Lingusitics Should the US Declare English as Its Official Language?

[honestrosewater]

The law doesn't apply to people's interactions with a clerk at 7-11. It does apply to citizens' interactions with their government.

This is not an illegal immigration bill, BTW.

Why were those courts wrong to find those state's English-only laws unconstitutional?

Protecting rights costs money? What a waste.

It might mean that the ballots for next year's election won't be available in any language other than English (Edit: Sorry, accomodations required for people with disabilities excepted). Would no one have a problem with that? Just tough luck for those who can't learn English well enough in the meantime. ??

A representative's communication with their constituents is official business. See this part:

`Nothing in this chapter shall be construed--

`(1) to prohibit a Member of Congress or any officer or agent of the Federal Government, while performing official functions, from communicating unofficially through any medium with another person in a language other than English (as long as official functions are performed in English)

Have a problem and want any official help from your representatives? Sure, that's your right. What? You don't speak English? Too bad. This is America, land of English-only speakers. Maybe you didn't see the sign:
Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed, to me:
I lift my lamp beside the English-only golden door.

Yes, it upsets me.

 

[honestrosewater]

I think I'll vote indifferent on this one. Pretty much all business in the US is done in English anyway. Whether or not some cater to speakers of other languages is their choice and would always remain their choice, even if English were made the "official" language.

No choice - English only.

`(a) Official Functions- The official functions of the Government of the United States shall be conducted in English.

`(b) Scope- For the purposes of this section, the term `United States' means the several States and the District of Columbia, and the term `official' refers to any function that (i) binds the Government, (ii) is required by law, or (iii) is otherwise subject to scrutiny by either the press or the public.

`(c) Practical Effect- This section shall apply to all laws, public proceedings, regulations, publications, orders, actions, programs, and policies,

Sure, any representative can explain in any language that all official business must be done in English.

 

[loseyourname]

What are you concerned about with this 'representative' thing? That you'll write a letter to your senator in Swahili and he will no longer employ a translator? Are letters from constituents actually considered "official" business?

Also, are you sure this applies to ballots? It says above that it refers to the District of Columbia and all the states. Ballots are published by county governments - are they subject to this as well? If anything, this bill doesn't seem to give enough clarification.

Edit: If this law actually does restrict the printing of ballots to one language, it will be found unconstitutional and stricken from the books. There really isn't anything to worry about there.

 

[outsider]

government interactions in english only makes sense... street signs and official documents... sure...

other areas beyond official business with the government are basically uncontrollable...

 

[moose]

Incorrect. Other nations have official national languages without any detrimental effects.

Im glad this is being put out there. I've lived in the United States my entire life and my city has been gradually turning into Mexico Part II. This move will only help Americans.

So true. Because of me living in Arizona, I also feel the horrid effects of being Mexico Part III(gotta count off somehow, right?). I once saw a commercial where some people were at a restaurant talking to each other, they order their food, and one of them gets the wrong item, and says to his friend "these people should really learn the language before coming here to serve us, you know?" and his friend is all offended and stuff. WTF, in any other country than the US, a person who doesn't know their language simply won't get a job at a McDonalds, and it's not a bad thing at all. It means the person is underqualified.

 

[hitssquad]

If this law actually does restrict the printing of ballots to one language, it will be found unconstitutional

According to which part of the constitution?

 

[honestrosewater]

What are you concerned about with this 'representative' thing? That you'll write a letter to your senator in Swahili and he will no longer employ a translator? Are letters from constituents actually considered "official" business?

I thought so, but the only information I can find now is that this kind of communciation is usually considered confidential. So I may have been wrong.

Also, are you sure this applies to ballots? It says above that it refers to the District of Columbia and all the states. Ballots are published by county governments - are they subject to this as well? If anything, this bill doesn't seem to give enough clarification.

No, I'm not sure - I asked about this and no one replied - that's why I said 'might'.
The bill may also be changed as it goes through the process, before it's voted on.

Edit: If this law actually does restrict the printing of ballots to one language, it will be found unconstitutional and stricken from the books. There really isn't anything to worry about there.

But shouldn't that be considered before it becomes law? I don't think it's acceptable for Congress to just pass laws indiscriminately and let the courts decide whether the laws are actually allowed - and try to fix what harm is done in the meantime.

 

[Moonbear]

No choice - English only.

No, there is always choice. You can have all the languages you want, it means English must be one of them. When's the last time you heard of Congress holding it's sessions in another language other than English anyway? Or the last time you saw a Supreme Court opinion written in Spanish or French? Or even a Presidential debate conducted in a language other than English? Official functions are already all done in English in the U.S. The law does not state that a translation can't be provided if someone wants to provide it.

