. instead of having all these immigrated people here with their national language talking differently. It would make us stronger as a country. If we dont have a national language it would divide our country. It puts us in like 'clicks' like a school. Where the hispanics are here, the african american there and the whites here. Why cant we just have a national with the same language that would give us one ultimate link?
ricky grasso
period 7
I feel that a national language would bring so much more unity to the United States. I think that the only way for every culture present in the U.S. to blend and be accepted is through communication. When people are unable to communicate due to language barriers, they cannot begin to appreciate the culture that the language comes from. For everybody to have equal opportunities to be not only accepted, but successful in our country, it is important to have a common language. I acknowledge previous students' comments that this nation was founded on immigrants and built by many different kinds of people, but the difference between our nation and immigrants staying in their nation is that ours is a blend of cultures. Our nation is built on acceptance of new ideas, but how can ideas be communicated without common speech? Establishing a national language would eliminate a big source of frustration, allowing our nation to grow in what it's most noted for: culture.
I agree with everyone who has posted before who has agreed with Ale. Although, like Josh said, our country has freedom of language. No one is forced to speak English, but would it be so bad if we were? It's hard to be unbiased in this situation, because I speak English already and I wouldn't have to change my life whatsoever if English became our national language. While the hardships many people would have to face in order to learn English thoroughly would be great, the benefits of having a national language are greater. We'd be united, obviously, and our communication within the country will be so much easier and more productive. Saving money is just one more benefit, for no extra copies of anything will have to be printed out in any other language. I don't think that the "melting pot" was meant to be everyone is put in the pot and mixed together until we are all the same thing, but I do feel that one thing that the melting pot should be able to ensure is that when immigrants come to our country to live here, to be citizens of the US, they should be prepared to learn English to really join the people of the country. Having English as our national language is a very easy, beneficial decision that I think our country has basically already decided on.
I believe that English as a national language would definitely unite our country, and has many benefits to our societies. For instance, the article states "... at best, eliminating bilingual education might save about a dollar per student per day" (Headden, Susan). Without bilingual education, we wouldn't be so confused by the differences of other languages such as the accents in Spanish, the dots and circles in Japanese, and the pinyin and caligraphy in Chinese; for some examples.
Also, as Louis Raab (from period 3) states, "To be successful in America you need to be able to speak English." I agree with this statement since a great majority of the population speaks English in the workplace. The main exceptions are world language teachers, translators, and diplomats. We wouldn't need to buy translated dictionaries, and look up what people say word by word. This, along with no translated caution signs such as the ones in airports, instruction manuals, captions in movies, and wet floor signs in Spanish can save a large sum of money. This money can be spent on good causes such as helping the Haitians from their recent earthquake, supporting the troops in Iraq, providing better healthcare and a better educational system in the United States, and decreasing the amount of job cuts in our economy, which is currently undergoing a depression.
People from other countries may see us as being ignorant of their cultures and traditions, but we Americans can retort by saying that we still visit foreign places and speak their languages in other countries. The only thing that changes is that we won't be speaking foreign languages in America, especially since we can't understand what many foreign people, such as illegal immigrants, are saying. Illegal immigrants come to America in hopes of a better future for the most part, and thus must adapt to our ways of living and learn English. Without learning English in America, foreigners are sure to be as confused as we are when we try to learn all the different languages in the world.
Andy H.
Class 7
I agree with other people's responses that by making English our national language our country's unity would improve. As Ale said making English our national language communication would improve. Furthermore, when misunderstandings are cleared up, the possibility for conflict is reduced. However, I think that there should be a "limit" per se to how far making English the national language should go. In other words, while I think that government signs should be in English (the only exceptions would be at the borders of the country) I do not think that, say private shops or small restaurants should be forced to put their sign entirely in English as I feel that that would be an attempt at suppressing their cultural identities (should a Chinese restaurant be forbidden from using Chinese in the sign or on their menu?)
As most, if not all of the other students stated above, I agree that a national language would help to unite the country. Doing so would give all Americans something in common and ultimately a sense of unity. Though America is the clear hub of differnt cultures in the world, making the national language english would help to unite the country. As Brian R. said, the national language of english would not prevent citizens from speaking the language of their choice in their home which i think is a good thing. This allows the national language to be in mode when in public, but still allows differnt languages and cultures to flourish. I think if this law of the national languge was slowly installed, it would be far less invasive and more likely for people to listen. Also, i think if it were to be forcely placed on the nation, I think a lot of unique and interesting cultures woiuld be be tradgically lost. The point of the language is for better communication and unity, not the loss the of culture, so, i bielieve if done properly, a national language would indeed unite our country.
Cristina N.
