English may "become" the national language - implications?

Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share
1

So, the senate is tossing around this new bill which, as one of its provisions, would make English the official national language.

The critical piece of information left out of the article is what implications would this have, practically speaking? (certainly not hablando-ing) The article also says:

Uh… common and unifying language? Isn’t it kind of already the common and unifying language? Is this just feel-good speak or what?

Also, later on they quote a certain John Trasvina, who says in opposition to the bill:

So are they mandating and enforcing that everyone learn English? Or are they just saying we all ought to learn English, because, well, it would be a really helpful and swell thing for people to do?

Anyone know what the heck this is really about?

2

I haven’t read the news about this, but I was discussing it with my mother, who said that one of the things proposed is that all of those special things provided in Spanish for non-English speakers (driving tests, etc) would only be in English.

Personally, I don’t think we need a national language. What’s the point? Furthermore, we should be proud of our mixed heritage, not attempt to squash it.

3

Grandstanding by nervous politicians in an election year, and a complete waste of time. An out of control president and trillions in debt and they’re ‘concerned’ about whether someone says hello or hola. :rolleyes:

4

I don’t know much about the implications, but it does tick me off. I mean, we can say that people should learn English all we want, but as of yet there’s no magic language upload available. If those services go away, we’re going to have a lot of people who suddenly can’t handle simple governmental transactions.

Personally, though, I don’t think that it’ll change a whole lot, now that I think about it. Passing an “English is the national language” bill isn’t going to stop businesses from providing services in Spanish. That would alienate a portion of their customer base; it’s bad for business.

5

There would be no implications at all, aside from annoying people. Everything that the government provides in Spanish and other languages would continue to be provided. It’s just that English would be “official.”

Personally, I’m rather fond of being one of only a handful of countries to never recognize an official language. I’d like to keep it that way.

6

as a practical matter, nothing will change.

But if you want to start a GD thread…it’s a good idea to define English as the national language. Some countries can do well with mutiple languages (Switzerland). But others don’t. (Canada)

Many (most?) Americans today can trace their grandparents back to Ellis Island. But few of them speak the same language that their ancestors did when they got off the boat. They assimilated, and America is better off for it.

7

We could look ridiculous and pompous. France has a language board that goes around busting people for using English words. Quebec officials fine shopkeepers for displaying signs in English. That sort of behavior makes you a living joke.

8

[QUOTE=AskNott]
We could look ridiculous and pompous. France has a language board that goes around busting people for using English words.
[/QUOTE]

Oh man, that would make a hell of a TV show.

Picture Cops… in France, with the Language Police.

Bad boys bad boys, whatcha gonna do…

9

[QUOTE=chappachula]
as a practical matter, nothing will change.

But if you want to start a GD thread…it’s a good idea to define English as the national language. Some countries can do well with mutiple languages (Switzerland). But others don’t. (Canada)
[/QUOTE]

All countries have multiple languages. Europe and the US/Canada are unique in only have a couple other prominent languages. Every country in Asia, the Middle East, Africa, South America, etc. has multiple common languages often numbering in the hundreds.

10

[QUOTE=even sven]
All countries have multiple languages. Europe and the US/Canada are unique in only have a couple other prominent languages. Every country in Asia, the Middle East, Africa, South America, etc. has multiple common languages often numbering in the hundreds.
[/QUOTE]

I’m not so sure this is true, unless you’re talking about continents. I’m Korean, and in Korea we only speak Korean. As far as I know, in Japan they only speak Japanese. China has a few dialects, but certainly nowhere near hundreds. So what exactly does your statement come from?

11

[QUOTE=chappachula]
Many (most?) Americans today can trace their grandparents back to Ellis Island. But few of them speak the same language that their ancestors did when they got off the boat. They assimilated, and America is better off for it.
[/QUOTE]

No, we’d be better off if we all spoke the languages of our immigrant ancestors, in addition to English. Far too many Americans, me included, are monolingual. On the other hand, some of us have problems with even one language.

12

[QUOTE=audiobottle]
I’m not so sure this is true, unless you’re talking about continents. I’m Korean, and in Korea we only speak Korean. As far as I know, in Japan they only speak Japanese. China has a few dialects, but certainly nowhere near hundreds. So what exactly does your statement come from?
[/QUOTE]

Okay, Japan and Korea are also fairly monolingual. China has tons. Actually this whole site has a lot of interesting information about what languages are spoken in what country. Check out India or the Phillipines or Vietnam- really anyplace but Japan or Korea.

If you click around on the site, you can find lists for the whole world. I’m moving to Cameroon, with an awesome 235 languages including three fairly official ones. Brazil’s got a pretty awesome list, as does Russia. It’s pretty facinating, actually.

13

[QUOTE=friedo]
There would be no implications at all, aside from annoying people. Everything that the government provides in Spanish and other languages would continue to be provided. It’s just that English would be “official.”

[/QUOTE]

English. It’s an “11.”

14

[QUOTE=Chefguy]
Grandstanding by nervous politicians in an election year, and a complete waste of time. An out of control president and trillions in debt and they’re ‘concerned’ about whether someone says hello or hola. :rolleyes:
[/QUOTE]

This absolutely nails it.

15

[QUOTE=chappachula]
as a practical matter, nothing will change.