Sure, any representative can explain in any language that all official business must be done in English.

Have you been to Canada recently? They have two official languages, French and English. I don't see them having any problems with that.

Actually, without an official language, I suppose if Congress decided to write up legislation in ancient sanskrit, they'd be free to do so, and nothing would require they translate it into any modern language if they didn't feel like it.

 

[honestrosewater]

According to which part of the constitution?

The good part. If you're asking because you're truly interested, http://www.gpoaccess.gov/constitution/browse.html is a great resource. There's even a list of http://www.gpoaccess.gov/constitution/html/acts.html (with explanations).

Edit: Adding to some things in post #40... from the Lau v. Nichols decision:

The failure of the San Francisco school system to provide English language instruction to approximately 1,800 students of Chinese ancestry who do not speak English, or to provide them with other adequate instructional procedures, denies them a meaningful opportunity to participate in the public educational program and thus violates 601 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which bans discrimination based "on the ground of race, color, or national origin," in "any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance," and the implementing regulations of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Pp. 565-569

...

We do not reach the Equal Protection Clause argument which has been advanced but rely solely on 601 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. 2000d, to reverse the Court of Appeals.

- http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=414&invol=563

So I'm guessing either the Civil Rights Act or the Fifteenth, Fourteenth, or Fifth Amendment. Whoever is responsible for the ballots must fall under one of these.? Though the Fifth Amendment has no equal protection clause, SCOTUS decided in Bolling v. Sharpe that the federal government cannot hold itself to a lower standard than it holds the states:

(a) Though the Fifth Amendment does not contain an equal protection clause, as does the Fourteenth Amendment which applies only to the States, the concepts of equal protection and due process are not mutually exclusive. P. 499.

(b) Discrimination may be so unjustifiable as to be violative of due process. P. 499.

...

(d) In view of this Court's decision in Brown v. Board of Education, ante, p. 483, that the Constitution prohibits the States from maintaining racially segregated public schools, it would be unthinkable that the same Constitution would impose a lesser duty on the Federal Government.

- http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=347&invol=497

 

[honestrosewater]

No, there is always choice.

Geez, I really wasn't thinking clearly last night. Talking about rights tends to upset me, maybe even make me a bit paranoid. I'm sorry. You're right, it doesn't say English only. The other laws were referred to as English-only, and I guess I just grouped them all together. However, it still isn't clear whether they intended your interpretation or the English only one.

You can have all the languages you want, it means English must be one of them. When's the last time you heard of Congress holding it's sessions in another language other than English anyway? Or the last time you saw a Supreme Court opinion written in Spanish or French? Or even a Presidential debate conducted in a language other than English? Official functions are already all done in English in the U.S. The law does not state that a translation can't be provided if someone wants to provide it.

So what is the point of adopting the law? Adopting laws just for the heck of it is at worst wasteful and at best senseless. Why do we need this law?

Have you been to Canada recently? They have two official languages, French and English. I don't see them having any problems with that.

I've never been outside of the US. Are their laws the same though? Some official language laws are merely symbolic.

Actually, without an official language, I suppose if Congress decided to write up legislation in ancient sanskrit, they'd be free to do so, and nothing would require they translate it into any modern language if they didn't feel like it.

I couldn't find a law specifically about languages in general, presumably because there's been no reason for such a law (since most business is already conducted in English), but there are laws regarding meaningful access for 'limited English proficient' (LEP) individuals:

Q. What are the relevant laws concerning language access for LEP individuals?

A. Federal laws particularly applicable to language access include Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Title VI regulations, prohibiting discrimination based on national origin, and Executive Order 13166 issued in 2000. Many individual federal programs, states, and localities also have provisions requiring language services for LEP individuals.

Q. What is Executive Order 13166?

A. An Executive Order is an order given by the President to federal agencies. The LEP Executive Order (Executive Order 13166) says that people who are LEP should have meaningful access to federally conducted and federally funded programs and activities.

- http://www.lep.gov/faq.html

The United States Supreme Court in Lau v. Nichols (1974) stated that one type of national origin discrimination is discrimination based on a person’s inability to speak, read, write, or understand English.

- http://www.fec.gov/pages/lepaccessplan.html

I don't think we need this law in order to ensure that English speakers will have access to the information that they are already entitled to. The same or similar laws that protect non-English-speakers should also protect English speakers.

 

[Smurf]

Have you been to Canada recently? They have two official languages, French and English. I don't see them having any problems with that.

