Poll
Question:
Sould english be the official language?
Option 1: Yes
votes: 21
Option 2: No
votes: 16
Obviously for political reasons. But you would've thought that back in the 17 and 18 hundreds it would've been made the official language. Several states have made English the official language. Oddly enough the official language of Puerto Rico is English. I wonder if their signs are in English or Spanish?
Inb4 lock/deletion
Quote from: US 41 on July 14, 2014, 09:13:37 PM
Obviously for political reasons. But you would've thought that back in the 17 and 18 hundreds it would've been made the official language. Several states have made English the official language. Oddly enough the official language of Puerto Rico is English. I wonder if their signs are in English or Spanish?
Puerto Rico's road signs are in Spanish (http://www.hawaiihighways.com/Puerto-Rico-page1.html). Except for the oddball exception of speed limits (in mph), they're also all in metric. The transportation department's official website, and its name (Departamento de Transportación y Obras Públicas), are in Spanish with no obvious accommodation for English-speaking website users.
English is clearly the de facto official language of the U.S., even though there is no law specifically saying so (which. IMHO, would be both unnecessary and needlessly complicate the Federal Government's use of other languages as needed). All the laws are at least nominally written in English, except treaties and similar agreements with non-English-speaking nations, and even if there are translations out there only the English version counts. For treaties, etc. written in both our language and the other nation(s)'s, there are provisions for which version controls, something also used more broadly by countries with more than one official language but not the U.S.
Some U.S. states have more than one official language, including at least New Mexico (Spanish) and Hawaii (Hawaiian). Their road signs are in English.
Quote from: oscar on July 14, 2014, 10:38:06 PM
Some U.S. states have more than one official language, including at least New Mexico (Spanish) and Hawaii (Hawaiian). Their road signs are in English.
we have the occasional bilingual sign in English, but I've never seen anything beyond the informative. for example, the Chinatown district in Oakland, CA has street names in English and Chinese.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cosmicadventure.com%2Fg3%2Fvar%2Falbums%2FUSA%2FNorthern-California-2009%2FChinatown%2520street%2520signs%2520in%2520Oakland.jpg%3Fm%3D1329529221&hash=84ce55b442b40644cba7c0f0c878ab821aa77aa0)
Quote from: US 41 on July 14, 2014, 09:13:37 PM
Obviously for political reasons. But you would've thought that back in the 17 and 18 hundreds it would've been made the official language. Several states have made English the official language. Oddly enough the official language of Puerto Rico is English. I wonder if their signs are in English or Spanish?
I think Americans don't use English well enough to make it the official language?
We use sentence fragments, write out the names of centuries improperly, start sentences with prepositions, use question marks at the end of declarative statements, omit commas where called for...
England ought never allow us to officially appropriate their language under such circumstances.
Quote from: US 41 on July 14, 2014, 09:13:37 PM
Obviously for political reasons. But you would've thought that back in the 17 and 18 hundreds it would've been made the official language. Several states have made English the official language. Oddly enough the official language of Puerto Rico is English. I wonder if their signs are in English or Spanish?
Both Spanish and English are official languages in PR but Spanish is primary and used for the government, road signs, and in classrooms. The population has a surprisingly low English fluency rate, although that's changing with the younger generations.
Road signs in PR are Spanish translations of their standard American counterparts. Do Not Enter becomes No Entre and One Way becomes Transito for instance. Interestingly, they use both Spanish text "No Estacione" signs (no parking) but keep slash-P no parking symbol signs, unlike places like Mexico that use slash-E for no parking.
Other US territories such as Guam, American Samoa, and the Northern Mariana Islands (Saipan) have local languages as official as well.
EDIT: According to wikipedia, Texas and NM also recognized Spanish as a de facto official language, as do Louisiana and Maine with French.
:banghead:
Quote from: agentsteel53 on July 14, 2014, 10:49:08 PM
Quote from: oscar on July 14, 2014, 10:38:06 PM
Some U.S. states have more than one official language, including at least New Mexico (Spanish) and Hawaii (Hawaiian). Their road signs are in English.
we have the occasional bilingual sign in English, but I've never seen anything beyond the informative. for example, the Chinatown district in Oakland, CA has street names in English and Chinese.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cosmicadventure.com%2Fg3%2Fvar%2Falbums%2FUSA%2FNorthern-California-2009%2FChinatown%2520street%2520signs%2520in%2520Oakland.jpg%3Fm%3D1329529221&hash=84ce55b442b40644cba7c0f0c878ab821aa77aa0)
Quote from: Pete from Boston on July 14, 2014, 11:03:10 PM
Quote from: US 41 on July 14, 2014, 09:13:37 PM
Obviously for political reasons. But you would've thought that back in the 17 and 18 hundreds it would've been made the official language. Several states have made English the official language. Oddly enough the official language of Puerto Rico is English. I wonder if their signs are in English or Spanish?
I think Americans don't use English well enough to make it the official language?
We use sentence fragments, write out the names of centuries improperly, start sentences with prepositions, use question marks at the end of declarative statements, omit commas where called for...
England ought never allow us to officially appropriate their language under such circumstances.
That's why it's called American English. The UK uses English :)
Because it's Big Government telling people what to do...
