Thinking Fool

Couldn't agree more. Such a simple and what I thought obvious idea....plan to move somewhere to live and work? Learn the language the people there speak.

First Year, it is far from clear that "English" is the operative "language the people there speak" when one is considering a move to many of the localities in this fine nation.

i'd have to agree with jeh, in a way. and also, to throw in my 1.5 cents, it doesn't bother me that people who come here can't/don't speak english. it's more their problem than mine.

it only becomes a problem for me when, for example, i can't communicate with a cashier because he/she doesn't speak english. but non-english speaking persons aren't likely to get that type of job anyway, because of the inherent potential for mis-communication.

i admire people who make any attempt to learn a second/third language. especially when they come from a background where education is not the main priority. i mean, i've tried learning mandarin, which is tough as hell. travelling in china while only knowing a few basics was difficult enough, but the people were understanding and appreciated my efforts.

i don't know why people become so upset over the fact that some people just don't speak english (well) (and TF, no offense meant to you). unless speaking english is viewed as a patriotic obligation, i don't care if you speak english or pig latin - the tower of babel only stands in the way of those who let it.

Have of the people out there, aren't even protesting for the right reason. I bet 50% of the people protesting are using it as an excuse to get out of work and school. These people piss me off. My grandfather rode over on a boat for 2+ weeks from China and then waited in a processing camp for an additional 2 weeks while his paperwork was processed. The did it all over again to bring over my grandmother! If you want to be an American Citizen, go through the process!

Tyler,

i respect your view, as well as the difficulties suffered by your ancestors. just to offer an opposing point of view, though: i don't think that most of the protestors (immigrant or not, illegal or not) were protesting for the sake of avoiding other obligations. personally, if i were going to take a day off from work, i'd stay home and park myself in the recliner with a good book, some hot chocolate, and jazz music. being squished between a couple hundred thousand other people would not be an ideal "sick day" for me. i'm sure the same could be said of the protestors.

that being said, i do agree that immigrants should respect our laws. on the other hand, i think some of the proposed ways of dealing with the illegals already in our country are a bit harsh.

regardless, our focus should be on what we can do about future immigrants. i'm sure you'll agree. your grandparents, and my ancestors as well, all came to america and (presumably, in the case of my own ancestors) obtained legal citizenship. respect for the law should be encouraged. but so should respect for others.

im not going to lie, i felt a little claustrophobic in my office building today as they marched on by...they just kept coming. and chanting. and it really made playing solitaire that much harder

LM,

I want people to learn English because it will make our country function better. We spend too much money on ESL classes and on printing materials in Spanish. Our official language should be English, which means we should only print stuff in English - ballots, hospital forms, etc. (Private business can do whatever they want to do.) Not to mention, it's a huge disservice to people who don't learn the language. It's time to exercise a little tough love. Just learn enough to be semi-fluent. You don't have to teach high school grammar classes. Why is that so much to ask?

Fool

i understand the disservice done to people who don't speak english, or who don't speak it well. but then again, that's their choice. nobody forced us to learn english - we just did, because that's what our parents spoke/speak. the same goes for immigrants (and not just mexican/hispanic immigrants). they were born speaking their own language, and english is their second or third language (if at all).

i don't think we can force people to speak english if they don't want to. if we could, would we also be able to prohibit people from speaking ebonics? and should we stop teaching foreign languages in public schools?

there has to be a limit to what we can require of people. if people choose to disadvantage themselves, that's their decision, and their burden. the fact that the US government publishes information in different languages is a good point, but the government does so in order to provide equal access to certain services. if we said that the government should no longer publish official documents in two languages, could we also say that the government should no longer provide services for the hearing- or visually-impaired? (closed-captioning and braille being the primary "languages" used to accommodate such persons).

i would agree that people should be encouraged to learn english. and i think that many are indeed encouraged to do so. for others, they may lack the time, resources (transportation, classes, etc), and funding to learn english. if we want to make sure that the government isn't spending too much money on things like printing documents in two languages, how do we justify spending money on things like ESL classes, transportation, etc? i don't think we can.

likewise, if a person disservices himself by not graduating from high school (and thereby placing a burden on society by not contributing as much as he can to advance his position, being dependent upon social services because he can't earn enough money to support himself, and so forth), could we also require him to get a GED? probably not. it sucks for him that he's in that situation, but hey, it was his choice. same goes for people who choose not to learn english (setting aside the issue of those who are, for whatever reason, simply unable to learn english).