HA! You must not be looking hard enough

 

[The Smoking Man]

HA! You must not be looking hard enough

Tell him to hang an English sign outside of a business in Quebec and see what happens.

 

[misskitty]

Smurf, does Canada have more than 2 official languages? Is that what you were getting at with "you must not be looking hard enough"?

~Kitty

 

[iansmith]

Canada has only two official language but each province have their own status. What it means is that any the federal government has to communicate in english or french. Also, all labeling goods are bilingual. This also allow people speaking french or english as their first languague to have education in their first language.

Province have different statues, Quebec is french only province, New-brunswick is billingual and the rest is english only. Most official provincial will have bilingual service but it always depends on the person serving you.

Tell him to hang an English sign outside of a business in Quebec and see what happens.

You are allowed to have an english sign but it has to have french on it.

 

[Curious6]

The reality is that the United States necessitates a law which proclaims English as its official language in order to preserve cultural unity and facilitate the assimilation of the substantial wave of Hispanic immigrants that have reached the country since the 1960's.

 

[honestrosewater]

You are allowed to have an english sign but it has to have french on it.

Are you joking, or is that true? A private business?

The reality is that the United States necessitates a law which proclaims English as its official language in order to preserve cultural unity and facilitate the assimilation of the substantial wave of Hispanic immigrants that have reached the country since the 1960's.

How is havng an official language going to accomplish this?

What is the difference between assimilation and suppression?

 

[hitssquad]

Assimilation, suppression and enhancement

What is the difference between assimilation and suppression?

Suppression of undesirable traits is one of the properties of assimilation. The other property is enhancement of desirable traits.

 

[Smurf]

Smurf, does Canada have more than 2 official languages? Is that what you were getting at with "you must not be looking hard enough"?

No, I mean it's not completely without problems.

Are you joking, or is that true? A private business?

Completely true, in Quebec.

What is the difference between assimilation and suppression?

One is borg-ish the other is hitler-ish.

 

[loseyourname]

Suppression of undesirable traits is one of the properties of assimilation. The other property is enhancement of desirable traits.

Assimilation does not connote any particular value of the traits being suppressed or enhanced. The traits suppressed are simply the traits that make one group different from the other, and the traits enhanced are the traits that make them similar. Unless you're saying homogeneity is desirable in and of itself, I don't see how an evaluative judgement of the particular traits is implied in the discriminatory process employed.

 

[loseyourname]

According to which part of the constitution?

Actually, I suppose the printing of ballots in English only is not unconstitutional, but if the counties were to do so, they would have to provide a translator. Otherwise, there is a de facto qualification process for who is allowed to vote (akin to the old literacy tests designed to disfranchise blacks in the south), which is not in accord with the articles and amendments pertaining to who is allowed to vote, which at this point is any citizen above the age of 18 who is not a felon. There is no requirement that one must be able to read English or even that one must be able to read at all.

 

[The Smoking Man]

Canada has only two official language but each province have their own status. What it means is that any the federal government has to communicate in english or french. Also, all labeling goods are bilingual. This also allow people speaking french or english as their first languague to have education in their first language.

Province have different statues, Quebec is french only province, New-brunswick is billingual and the rest is english only. Most official provincial will have bilingual service but it always depends on the person serving you.



You are allowed to have an english sign but it has to have french on it.

Yeah ... Sure you are ... Ask about if that business happens to be a flower shop that has been there for a hundred years.

That place had the wondows blown out with a shotgun.

You also get stupid things like the guy in Alberta who seemed to have absolutely NO problem surviving in a community there for most of his life in English. Then ... When he was done for tax evasion ... elected to have his trial for tax evasion in French only meaning they had to move a complete French courtroom to his town at a cost of $2 million so the government could recover $100,000.

Then there is the stated preference for government employees who are bilingual. Well it appears that all French is not the same because of two people who are bilingual going for the same job the French person who learned English will get the job and not the English who acquired French.

Why? --- The schools of Canada teach Parisian French and not Quebecoise.

Most of the people who were brought up in Canada don't speak Parisian French.

Therefore, the native Quebecoise speaker gets the job because they are more qualified.

 

[iansmith]

Yeah ... Sure you are ... Ask about if that business happens to be a flower shop that has been there for a hundred years.

That place had the wondows blown out with a shotgun.

That is the work of extremist and terrorrist. By law you are allows to have any languague on sign as long as french is dominant.

You also get stupid things like the guy in Alberta who seemed to have absolutely NO problem surviving in a community there for most of his life in English. Then ... When he was done for tax evasion ... elected to have his trial for tax evasion in French only meaning they had to move a complete French courtroom to his town at a cost of $2 million so the government could recover $100,000.