Why isn't Cherokee the official language of the United States?
English isn't the official language of England for the same reason - it's de facto the case, and there is no doubt, so why bother making it de jure the case? (I should point out that Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland have English as an official language as there is both doubt as to whether English is totally dominant, and other official languages).
Local authorities, especially London ones, will often publish public-facing documents in non-English languages (Polish, Hindi, Urdu, etc) - though that is less the case now when it comes to TfL - I can't find the Urdu tube map (for residents, given the choice of other languages. had station/line names in English, everything else in Urdu), for instance (pretty sure that's a Ken v Boris thing). There are a few signs for visitors in several languages - at points of entry, etc. And Chinatown in London is bilingual/Chinese only, but is small and the Chinese only signs have pictograms.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on July 14, 2014, 11:03:10 PM
I think Americans don't use English well enough to make it the official language?
We use sentence fragments, write out the names of centuries improperly, start sentences with prepositions, use question marks at the end of declarative statements, omit commas where called for...
England ought never allow us to officially appropriate their language under such circumstances.
If you think America is the only nation who bastardizes her language, please check out some discussion boards or any other media entirely in another language. We are not the sole users and inventors of slang, abbreviations, grammar errors, spelling mistakes, and inappropriate use of style.
But rarely, outside of pidgin/creole-type or slang languages do you see spelling mistakes being seen as 'correct'. But American English has that (neither Aussies nor Kiwis nor Springboks nor South Asians would see 'flavor' as correct English* - just the Americans**). Quebecois doesn't remove vowels from French to make spelling simpler or remove double letters, etc.
The many different dialects of European English employ slang, abbreviations, etc, but they still spell stuff correctly (or try to anyway).
*OK, even Brits sort of do now. Certainly coursemates of mine from the Channel Islands asked whether US English spelling is OK for essays (it is, as long as it is consistent) as that's what they use at work and stuff (and presumably it's been OK in schools for years there, as all of them are old people). Teenagers use such spelling a lot, but they wouldn't get all their SPAG marks in humanities subjects at GCSE and A level, even if consistent. At least in the Humanities (and there's probably a fairly high penalty in English Language for spelling stuff the American way) - Sciences and Foreign Languages you probably would get away with it.
**I believe that includes Bermuda and the Caribbean too, though I'm not certain.
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 15, 2014, 04:16:38 AM
Why isn't Cherokee the official language of the United States?
Bad immigration policies.
Quote from: ET21 on July 15, 2014, 01:04:18 AM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on July 14, 2014, 11:03:10 PM
Quote from: US 41 on July 14, 2014, 09:13:37 PM
Obviously for political reasons. But you would've thought that back in the 17 and 18 hundreds it would've been made the official language. Several states have made English the official language. Oddly enough the official language of Puerto Rico is English. I wonder if their signs are in English or Spanish?
I think Americans don't use English well enough to make it the official language?
We use sentence fragments, write out the names of centuries improperly, start sentences with prepositions, use question marks at the end of declarative statements, omit commas where called for...
England ought never allow us to officially appropriate their language under such circumstances.
That's why it's called American English. The UK uses English :)
What I described is actually called "broken English."
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 15, 2014, 04:16:38 AM
Why isn't Cherokee the official language of the United States?
(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3105/3221907520_4e47544bee_z_d.jpg)
Quote from: formulanone on July 15, 2014, 05:27:44 AM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on July 14, 2014, 11:03:10 PM
I think Americans don't use English well enough to make it the official language?
We use sentence fragments, write out the names of centuries improperly, start sentences with prepositions, use question marks at the end of declarative statements, omit commas where called for...
England ought never allow us to officially appropriate their language under such circumstances.
If you think America is the only nation who bastardizes her language, please check out some discussion boards or any other media entirely in another language. We are not the sole users and inventors of slang, abbreviations, grammar errors, spelling mistakes, and inappropriate use of style.
I would put it to any speaker any language who made a big stink about protecting that language that they themselves had better be protecting it by using it properly or they should shut the hell up.
Let me put it this way: if there was a simple test required to qualify to have English as an official language, one that required the average score of Americans–I'll even go so far as to just say native English-speaking Americans–be at a simple high-school-senior English class level, I have a strong feeling that we noble defenders of the mother tongue would not pass.
There is no official language in the US Constitution as we were made a Democratic Republic. Our founding fathers wanted a nation of freedom and therefore decided that issue to be a custom rather than something decided by law.
Heck, we could have also spoke German too, but being once part of the mighty UK that is how we ended up English.
I would be in favor of designating an official language for governmental purposes, both state and federal. That is, for example, all government forms should be printed in English only. There should be no tax forms printed in Spanish or no "press 1 for English" instructions when you call a government office.
People should be free to use whatever language they want, but it should be understood that if you want to survive in American society, you use the dominant language.
I would never move to, say, France, and expect the government or businesses there to cater to me as an English speaker. I would learn the native language.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on July 15, 2014, 09:37:41 AM
Quote from: formulanone on July 15, 2014, 05:27:44 AM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on July 14, 2014, 11:03:10 PM
I think Americans don't use English well enough to make it the official language?
We use sentence fragments, write out the names of centuries improperly, start sentences with prepositions, use question marks at the end of declarative statements, omit commas where called for...
