Covering The Coverage: The Baltimore Sun Urges Us To Resist Linguistic Terrorism. God, That Sounds Hot.
The Baltimore Sun features a piece today advising us U.S. Americans to resist the “linguistic terrorism” of English-only laws. Mmm linguistic terrorism:
Linguistic terrorism has plagued children of immigrants and Native Americans for generations. Alberto Alvaro Ríos wrote in his book Capirotada: A Nogales Memoir: “If speaking Spanish is bad, and our parents speak Spanish, then they must be bad,” he concluded, “and we became ashamed of them.”
Fueling the language debate are clashes arising over illegal immigrants fleeing dire circumstances. But anti-foreign-language fervor has been around for a long time. We disrespected the languages of Native Americans and African-Americans because non-white minorities spoke them, and we shunned German during World War I. Now it’s Spanish.
We are “The Other” currently en vogue (that’s, like, French!). Wait ‘til Middle America finds out about Asians and Eastern Europeans! Shit is going to hit the roof. Of their mouths:
As for Spanish, it left its mark upon our culture long before the arrival of Cristóbal Colón. Just close your eyes and press your finger onto any U.S. map, and chances are decent that you’ll be pointing to a place with a Spanish name (such as Colorado, Montana or Florida).
Well. The Spanish might have also played a part in “disrespect[ing] the languages of Native Americans and African-Americans.” With their guns and their diseases and stuff. But, moving on:
Yet we view foreign languages with suspicion and derision - the billboards in Spanish, the mom-and-pop piñata shops, the Little Mexicos. We’ve got them in our sights. Our weapon? Legislation.
Thirty states, from Arkansas to Wyoming, have enacted laws making English their official language.
The writer points out that there’s a difference between “English as official language” and “English only” policies, the latter of which may often be more the result of xenophobia than a hope for inclusiveness. Furthermore, it just seems counterproductive to alienate such a growing, cell-phone using, email-sending, car-buying segment of the population:
To legislate against Spanish is to marginalize the largest minority group in this country. The United States contains the fifth-largest Spanish-speaking population in the world, estimated at about 32 million. Spanish is the third-most-spoken language on the planet, with 400 million to 480 million speakers.
As for the assertions that these “foreigners” don’t want to learn English, considering the waiting list of immigrants clamoring for classes, that can’t be true.
Moreover, learning a foreign language takes time. Please, let’s give them a chance.
We have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, we find it a little frustrating that some of our relatives have been living and working in the U.S. since the 60’s and haven’t made an effort to learn English. It kind of smacks of laziness or entitlement. On the other hand, we’re well aware that we’re pretty lazy and entitled ourselves. On some third hand, we guess these relatives never really had to learn English as they’ve always lived, worked and made connections in areas where Spanish is the predominant language. And on yet a fourth hand, we don’t see why there has to be an official language on a federal level anyway, because we don’t want the government all up in our mouths (except maybe Obama). But some [Ed. note: Like, you know. Me.] of us might just be crazy Libertarians guarding our front lawn with a shotgun, so what do we know anyway.
So, what do you think? Should there be a national language? Or should there be two? Or none at all? And doesn’t “linguistic terrorism” sound like something you might want to try after a few too many shots with a complete stranger in the bathroom of a dive bar?
U.S. should resist linguistic terrorism of English-only laws [The Baltimore Sun]
9
- Editor
Cindy Casares
- Associate Editor
Alex Alvarez
- Contributing Editors
Gabriel Caro - Camilla Rowan
- Editor at Large
Daniel Mauser
Heck, down where I live, there are people whose families have lived in the United States since 1848, and still speak Spanish. Come to think of it, I think there are still some relatives of mine who still speak German, and my family has been in the United States since 1812.
While minority language speakers have, for the most part, been at a disadvantage in Latin America, the languages were never outlawed or “disrespected”. Yeah, it’s been only recently that textbooks in Nahuatl or any of the 30 Mayan languages have been available in Mexico, but all are legal languages and accepted in court documents.
Peru has Quecha as its official second language, and Guraní is the official language in Paraguay, so one can’t exactly claim that Latin American nations dissed those languages.
As to English, it’s a creole… which version is “official” — and which of the 27 recognized U.S. dialects is the “official” version. Is Gullah acceptable?
Posted by Richard Grabman | January 09, 2008
Considering Belgium is currently being torn apart by French and Dutch factions, I think having two official languages (ie. pandering to two large cultural sectors of the population) isn’t advisable. But I’m fat, so don’t listen to me.
Posted by Fat Elvis | January 09, 2008
It is wrong that people dont learn english but even if they do learn it’s hard just to drop your first language.
I know a lot of people who took english classes but they don’t speak english unless they have too.
People just need to get used to the fact that the US is home to a lot of people from all over the world.
Posted by la roncha | January 09, 2008
I think the point is, it’s hard to have a “United” nation if the country is split into groups: whether it’s along religious lines, color lines, cultural lines or language lines. Obviously making English the de facto language of America isn’t going to fix all of our problems and make everyone sing unity songs around a campfire, but, as the theory goes, it’ll help make America an actual, unified nation and not just some hodgepodge of immigrants that couldn’t make it in their own country.
That said, I am personally in favor of making English the official language of America, but I also think greater emphasis should be put on learning foreign languages. It seems less expensive and generally easier to have one official language (for all official print documents) and let people decide want language they want to use at home and in their community.
Posted by Fat Elvis | January 09, 2008
Some people would have us believe that everyone that speaks Spanish is an immigrant, i.e. bad. All this talk of English only and language requirements for citizenship would essentially trample the rights of hispanics and native americans guaranteed under the state constitution of New Mexico. These rights have already largely been trampled so why should we go in for this again. I leave it to a Republican (of all people) to make the argument AGAINST English Only:
http://domenici.senate.gov/legislation/record.cfm?id=275672
Posted by Elmo Delcharco | January 09, 2008
I apologize in advance for this is being written after drinking several micheladas-and not the miller crap kind variety.
English should be spoken but I don’t think that means you shouldn’t speak any other languages. It is kind of sad to see a situation where knowing more than one language is viewed as bad thing. I mean no one seems to have a problem with the word “burrito” . What would we call it in an eng. only counrty. Delicous goodness wrapped in flat flour wrap???no.
Posted by pocachica | January 09, 2008
I’m just curious about what exactly English as the official language would constitute. Obviously, it would not preclude foreign languages being spoken in the private sphere, or the use of the vernacular name for foreign foods (although I appreciate the humor pocachia), etc. So then what exactly does it mean? Would billboards and signs in foreign languages be prohibited? Would legal documents in foreign languages be prohibited?
It seems to me that it would just mean that in the public sphere, i.e. government and judicial procedures and buildings and anything/where that is owned by the government would be confined to English. If that’s the case, isn’t it already this way. Besides ESL courses, English is the only language used in education. Isn’t that enough. Besides wanting to quell the unfounded fear that seeing so many daily manifestations of the Spanish language is evidence of “cultural deterioration”, I do not see the imposition of English as the official language as necessary.
Posted by BornAgainChicano | January 10, 2008
People fear what they don’t understand. pocachica hit on right on the head in that speaking more that one language is bad. Why? After all, the world is a lot smaller and globalized that speaking more than one language is actually advantageous. But don’t tell that to the xenophobes. After all, how would they get funds for their campaigns from immigrant fearing Americans?
Posted by Quique | January 10, 2008
favorite term of the winter (ala Zoé Valdés):
monolingüista machista
Posted by Calaverita | January 10, 2008