But if you want to start a GD thread…it’s a good idea to define English as the national language. Some countries can do well with mutiple languages (Switzerland). But others don’t. (Canada)

Many (most?) Americans today can trace their grandparents back to Ellis Island. But few of them speak the same language that their ancestors did when they got off the boat. They assimilated, and America is better off for it.
[/QUOTE]

What’s your point? People learned English in the absence of an official language then, and they’re continuing to do so now. These things are well-studied and documented; this idea that foreigners are coming to the U.S. but not learning English is a complete myth, spread by grandstanding politicians.

[QUOTE=audiobottle]
I’m not so sure this is true, unless you’re talking about continents. I’m Korean, and in Korea we only speak Korean. As far as I know, in Japan they only speak Japanese. China has a few dialects, but certainly nowhere near hundreds. So what exactly does your statement come from?
[/QUOTE]

Korea is pretty thoroughly monolingual; Japan is nearly so (the Ryukyuan languages are sometimes treated as dialects of Japanese, though they’re not - Okinawan, for instance, should properly be regarded as a separate language from Japanese.) China, however, is not. The Chinese languages themselves number anywhere from 7 to 11 depending who’s counting; China officially recognizes something like 60 different nationalities besides the Han native to China, most of which have at least one language (though I’m not sure what the official status of those languages is - China supports at very least education and development of writing systems for minority languages.) Anyway, China is anything but linguistically unified. India and the Philippines are particularly diverse; India, for instance, has several hundred native languages. Hindi and English are used in administration, but Assamese, Bengali, Bodo, Dogri, Gujarati, Kannada, Kashmiri, Konkani, Mayalayam, Manipuri, Marathi, Nepali, Oriya, Punjabi, Sanskrit, Santali, Sindhi, Tamil, Telugu and Urdu all have official status (per Wikipedia.) Further, I don’t think any language is spoken by a majority of India’s populace.

The United States is unusual in having so few important languages; English and Spanish are really the only major languages of the U.S., and Spanish is obviously spoken mostly only by fairly recent immigrants. Americans have historically learned (and still do learn) English; there is simply no reason to establish an official language. Further, efforts to prevent bilingual education are actively harmful and really can’t be described as anything but an attempt to marginalize immigrants.

16

[QUOTE=even sven]
Actually this whole site has a lot of interesting information about what languages are spoken in what country. Check out India or the Phillipines or Vietnam- really anyplace but Japan or Korea.
[/QUOTE]
That seems to be a site for showing what languages the Bible has been printed in in which country, not what the most used languages are. I checked out the UK, and it’s got Cornish, English, Gaelic, Kashmiri, Manx, and Welsh - All languages which are certainly used here, but it misses out some pretty widespread ones like Hindi, Gujarati, Bengali, Tamil, etc; other than Kashmiri none of the South Asian-based languages are mentioned.

17

English as the official language of this country is a law that has been sorely needed for a long time. If it does nothing more, it will help get rid of bi-lingual education, which is a miserable failure that dooms non-English speaking kids to a life of second-class servitude.

18

[QUOTE=Revenant Threshold]
That seems to be a site for showing what languages the Bible has been printed in in which country, not what the most used languages are. I checked out the UK, and it’s got Cornish, English, Gaelic, Kashmiri, Manx, and Welsh - All languages which are certainly used here, but it misses out some pretty widespread ones like Hindi, Gujarati, Bengali, Tamil, etc; other than Kashmiri none of the South Asian-based languages are mentioned.
[/QUOTE]

It’s hardly comprehensive (it misses a few hundred Indian and Cameroonian languages, for at least a couple examples) but at least it gives a hint of the linguistic diversity of the world. If you find a better cite, by all means tell me. But the truth still stands that you won’t find a page showing countries as having less languages. Very few countries are monoligual.

19

[QUOTE=even sven]
It’s hardly comprehensive (it misses a few hundred Indian and Cameroonian languages, for at least a couple examples) but at least it gives a hint of the linguistic diversity of the world. If you find a better cite, by all means tell me. But the truth still stands that you won’t find a page showing countries as having less languages. Very few countries are monoligual.
[/QUOTE]
Good point. Probably the best cites would be from whichever country’s government web pages (if they have one), but for illustrating the multilingual nature of nations that site does it’s job.

[QUOTE=Clothahump]
English as the official language of this country is a law that has been sorely needed for a long time. If it does nothing more, it will help get rid of bi-lingual education, which is a miserable failure that dooms non-English speaking kids to a life of second-class servitude.
[/QUOTE]
Could you explain this? I’m afraid I don’t get what you mean.

20

[QUOTE=Clothahump]
English as the official language of this country is a law that has been sorely needed for a long time. If it does nothing more, it will help get rid of bi-lingual education, which is a miserable failure that dooms non-English speaking kids to a life of second-class servitude.
[/QUOTE]

Except, that AFAIK in the legislation in question, either in the version proclaiming a “national” language or the one recognizing a “common, unifying” language (brilliant restatement of the obvious) goes no further than just saying that; it does not enforce what is normally meant by “English Only” (i.e. elimination of so-called “bilingual education” – which, yeah, in a lot of school districts is implemented completely backasswards – and of multi-lingual official publications).

These are mere restatements of something that ALREADY exists: you ARE supposed to learn English to become a citizen: Naturalization Requirements – exemptions are for* long-resident senior citizens* – that those in charge of screening may be lenient about it, is another story.