England ought never allow us to officially appropriate their language under such circumstances.
If you think America is the only nation who bastardizes her language, please check out some discussion boards or any other media entirely in another language. We are not the sole users and inventors of slang, abbreviations, grammar errors, spelling mistakes, and inappropriate use of style.
I would put it to any speaker any language who made a big stink about protecting that language that they themselves had better be protecting it by using it properly or they should shut the hell up.
Let me put it this way: if there was a simple test required to qualify to have English as an official language, one that required the average score of Americans–I'll even go so far as to just say native English-speaking Americans–be at a simple high-school-senior English class level, I have a strong feeling that we noble defenders of the mother tongue would not pass.
I'm guessing you may not realize the humor value of the boldfaced text in the context of the rest of your comment (although I suppose you could debate whether the subjunctive would be included on a "simple" test)! :-D
Quote from: hbelkins on July 15, 2014, 10:39:48 AM
I would be in favor of designating an official language for governmental purposes, both state and federal. That is, for example, all government forms should be printed in English only. There should be no tax forms printed in Spanish or no "press 1 for English" instructions when you call a government office.
People should be free to use whatever language they want, but it should be understood that if you want to survive in American society, you use the dominant language.
I would never move to, say, France, and expect the government or businesses there to cater to me as an English speaker. I would learn the native language.
I agree. With all the people coming up from Mexico and Central America, it seems like the government wants we citizens to learn a second language (Spanish), instead of the Mexicans learning English. I'm in favor of English being the official language for that reason. And to previous comments, who cares if no one speaks English correctly, it should still be the official language.
Don't forget that New Mexico, Arizona, and Texas had sizable Spanish speaking populations before they became part of America in San Antonio, El Paso, Santa Fe, and Tucson. The Spanish language has been part of our national fabric since we chose to invade Mexico. I see oppressing the Spanish language in the southwest as similar to attempts to quash French in Quebec.
Society is more mobile today, so now we see more Spanish speakers in Ohio, but the US has had a large Spanish speaking population since the 1850s, and state, territorial, and federal governments have used it as necessary since that time, but people in Maine wouldn't have noticed it until recently. But this isn't new.
I agree with the idea that an official language is just a government burden. If government needs to use Spanish in high Latino areas, that's fine with me. At the state level, if, say, Virginia wants to make English its official language to protect its culture, that is their prerogative. The feds have to look after the entire country though, including the southwest.
Pressing one for English doesn't bother me. Our country is theoretically bound by its values. Language isn't a value, though I would love to see somebody argue that English is morally superior to Spanish.
Quote from: corco on July 15, 2014, 11:20:27 AM
Don't forget that New Mexico, Arizona, and Texas had sizable Spanish speaking populations before they became part of America in San Antonio, El Paso, Santa Fe, and Tucson. The Spanish language has been part of our national fabric since we chose to invade Mexico. I see oppressing the Spanish language in the southwest as similar to attempts to quash French in Quebec.
Similar for Hawaii, which has some places where Hawaiian remains the main language. And also for tribal reservations and other native lands on the mainland, which not only non-English languages prevailed before being added to the U.S., but also remain sovereign to some extent and so are especially entitled to retain their native languages.
Quote from: hbelkins on July 15, 2014, 10:39:48 AM
I would be in favor of designating an official language for governmental purposes, both state and federal. That is, for example, all government forms should be printed in English only. There should be no tax forms printed in Spanish or no "press 1 for English" instructions when you call a government office.
People should be free to use whatever language they want, but it should be understood that if you want to survive in American society, you use the dominant language.
I would never move to, say, France, and expect the government or businesses there to cater to me as an English speaker. I would learn the native language.
English, however, is not the native language here. It is instead the dominant one of many imported foreign languages.
If being the dominant foreign language means it should be the official language, then why the heck hasn't the dominant linguistic group made it so through the legislative process? Probably because at best it's not that important, and at worst it is discriminatory and jingoistic.
Quote from: US 41 on July 15, 2014, 11:02:29 AMI agree. With all the people coming up from Mexico and Central America, it seems like the government wants we citizens to learn a second language (Spanish), instead of the Mexicans learning English. I'm in favor of English being the official language for that reason.
The government has
always wanted us to learn a second language. Everywhere I've ever lived has had a foreign language requirement in public schools, as did my (public) university.
QuoteAnd to previous comments, who cares if no one speaks English correctly, it should still be the official language.
To all those who preach "learn English," I reply, "you first."
The way I see it is that I'm an American and I shouldn't have to learn a second language.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on July 14, 2014, 11:03:10 PM
I think Americans don't use English well enough to make it the official language?
We use sentence fragments, write out the names of centuries improperly, start sentences with prepositions, use question marks at the end of declarative statements, omit commas where called for...
England ought never allow us to officially appropriate their language under such circumstances.
I think we missed the irony here.
Quote from: hbelkins on July 15, 2014, 10:39:48 AM
I would be in favor of designating an official language for governmental purposes, both state and federal. That is, for example, all government forms should be printed in English only. There should be no tax forms printed in Spanish or no "press 1 for English" instructions when you call a government office.
People should be free to use whatever language they want, but it should be understood that if you want to survive in American society, you use the dominant language.