Period 7
I think that a natinal language would not help our country unite because there will always be someone who is unwilling to change change their lifestyle due to a law. A national launguage would only cause disrupt becasue it would seperate the many natinalities that America is made up of. Generally, America is a diverse country made up of many natinalities and backgrounds, and personalities. We have come to beleive that discrimination of race, religion, gender, and homosexuality is not to be tollerated. If we were to decide that English is the only accetable launguage then we would be contradicting the "freedom" America is know for. This would cause harsh feelings to the many immigrants that make up a large percent of the population of the U.S. It would pull apart our country over an issue that was not causing a problem to begin with. English is clearly the accepted launguage of the U.S. and it is simply inconvinient to not know it. Like the artical said, if you cant read a steet sign, shoud you be able to get your license? I think not, but the fact that the majority of American signs, books, and labels are in english almost forces people to conform to our ways without causing disrupt.
Abby Keough
Period 3
Unlike a few comments made, I believe that having English as a national language would only divide people and set boundaries. Having a universal language in America would make it easier to communicate with one another but it would also cast a wall onto people unlike English speaking individuals. Also, having a universal language would make immigration harder not to mention that it would make America not unique. America is unique because of its diversity and numerous languages. To have a universal language for America would be taking away what America is known for being, a melting pot.
Not only will a national language take away America’s individuality, it will also make America more discriminatory than what it already is. Having a national language will discriminate against anyone not having English as their first language. Many immigrants may find it even harder to adapt because no one would be able to understand what they may be saying. Making America only speak English would make America just like any other country. Never more will America be the greatest melting pot of all.
Kelsey P. Per. 3
I agree with the many people who thought that a national language would unite us. One huge thing that establshing a national language would do is to, as Ale said, make us better, "able to communicate with eachother without there being any misunderstandings." By establishing a national language we would be able to do just this and break through the language barrier that divides our country.
Not having a national language also seems somewhat impractical. "Massachusetts offers driver's tests in 24 foreign languages, including Albanian, Finnish, Farsi, Turkish and Czech." It does not seem safe to me that people who do not understand English are driving around on roads. How will they be able to read signs that warn of hazardous things on roadways. By having a national language we could eliminate this risk.
By not having a national language we are also not helping any children. "Of the children returning to urban public schools this fall, a whopping one third speak a foreign language first." After they graduate from school how far will they be able to go if they can only speak some foreign language? As the article states, "It is not much easier for today's Guatemalan immigrant to get a good education and a good job without learning English than it was for his Italian, Polish or Chinese predecessors." So by not making English our national language then who are we really helping?
There is also no reason not to make English our national language. "According to a new U.S. News poll, 73 percent of Americans think English should be the official language of government. House Speaker Newt Gingrich, Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole and more than a third of the members of Congress support proposed federal legislation that would make English America's official tongue." If so many people think that we should do it, then why not?
Many adults who do not speak English are already trying to learn. "San Francisco City College teaches English to 20,000 adults every semester, and the waiting list is huge." If we made English our national language then even more people would learn.
As you can see establishing English as our national language would only serve to strengthen our country. Not only would it allow everyone to communicate much easier, but it could also help to eliminate language barriers, make our country more safe, and it could also improve many childrens futures. The majority of people already believe that we should make English our national language, so why not just do it?
Matt H.
Period 7
I think a national language would unite our country as appose to dividing it. We would all be able to communicate with one another. For example, when we go somewhere like a fast food restaurant, sometimes it is really hard to communicate with people who barely speak English. If we had a country with a whole bunch of different speaking languages, then it would be extremely hard to communicate. If there were a national problem within our country, it would take a lot longer to get the word out to the country if we had to announce it in different languages. It would make things more confusing. It would definitely help make connivence and unite our country.
Lindsay M.
Period: 3
I agree with Kevin, Brian and Ale that a National language would help to unite the United States. To go off of what ale was saying that it would help people to communicate without misunderstandings. This is extremely important because people who come from different countries have to be able to read road signs and other signs for their safety. Also part of being an American is voting, if a person doesn’t understand what a politician is saying or what they believe in, how they are supposed to know the issues and who to vote for.
To go off of what Brian was saying, such as how it would create unity by having a national language because it creates something for them to have in common. Most people don’t understand others cultures, but with a common language I think there is more of a chance that people from different countries would more easily get along. Also by having a national language it would help people from different countries gain access to higher jobs. Many immigrants do not know how to speak English and this is what stops them from making a substantial income. With a national language they would be able to communicate with others in the work place. Having a national language would help people both socially and would help economically in the business world.
Meghan L
Period 3
I believe that a national language would unite our country. The United States is a country of so many different cultures and is considered the country of immigrants. The problem with not having a national language in this country would be all these neighborhoods of Germans, Chinese, and Hispanics would be divided. Not having a national language would create so many divisions in this country that certain areas would be like completely different countries. A national language brings all these cultures together the way the United States was outlined to be. Many cultures under one flag.