You do seem to understand that some people can function in a second language, yet they do not master this language. This put them at a disadvantage when sign contract or are in court because native speaker have a certain understanding of the fine details of the language

Also some people will leave in very closed communities where french is major languague but are surronded by english majority. Or vice-versa. I seen people from the west-island of montreal that lived there for more than 60 years but could not speak a word of french. Yet they are surrounded by french speaking people.

Then there is the stated preference for government employees who are bilingual. Well it appears that all French is not the same because of two people who are bilingual going for the same job the French person who learned English will get the job and not the English who acquired French.

Why? --- The schools of Canada teach Parisian French and not Quebecoise.

Most of the people who were brought up in Canada don't speak Parisian French.

Therefore, the native Quebecoise speaker gets the job because they are more qualified.

The problem here is that you should not rely on the school system to teach you another language. The english thaught in Quebec is as bad as the french taught in other province. The difference is that people in Quebec go outside the province to learn english. You also have to expose yourself to the language and pratice it to maintain a certain level of expertise. A language can be lost quite rapidly if you do not speak it on a regular basis.

 

[The Smoking Man]

That is the work of extremist and terrorrist. By law you are allows to have any languague on sign as long as french is dominant.

The observation was that 'there was no trouble in Canada based on having two languages'.

I am glad to see that you have agreed with me and explained that having two 'official languages' has indeed given Canada terrorists.

You do seem to understand that some people can function in a second language, yet they do not master this language. This put them at a disadvantage when sign contract or are in court because native speaker have a certain understanding of the fine details of the language

So you agree that the government was correct in spending $2 million to recover $100 thousand in back taxes?

This is not a problem to you? Again, you have just proved to our fiscally minded bretheren to the south that there are some really nasty problems but you are just too messed up to realize it.

Also some people will leave in very closed communities where french is major languague but are surronded by english majority. Or vice-versa. I seen people from the west-island of montreal that lived there for more than 60 years but could not speak a word of french. Yet they are surrounded by french speaking people.

This man lived in a community that had 7 french speakers. He and his wife and 5 children who did not qualify as great enough of a population to create a French School. His children were educated in English, he signed contracts in English, he had an English lawyer, he purchased his land in English and he banks in English.

The problem here is that you should not rely on the school system to teach you another language. The english thaught in Quebec is as bad as the french taught in other province. The difference is that people in Quebec go outside the province to learn english. You also have to expose yourself to the language and pratice it to maintain a certain level of expertise. A language can be lost quite rapidly if you do not speak it on a regular basis.

Well, thanks for that. Next time I consider employment with the Canadian government, I'll remember that I have to moved to Quebec for 10 years and acquire my language skills.

The only problem with that is the guy looking at my CV will not have the same opinion of my language skills because 'living in a province for 10 years' does not give me an academic credit and he will assume I only speak Parisian French and I won't even get called for an interview since I am not a NATIVE speaker of Quebecoise.

You'll also find that most Quebecoise speakers do NOT leave the province to learn English. They simply go to night school. Our language appears in textbooks. Quebecoise does not because it is a gutteral dialect of French that even the real French have no respect for since it is considered an abomination and affront to the national language of France.

 

[hitssquad]

US voting rights vs the US Constitution

the articles and amendments pertaining to who is allowed to vote, which at this point is any citizen above the age of 18 who is not a felon.

Nothing in the United States Constitution grants any citizen the right to vote.

"The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude."
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

"The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex."
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

"It may be surprising that in the US citizens technically lack a constitutional right to vote."
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffrage#Suffrage_today

 

[Smurf]

excuse me while I burst into hysterical laughter briefly

 

[Smurf]

even the real French have no respect for since it is considered an abomination and affront to the national language of France.

In my experience it's viewed more with apathetic humour than any hostile feelings.

hehe, they'd still rather talk to a quebecy than a brit.

 

[The Smoking Man]

excuse me while I burst into hysterical laughter briefly

Something funny here you ... you ... ANGLOFONE!?

Your mother was a hamster and your father smelled of elderberries!

(Monty Python French reference)

 

[Smurf]

Are you suggesting coconuts MIGRATE?

 

[The Smoking Man]

In my experience it's viewed more with apathetic humour than any hostile feelings.

hehe, they'd still rather talk to a quebecy than a brit.

Understandable ... the Brit would just as soon shoot at them.

The Quebecers are like the little yappy dog from those cartoons bouncing around at the heels of the big ferocious dog.

Must be the potine.

 

[The Smoking Man]

Are you suggesting coconuts MIGRATE?

Two African swallows and a bit of string.