I would never move to, say, France, and expect the government or businesses there to cater to me as an English speaker. I would learn the native language.
I personally have no issues with government forms and services being available in multiple languages. Someone who is working to learn English or even people who may be conversational in English would still be much more fluent and comfortable in their native language. Government services should be available to all tax payers regardless of their language abilities.
In the case you brought up of tax forms, don't we want people to pay accurate taxes even if English is their second language? Those forms are hard enough to figure out without throwing a language barrier in the mix.
Also, please keep in mind that there are a very large number of US Citizens (by birth - not immigrants) in Puerto Rico who don't speak any English. The federal government owes the same services to them that they do to someone from the mainland. They are our fellow Americans after all.
Quote from: US 41 on July 15, 2014, 12:25:32 PM
The way I see it is that I'm an American and I shouldn't have to learn a second language.
What else shouldn't you have to learn? Science from other countries? Non-US literature? My high school didn't provide for negotiating the curriculum. Maybe yours was different.
Quote from: Big John on July 15, 2014, 12:28:45 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on July 14, 2014, 11:03:10 PM
I think Americans don't use English well enough to make it the official language?
We use sentence fragments, write out the names of centuries improperly, start sentences with prepositions, use question marks at the end of declarative statements, omit commas where called for...
England ought never allow us to officially appropriate their language under such circumstances.
I think we missed the irony here.
This was in response to the previous post that included a declarative sentence "I wonder..." with a question mark.
I realize harping on grammar is somewhere between discouraged and outright banned, but it's central to the conversation here.
Quote from: US 41 on July 15, 2014, 12:25:32 PM
The way I see it is that I'm an American and I shouldn't have to learn a second language.
Who is forcing you to learn a new language?
Then don't! You are free to do so.
As for language requirements, Spanish has overtaken French in most of the US just due to demand. Americans are more likely to encounter a situation where Spanish helps than French, so we've seen that shift.
As for why language requirements exist-most folks never learn enough to be fluent, but a year of a foreign language is good for your own brain development as you learn to think, and actually helps people become better English speakers because learning grammar in another language gives folks a better feel for why grammar is the way it is, giving them the tools to look at their English in a more technical light. Also expands vocabulary, as learning a romance language teaches some root words that expand ones knowledge of English.
Quote from: realjd on July 15, 2014, 12:33:37 PM
Quote from: US 41 on July 15, 2014, 12:25:32 PM
The way I see it is that I'm an American and I shouldn't have to learn a second language.
Who is forcing you to learn a new language?
The English-only zealots, I presume?
I never had any desire to learn a foreign language, and I'm grateful that such was not required either in my high school or in my college degree requirements. I had a short course in Spanish as a sixth-grader, but I don't remember why, or what class it was a part of. About all I remember from that course is "como esta usted? Muy bien."
Quote from: corco on July 15, 2014, 11:20:27 AM
Don't forget that New Mexico, Arizona, and Texas had sizable Spanish speaking populations before they became part of America in San Antonio, El Paso, Santa Fe, and Tucson. The Spanish language has been part of our national fabric since we chose to invade Mexico. I see oppressing the Spanish language in the southwest as similar to attempts to quash French in Quebec.
Society is more mobile today, so now we see more Spanish speakers in Ohio, but the US has had a large Spanish speaking population since the 1850s, and state, territorial, and federal governments have used it as necessary since that time, but people in Maine wouldn't have noticed it until recently. But this isn't new.
I agree with the idea that an official language is just a government burden. If government needs to use Spanish in high Latino areas, that's fine with me. At the state level, if, say, Virginia wants to make English its official language to protect its culture, that is their prerogative. The feds have to look after the entire country though, including the southwest.
Pressing one for English doesn't bother me. Our country is theoretically bound by its values. Language isn't a value, though I would love to see somebody argue that English is morally superior to Spanish.
When did we invade Mexico? Oh didn't we purchase a portion of Mexico? Didn't the Mexicans push the Indians out of power in the region? People always forget that part when they say that the US stole Mexico. Mexico stole the land from the Spanish and Indians.
The Mexican-American War did happen, which because we won allowed us to buy a portion of Mexico, but they weren't exactly happy to sell. The Gadsden Purchase later was peaceful.
Saying Mexicans stole Mexico from the Spanish is like saying we stole America from the British.
Yes, at the end of the day we all stole from the Indians on the entire continent, which is why I compared it to Quebec. There was a long, well established culture of Spanish speakers in the region, and after we acquired it we didn't try to change that, so it is odd to come in now and try to do that. The "We speak English in America!" idea is really fairly new.
To be fair, St. Augustine, Florida was speaking Spanish for a good 180 years until a treaty with the British around 1700 or so.
Quote from: corco on July 15, 2014, 12:34:08 PM
Also expands vocabulary, as learning a romance language teaches some root words that expand ones knowledge of English.
I noticed this as well; two years of a foreign language was required for a high school diploma, although struggling students were given the option for a single year, if they tested poorly or in danger of dropping out. But learning Spanish opened up my vocabulary greatly, especially those with Latin roots, which was quite helpful in understanding unfamiliar English (or other Romance language) words.