Doug Brodbeck
Class 7
I agree with Josh, and the fact that our country has no national language makes us the country we are. I feel that the debate with our national language goes hand in hand in our view on immigration. It's been said over and over again, but its fact. Our country was created through immigration, and then we turn around and think about closing our borders? So when we are proud to be Americans and have our free speech, but then force our own language upon other people, we are being hypocritical. I started to learn another language in seventh grade, and I feel like it has been a large help to me throughout the years since I began. Making English our national language gives people another reason to not attempt to learn another language and therefore our ignorance grows. Immigration and language are important to Americans in the sense that we need to learn more about foreign cultures. Our society is full of stereotypes mostly because we aren't introduced to other cultures. By being surrounded by many languages, it makes us want to learn more about the culture behind the language. "Language skills. That may be what's most disturbing about the English-only sentiment: In a global economy, it's the monolingual English speakers who are falling behind." The entire world doesn't speak English, and if we want to be suc successful, we are going to need to expose ourself to other languages.
-Mark A.
-Class 3
Like Josh, Tom, Dan, Janis, Abby and Kelsey, I believe that giving this country a notional language would be more harmful than beneficial. Encouraging people to continue practicing their native language is important and if so many people speak foreign languages at home, so what? What they do at home is none of our concern. Like Josh said freedom of speech should be able to transpose to freedom of language. “At least 31.8 million people in the United States speak a language other than English at home. Of the children returning to urban public schools this fall, a whopping one third speak a foreign language first.” However, outside of their private homes they should be able to understand and communicate in America English. Tests and street signs and campaign posters shouldn’t have to be offered in so many languages and employers shouldn’t have to change their requirements based on any language someone may or may not be able to speak. Accommodating for so many foreign languages doesn’t have to be a problem. At the same time, if a business would suffer from having only English speaking employees then no matter what the law says they’re going to do what's in their best interest and continue to hire those who are bilingual. "We are simply saying that official documents should be in English and money saved on translations could go to help the people learn English. We're saying you could still take a driver's test in another language, but we suggest it be temporary till you learn English." Like Louis said an immigrant wouldn’t have to come over here speaking it fluently but they would have to make an effort to learn it. And they are. I know four Germans who’ve come over here less than a year ago and I, being monolingual can communicate perfectly with them. What’s even more impressive is that they teach dance and know the English dance terms that I’ve been studying since I was two and still don’t know as well they do. I don’t think a single national language would make a difference one way or the other, just create more racial tension between monolingual American English speakers and everyone else. After trying over and over again to erase racism while still trying to maintain strong diversity, it would be really terrible to see that destroyed by something as simple and announcing a national language. For so many years this country has prided itself on taking in immigrants and was proud of our diversity. Where did that go?
Sarah Poarch
Period 3
Like the majority of my peers, I feel that a national language would unite our country. It would simply provide a common way for people to communicate. As myself and many of my peers have experienced, it is difficult to communicate with someone who speaks a different language. However, if everyone spoke in the same language, these incidents would become much more infrequent, thus easing our lives. And as statistics show, 73% of Americans believe that English should be the official language of the United States. And if about three of every four American people believe this, then I don't see why it shouldn't be.
-Hank Helgren, Class 7
I am agreeing with many others when I say that a National language for our country would help to unite it. There are a few reasons as to why it would be a good thing for the United States to adopt English as the National language. Many aspects of communication would be easier with one national language, tax money would be saved, and immigrants who are new to the country will have to "earn" their citizenship by learning the language. The article started off by talking about the many difficulties that Americans have had dealing with non-english speaking in America. "For a Sherman Oaks, Calif., election worker, the last straw was hanging campaign posters in six languages and six alphabets. For a taxpayer in University Park, Texas, it was a requirement that all employees of the local public utility speak Spanish. For a retired schoolteacher from Mount Morris, N.Y., it was taking her elderly and anxious mother to a Pakistani doctor and understanding only a fraction of what he said." All of these problems could easily be fixed by making the national language english. Campaign posters could be in one language, Communication would be clear, and people would not have to be bilingual to get a job. In order to cope with the many languages that are spoken in the United States, Laws are printed, translated, and distributed in many different languages in over half of the states. It would save tax money if only english laws were printed. I think it would be a good idea for english to be the national language as well because it could be sort of an initiation for living here. If you put in the effort to learn english, you can immigrate here.
Patrick B. Period 3
I think that a national language would unite our nation, without a doubt. There would be far less fighting then there is in the united states going on right now. It is hard to make things right when knowone can communiate with eachother. thank god people are given the right to learn a new language, but it is only voulntary. A new language should be invented all together that gives everyone the equal oppurtunity to learn something new. this would make peoople also come together. A national language would unite a country.
period 7
dugan.
Having a national language in the United States would be a very smart move that would ultimately better the country. Just as Louis said, this country was founded mainly of immigrants, which resulted in many different unique languages spread across the US. Having a national language would help organize many problems we have have with translating. Like it said in the reading "hanging campaign posters in six languages and six alphabets" is making more work for the people who create the posters. The cost also have a big factor. On street signs as Ishan mentioned, they must be printed in multiple languages, which probably isn't enough because there will always be someone who speaks a language that is very different from our cultures. It would save a whole lot of money printing something in just one language rather than printing something in 3 or 4 languages. And if the government could take this idea into consideration and finally pass it, i believe it would end major problems we have with translating, and taking a language in school wouldn't be as important anymore.
Aaron N.
Class 3
Post a Comment