[sorry for such a long comment, and for so many hypos. exams are getting to me]

i understand the disservice done to people who don't speak english, or who don't speak it well. but then again, that's their choice. nobody forced us to learn english - we just did, because that's what our parents spoke/speak. the same goes for immigrants (and not just mexican/hispanic immigrants). they were born speaking their own language, and english is their second or third language (if at all).

We should force them to speak it by only conducting official government business in english. You snooze, you lose!

i don't think we can force people to speak english if they don't want to. if we could, would we also be able to prohibit people from speaking ebonics? and should we stop teaching foreign languages in public schools?

We should encourage MORE foreign languages in schools. Americans should speak more languages than we do. But people who come to our country to live should speak our language. If you and I move to France, we need to learn French. If we move to Iran, we better learn Arabic (and how to love the Bomb). As for ebonics, at least the ebonics crowd speaks a basic form of English. I think ebonics is a joke too - that cuts off on opportunities in this country as well. But that's tolerable. No English is not.

there has to be a limit to what we can require of people. if people choose to disadvantage themselves, that's their decision, and their burden. the fact that the US government publishes information in different languages is a good point, but the government does so in order to provide equal access to certain services.

It shouldn't have to provide equal access for immigrants who don't assimilate.

if we said that the government should no longer publish official documents in two languages, could we also say that the government should no longer provide services for the hearing- or visually-impaired? (closed-captioning and braille being the primary "languages" used to accommodate such persons).

Both sets of people are covered under the ADA. Not learning English because you're an immigrant who chooses not to learn is not a disability in any legal sense. It's a joke. But to directly answer your question, NO, we should keep printing things in braille and continue to close caption programs. Are there different versions of Braille - i.e. does Arabic use one form and French another? That'd be interesting. If so, English all the way!

i would agree that people should be encouraged to learn english. and i think that many are indeed encouraged to do so. for others, they may lack the time, resources (transportation, classes, etc), and funding to learn english.

BUT if there were no crutches - you HAD to know the language in order to survive, bet your bottom dollar, people would learn. Stupid or not, people are remarkably resilient. We adapt to our situations. And again, I'm not expecting Ernest Hemingway's prodigy to come out of the immigrant community, though that'd be nice.

if we want to make sure that the government isn't spending too much money on things like printing documents in two languages, how do we justify spending money on things like ESL classes, transportation, etc? i don't think we can.

I think ESL classes are a complete joke. I've known people who have taught them and people who have been in them and I also know people who have not been native English speakers who have been thrown into English classes as children, without the benefit of Spanish, and actually excelled because they were forced to learn our language to survive. i don't get your transportation hypo.

likewise, if a person disservices himself by not graduating from high school (and thereby placing a burden on society by not contributing as much as he can to advance his position, being dependent upon social services because he can't earn enough money to support himself, and so forth), could we also require him to get a GED? probably not. it sucks for him that he's in that situation, but hey, it was his choice. same goes for people who choose not to learn english (setting aside the issue of those who are, for whatever reason, simply unable to learn english).

you're arguing my point. for the moron who doesn't get his GED, too bad - opportunities are cut off from you now. for people who don't learn english, TOO bad, you can't vote (because you won't be able to read the ballot), you can't fill out emergency room paperwork because you can't read it, you can't get a driver's license because the clerk won't speak in spanish. At least, that's where I think we should head as a country. We're becoming too fragmented. The idea of the melting pot is a crock of crap. It's a big salad bowl where not enough blends together.

[sorry for such a long comment, and for so many hypos. exams are getting to me]

You bastard. :-) Good luck on exams.

They speak Persian in Iran, not Arabic.