Admittedly, my grammar is far from perfect. I think I'd score well on a high-school level English grammar or spelling test, but ask me to diagram a sentence or explain the meanings of stuff like subjunctive mood, past perfect tense, or stop making common "visual" typos (from/form, for example) that I frequently make, and I'd probably suck harder than a thousand collapsed stars. I think my run-on train wreck of the above sentence proves it.
Quote from: corco on July 15, 2014, 01:25:58 PM
The Mexican-American War did happen, which because we won allowed us to buy a portion of Mexico, but they weren't exactly happy to sell. The Gadsden Purchase later was peaceful.
Saying Mexicans stole Mexico from the Spanish is like saying we stole America from the British.
Yes, at the end of the day we all stole from the Indians on the entire continent, which is why I compared it to Quebec. There was a long, well established culture of Spanish speakers in the region, and after we acquired it we didn't try to change that, so it is odd to come in now and try to do that. The "We speak English in America!" idea is really fairly new.
The war did occur because the Mexicans wanted it.
Quote from: Avalanchez71 on July 15, 2014, 01:59:55 PM
Quote from: corco on July 15, 2014, 01:25:58 PM
The Mexican-American War did happen, which because we won allowed us to buy a portion of Mexico, but they weren't exactly happy to sell. The Gadsden Purchase later was peaceful.
Saying Mexicans stole Mexico from the Spanish is like saying we stole America from the British.
Yes, at the end of the day we all stole from the Indians on the entire continent, which is why I compared it to Quebec. There was a long, well established culture of Spanish speakers in the region, and after we acquired it we didn't try to change that, so it is odd to come in now and try to do that. The "We speak English in America!" idea is really fairly new.
The war did occur because the Mexicans wanted it.
I don't think that's necessarily true- it is in some ways but not others.
Either way, it's irrelevant. I'm not saying the US "stole" or did not steal those portions of Mexico. What I think we both can agree we did do was acquire those portions of Mexico.
When we acquired them, we acquired a sizable Spanish speaking population that had existed for over 200 years- Santa Fe is older than Jamestown, so Santa Fe has still been part of Spain/Mexico longer than it has been part of the United States. After these lands became part of the US, we did open those areas up to Anglo settlers, but we didn't make any efforts to make the people that had already been there speak English. New Mexico is really an interesting ball of wax- it was isolated from most of Mexico and then from the US, as the population center was pretty far north in Santa Fe. There's still a sizable chunk of old Spaniards that never interbred with the natives (as with most of Mexico) that speak a unique style of 17th century Spanish.
Texas is a bit of a different ball of wax- Spanish speakers and English speakers lived fairly side by side. I'm sure there was some tension there, but they were all Texans, and that was their loyalty. The border in that area was fairly porous anyway- plenty of Anglo landowners lived in Mexico and spoke English too.
Arizona was a bit less inhabited- the part of Arizona we got in the Mexican Cession had basically nobody in it but the Navajo. When we bought Tucson with the Gadsden Purchase, though, we inherited another centuries-old, Spanish speaking city. We made no effort to try to make Tucsonans try to speak English, but we allowed Anglo settlers to come to the area, so the language was introduced slowly.
Tucson, El Paso, and most of New Mexico are probably the most bilingual areas. Nobody in Tucson who has lived there for a while complains about Spanish - Spanish is engrained in that city's history far moreso than English, and it's well accepted that there are many folks that don't speak English, and these aren't all recent immigrants either. A person can get by in Tucson just fine without English, and a good number of multigenerational families still don't speak English because there's been no reason to learn. I haven't lived in Santa Fe, but it strikes me as being very similar.
I just...folks who have this engrained notion that this is an English speaking country and we need to speak English and Spanish is the language of illegal immigrants- they should do some research, visit the southwest, and then re-consider their opinions. History shows that as long as we've had the American Southwest, we've had a ton of Spanish speakers. The Spanish language is part of America, and it has been for over 200 years now. Folks in the northeast just didn't have cause to notice it until recently.
Mexico started the war because they didn't really recognize Texan independence. When the US annexed Texas, Mexico said that Texas was still theirs. Then the fight was on. We probably could've taken over Mexico after that war because we won almost every battle.
IMHO,
- The "there were lots of Spanish speaking people in * before the US took it over" line is mostly historical revisionism, if used to prove the point that Spanish speaking people in the US are deserving of some sort of prividge or accomodation. Fact is probably 98% of Spanish speaking peoplein the US today are NOT genetic decendants of those people, and various state governments, and the Treaty of Guadulupe-Hidalgo, accomodated those people anyway.
- More broadly, the neat little maps we all saw in school that showed the US acquiring various places from Spain/Mexico, the UK/Canada, France, and Russia are BS. All political power comes from the consent of the governed. The vast majority of people, which is to say the "Indians", in those areas had no idea they were part of any European empire. The European cessions to the US are best viewed as similar to a Quit Claim deed. They became part of the US de facto when the areas were later populated by people who wished to be governed by the US. You are telling me that the Mandans were French? Or that the Utes were Mexican? Or the Eskimos Russian? A silly concept.
- The US, and similar nations like Canada and Australia, from before their independence until just a few years ago, pursued a policy of encouraging rapid learning of the national language ( or one of them in Canada), as the ticket to economic and political inclusion. A good policy. Things like government forms in Spanish, pugunta dos, and all of that are bad policy, because the end result is one, and eventually dozens of different groups who have no way of communicating with one another. Imagine if you, today, spoke only the language of your ancestors.
- "Hispanic" is undefinable. Is a Spanish person from Spain, Hispanic? And if he is, why should he be treated any different than a recent immigrant from Poland, Vietnam, or Zambia? Is Rich Rodriquez Hispanic? Is some white kid from Georgia who gets a MA in Peruvian litterature? And so what? While one may, or may not, argue for governmental privilidge for identifable racial groups, speaking a language is not an ethnicity.
Quote- The "there were lots of Spanish speaking people in * before the US took it over" line is mostly historical revisionism, if used to prove the point that Spanish speaking people in the US are deserving of some sort of prividge or accomodation. Fact is probably 98% of Spanish speaking peoplein the US today are NOT genetic decendants of those people, and various state governments, and the Treaty of Guadulupe-Hidalgo, accomodated those people anyway.
I think 98% is probably a pretty low estimate- I'd put it closer at 90%, but we're both guessing. That said, I'm not sure that matters. Tucson, El Paso, and Santa Fe have continuously had a large number of Spanish speakers, regardless of their origin, since the 1600s. While those people may not be genetically the same, I have to assume that part of the draw of those Spanish speakers to those cities is the fact that there's already a lot of Spanish speakers. There's cultural momentum there that preserves the language, and possibly does warrant some special status. Some of these folks are definitely illegal immigrants, but most aren't in these areas. The U.S. has done nothing to try to stop this, so saying out of the blue that English is now the official language would be an insult to legal immigrants who moved to a Spanish speaking city with the intent to live in America, a country that didn't used to discriminate based on language.
Quote- More broadly, the neat little maps we all saw in school that showed the US acquiring various places from Spain/Mexico, the UK/Canada, France, and Russia are BS. All political power comes from the consent of the governed. The vast majority of people, which is to say the "Indians", in those areas had no idea they were part of any European empire. The European cessions to the US are best viewed as similar to a Quit Claim deed. They became part of the US de facto when the areas were later populated by people who wished to be governed by the US. You are telling me that the Mandans were French? Or that the Utes were Mexican? Or the Eskimos Russian? A silly concept.
This is a good point. The question, I guess, becomes "Does accepting the US as your government mean that you accept the English language?" I'm not sure that's true, especially in 1850. Certainly the US government never specifically said that this was the case.
Actually, English is the official language. What language is all our laws published in? Congress and the Supreme Court do everything in English.
Quote from: bandit957 on July 15, 2014, 08:39:16 PM
Actually, English is the official language. What language is all our laws published in? Congress and the Supreme Court do everything in English.
You need to learn the difference between
de facto and
de jure.
The reason why English isn't the official language of the US is because you'd have to have a bureaucracy define all of the official words, and from what I can tell, no one wants to have to deal with another bureaucracy in the government.
Visiting Quebec as someone who speaks English but not French has been more than enough firmly to convince me that laws governing what language things may or may not be written in are dumb. Before you go around telling people that the language they speak is unacceptable and they need to learn yours, try being on the receiving end of such an attitude and see how you like it.
If there is demand for service in any given language, no reason why it shouldn't be made available as a legitimate business decision.
Explore the five boroughs of New York City and in addition to English and Spanish you will see signs in Chinese, Korean, Italian, Polish, Russian, Hebrew, Arabic, Hindi, Thai...
I think that's actually kind of awesome and would hate to see it quashed. Gives the city a lot of character.
Quote from: bandit957 on July 15, 2014, 08:39:16 PM
Actually, English is the official language. What language is all our laws published in? Congress and the Supreme Court do everything in English.
Big difference between
de facto (which English is in the US) and
de jure (which English and Hawai'ian are in the State of Hawai'i). There is no
de jure official language for the US as a whole. Individual states do have them.
Quote from: 1995hoo on July 15, 2014, 08:43:43 PM
Quote from: bandit957 on July 15, 2014, 08:39:16 PM
Actually, English is the official language. What language is all our laws published in? Congress and the Supreme Court do everything in English.
You need to learn the difference between de facto and de jure.
Does he really, though?
If a declaration were issued tomorrow that a process would begin toward making English the official language of the United States, there would be prolonged debate as to what "official language" means in practical terms. In our current political climate, this would take years.
If such a measure were enacted, probably very little of the multilingualism that occurs now would go away anytime soon, if at all. Barring extreme Québec-style laws, which are probably unconstitutional here anyway, social and economic commerce that takes place in non-English languages now would likely continue unchanged, because demand would continue to dictate that they do. That is what the market wants.
As far as government no longer printing additional forms, this cost savings will be eaten up by the cost of language enforcement. Good morning, new layer of bureacracy.
Home Depot or whatever will still make you press "1" for English because it is in their business interest to do so (and probably unconstitutional to prohibit), and just like now, this will cost you
almost no time and effort.There would, of course, be a proliferation of fly-by-night English-language schools, probably predatorily targeting immigrants like television-commercial lawyers and check-cashers today target the poor and unemployed.