Amend my prior statement to "If we move to Iran, we better learn Persian (and how to love the Bomb)." Really glad we cleared that up.

sorry for the hiatus, i had to cram about 25 rules of evidence into my monkey brain. it was tough work, but it has since been purged, leaving more room for fun things like biotech and con law! whoo!

right, back to immigration.

i just want to get your views straight - correct me if i misstate anything:

1. English should be our official language, but Americans should still be exposed to more foreign languages (in school).
2. Non-English speakers have to learn English, but the government shouldn't provide that service, nor is the government obligated to provide equal access to services to people unable to speak English.
3. Not speaking English is not a disability (yeah, i knew that my braille/CC hypo would fall under the disabilities act - bonus points for you on this hypo!) (sidenote: there are different versions of sign language, for example (ASL - American Sign Language, plus different sign languages for other countries as well, including the UK!)
4. ESL classes are silly (ergo, they shouldn't be used, supported, or maintained?) My transportation hypo was meant to provide one reason why people might not be able to learn English - lack of transportation to get to classes, or wherever it is they might go to obtain greater proficiency in English).
5. Um, hmm. So we both agree that it sucks for people who don't speak English. But you would say they should be required to speak English, whereas i might say that they can do whatever they please, as long as they don't stop making burritos.

To respond:

1. i could see how this might make sense. we should embrace our own culture, but also learn more about other cultures. That could be a good balance. but let's just say we make English our official language, without exposing Americans to more foreign languages. we'd become even more isolated from foreign cultures than we are now. i'm not all about isolationism, as it makes me feel lonely. bring on the persians!

on a slightly more serious note, if we want to encourage cultural diversity, what's the point of having an official language? in fact, that's one of the reasons why we shouldn't have an official language - because when the government endorses one language over others, it's sending out a message that people should prefer a particular culture over others. the argument then goes something like this: our ancestors were all immigrants, america is a melting pot of freedom and liberty and burritos and pirogies (mmm), let's not ruin a good thing.

and really, how can you argue with pirogies? or burritos!!

2. immigrants who come to America have to learn English, but hell if the government helps you! is basically the message i'm getting. ok, fine. i don't want to pay taxes any more than i have to. but where/how are immigrants supposed to learn English, then? there are only so many volunteer tutors, and after that, lessons = money.

even if immigrants don't take lessons, but just learn English through daily interactions (which i think is what you've proposed?), that's still a looooong process, and it doesn't happen overnight, or even in one year. so, in the meantime, what if a non-English speaker gets hit by the burrito mobile and has to go to the hospital? he can't fill out the form because, good golly, it's all in jibberish! (English, to us). i dunno. i'd say, dual-language forms = good.

3. [see above sidenotes and parentheticals]

4.ESL classes. ok, so they're dumb. but surely someone must be getting something out of them, else they wouldn't still be around, would they? so i'd have to disagree with you on the point of the classes being a joke (although i cannot speak from firsthand experience, nor can i speak on behalf of others who've taken/taught them (objection, hearsay! i should've used more exclamations on my exam....)

5. this last point's a bit tricky. we both agree that not speaking English is generally a bad thing, but we disagree as to what should be done about it. i'd say, nothing. you'd say, make them learn English. i'm not a fan of ruling with an iron fist, so for me, i'd rather let them sort it out, but in the meantime, if you need something important, like medical assistance, you should at least be facilitated in that endeavor by being able to fill out the necessary forms.

and let's face it - not everyone who uses those dual-language forms is an illegal immigrant. they may be here legally. furthermore, and regardless of their legal status, if the person came to the US when they were older/in their later years, they might not've been able to learn English very well. it's easier for children to learn and acquire new language skills than it is for adults and the eldery, and i think that fact has to be respected. i'm certain that some of my ancestors didn't speak English when they came here, and perhaps some of them never really did learn it well, if at all. when immigrants came over from Europe, they tended to settle in culturally-distinct neighborhoods, with people from their own homeland or of their own ethnicity, which of course made it easier for them to communicate in their native language.

the same is possibly/probably true of modern-era immigrants, many of whom settle in CA and in various southern states (and even in northern/mid-western states where certain immigrant populations are known to settle). the point is, perhaps there's no real need for them to learn English.

why would someone do something if there was no practical basis for it? would you learn Persian if you weren't planning on going to Iran? probably not (unless you're infinitely curious about foreign languages).

so, i respect your point about needing to light a fire under the seats of immigrants to make them learn English, but i'd say, if they need to learn English, they will. and if they don't need to, they won't. in either case, if they fail to learn English, that's their choice, and i'm sure they realize that they are foregoing some very good opportunities that they might not otherwise have.

You bastard. :-) Good luck on exams.

ouch! and thanks :D