The difference between
de jure and
de facto, in other words, is an awful lot of money being spent in different places than it is now. People are still going to communicate how they want to communicate.
I voted No. I don't really have much to add to the arguments above, except a few points:
* Designating a language as official for cultural preservation reasons makes the most sense when the language is endangered through continuing shrinkage of the pool of native speakers. This is the case with minority languages like Irish and Scottish Gaelic, Welsh, Breton, Romansh, etc. When the language being given this official status is already the dominant language, discrimination has to be suspected as part of the motivation. In Québec the situation is not simple since, although French was the mother language of the majority when Bill 22 was passed (1974), English was the language of business and there was a long-standing tradition of French-Canadians being locked out of the power structures in their own province.
* Suppose we made English the official language of the US (ignoring issues related to accents, dialects, the British/American divide, etc.). What would that mean exactly? We could have a government office charged with the responsibility of compiling an official dictionary and grammar of the English language, but that doesn't necessarily have to be the case (there is no direct equivalent of the Academie française in Wales, for example, although there is a Welsh Language Board whose function is to promote the use of Welsh). We could get rid of the Voting Rights Act requirement to provide election materials in minority languages when speakers of those languages comprise 10% or more of the population (a requirement that resulted in Arizona and Alaska becoming the only preclearance states outside the old Confederacy before the Supreme Court did away with preclearance), but that wouldn't necessarily have to happen. If you support English as a (federal) official language for the US, then exactly what do you want the concomitant policies to be?
* Notwithstanding English not being de jure an official US language at the federal level, isn't fluency in English tested as part of the naturalization process? If a would-be citizen chooses to naturalize in a US jurisdiction where English is the minority language (like Puerto Rico), what happens then?
A point most people forget: it usually takes until the second generation of American born children for a "native" language to disappear culturally from an immigrant family. For instance: when my great grandparents came here from Italy (generation zero), they spoke no English. They learned enough to get by, but mostly associated with other Italian Americans and lived in the Little Italy neighborhood of Baltimore. They had children, including my grandfather (first generation American), who knew Italian to communicate with his family but learned English in school and spoke English in most areas of his life. He was raised in America and wanted to fit into mainstream culture. He had an Italian first name but went by an American nickname (which he legally added to his name as an adult). Sure, he lived in Maryland, which has lots of Catholics, but his family was from Southern Italy, so they were "different" and the "wrong type of European" so they were on the lower end of the white totem pole. By the time my dad was born (generation 2) and was raised entirely in English. All of the native Italians were getting old and died when my father was young. My dad learned some Italian words, but nowhere near enough to speak or read fluently. Anything remotely Italian now culturally in our family is family tradition, which is a hybrid of Italian-American ideals and a far cry from native Italy.
My point: unless entirely secluded from the general population for multiple generations, most immigrant families will eventually speak English. The exception would be if you lived in a region of the country where a huge chunk of the population still speaks that language, which at this point has historically been happening for centuries.
iPhone
Quote from: Laura on July 16, 2014, 08:17:12 AM
A point most people forget: it usually takes until the second generation of American born children for a "native" language to disappear culturally from an immigrant family. For instance: when my great grandparents came here from Italy (generation zero), they spoke no English. They learned enough to get by, but mostly associated with other Italian Americans and lived in the Little Italy neighborhood of Baltimore. They had children, including my grandfather (first generation American), who knew Italian to communicate with his family but learned English in school and spoke English in most areas of his life. He was raised in America and wanted to fit into mainstream culture. He had an Italian first name but went by an American nickname (which he legally added to his name as an adult). Sure, he lived in Maryland, which has lots of Catholics, but his family was from Southern Italy, so they were "different" and the "wrong type of European" so they were on the lower end of the white totem pole. By the time my dad was born (generation 2) and was raised entirely in English. All of the native Italians were getting old and died when my father was young. My dad learned some Italian words, but nowhere near enough to speak or read fluently. Anything remotely Italian now culturally in our family is family tradition, which is a hybrid of Italian-American ideals and a far cry from native Italy.
My point: unless entirely secluded from the general population for multiple generations, most immigrant families will eventually speak English. The exception would be if you lived in a region of the country where a huge chunk of the population still speaks that language, which at this point has historically been happening for centuries.
Miami is a good example of this. The older Cuban population still has a number of folks who don't speak English but their kids and especially their grandkids are all bilingual. Spanish is definitely the primary language down there and I don't see that changing but I've rarely, if ever, run into a true language barrier.
Quote from: Laura on July 16, 2014, 08:17:12 AMMy point: unless entirely secluded from the general population for multiple generations, most immigrant families will eventually speak English. The exception would be if you lived in a region of the country where a huge chunk of the population still speaks that language, which at this point has historically been happening for centuries.
This situation also isn't as rare as some might think. My maternal ancestors, all of whom were native-born Americans going back at least to my great-grandparents' generation, spoke German instead of or in addition to English, and were schooled in German until the US entered World War I and there were quite conscious efforts to intimidate German-Americans into not speaking German. (As an example, Arthur Capper, who was then governor of Kansas, threatened to sic the militia on the German-American community in the state if there was any protest against the war. This is why I will vigorously oppose any form of posthumous recognition for him, such as adding his likeness to Statuary Hall at the Capitol.)
S.I. Hayakawa, who served as a US senator from California and famously opposed official bilingualism, used to remark that bilingualism was good for individuals but bad for the state. My maternal grandparents, who remembered the strain of having to learn to speak only English at school and in other public settings after World War I, did not believe that bilingualism was good even for the individual, and opted to teach their children English only while reserving German for family arguments which the children were not to understand even if they could overhear them.
Part of their reasoning was that bilingual German-English speakers of their generation had difficulty drawing distinctions between German and English usage in ordinary conversation. For example, they would often say "Leave it be" instead of "Let it be," since the same verb (
lassen) is used for both
let and
leave in German. They were farmers, but recognized that the general trend at the time was toward urbanization, and they wanted their children to be able to present themselves as educated English speakers.
German continues to survive as a minority language in the US (cf.
Texasdeutsch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_German)) but is very much endangered.
My wife's family immigrated from Hungary (except for her two brothers, who were born here). She spoke solely Hungarian until she started school at age 5. If you met us, you wouldn't know she's a naturalized citizen or that English is, technically, her "second language" because, practically speaking, it's long been her first language. Her father once told her not to speak Hungarian in public because she speaks it like a little kid–so I guess she stopped learning much Hungarian once she started school. But if you met her father (well, if he were still alive, that is) you'd have known instantly he was an immigrant because he always had a very thick accent and spoke much more slowly.
There's no question kids pick up another language and assimilate into another culture far more easily than adults do.
There's elementary school classes in London that have 20 kids and about 13 first languages, none of them English, when they start. These classes, I gather, are a struggle at first, but as children are good at learning languages when they need to, they pick it up quickly and as they can't speak their native tongue in school and be understood by more than a couple of people in class, conversations on the playground start to happen in English. The issue is the parents and their English, as they aren't being taught it...
It's occasionally still a problem at Junior High Level that British-born (even 3rd generation) children aren't good at English as they only get exposed to it at school, but normally only when you have a large community of one language (and normally when that community is Pakistani or Bangladeshi in origin).
I believe that Welsh schools, whether Welsh-language or English-language, have to learn both (a problem with bilingual countries which are bilingual to protect minority groups) up to age 16. In the English-speaking areas, Welsh teaching is often pretty poor.
Quote from: english si on July 15, 2014, 06:02:38 AMTeenagers use such spelling a lot, but they wouldn't get all their SPAG marks in humanities subjects at GCSE and A level, even if consistent.
and you don't think British English has a lot of nonstandard items in it. just look at that sentence. so spaggy!
Quote from: agentsteel53 on July 16, 2014, 01:34:12 PM
Quote from: english si on July 15, 2014, 06:02:38 AMTeenagers use such spelling a lot, but they wouldn't get all their SPAG marks in humanities subjects at GCSE and A level, even if consistent.
and you don't think British English has a lot of nonstandard items in it. just look at that sentence. so spaggy!
I'll think about that in the Loo.
Quote from: US71 on July 16, 2014, 03:06:05 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on July 16, 2014, 01:34:12 PM
Quote from: english si on July 15, 2014, 06:02:38 AMTeenagers use such spelling a lot, but they wouldn't get all their SPAG marks in humanities subjects at GCSE and A level, even if consistent.
and you don't think British English has a lot of nonstandard items in it. just look at that sentence. so spaggy!
I'll think about that in the Loo.
Looing's ace, mate.
Quote from: realjd on July 15, 2014, 12:33:37 PM
Quote from: US 41 on July 15, 2014, 12:25:32 PM
The way I see it is that I'm an American and I shouldn't have to learn a second language.
Who is forcing you to learn a new language?
My high school.
Quote from: billtm on July 16, 2014, 11:57:48 PMMy high school.
Then times have changed. When I was going to high school, foreign languages were elective, but students who were attempting what was called a "college-preparatory curriculum" (which was not a formal requirement) were strongly urged to have at least two years of a foreign language. I took four years of Latin.
Quote from: formulanone on July 16, 2014, 05:47:43 PMLooing's ace, mate.
G'day to you too, you aussie!
For the record - SPAG = Spelling, Punctuation and Grammar. I was told not to bother with them, except in English.
Quote from: billtm on July 16, 2014, 11:57:48 PM
Quote from: realjd on July 15, 2014, 12:33:37 PM
Quote from: US 41 on July 15, 2014, 12:25:32 PM
The way I see it is that I'm an American and I shouldn't have to learn a second language.
Who is forcing you to learn a new language?
My high school.
That's the attitude that see American tourists get talked about behind their back across the world - and not just in snobby Paris, but even among the natives in London who can't speak other languages than English in a thick Cockney/Seff Lon'on/Estuary accent.
And as I pointed out, English as the official language would do this to non-English speakers...
Quote from: J N Winkler on July 17, 2014, 12:08:42 AMI took four years of Latin.
That's the least surprising JNW sentence ever! A perfect match ;)
I had to do two years of French and German at secondary school, but only had to do one for a further two years. If they (foolishly) had given me another elective, my dislike of the French French teachers being in-your-face about how France is better would have probably have been overcome, meaning I did both languages (along with about 30% of my year). However this dislike had overcome my inferior German skills (as I had quite a bit previous French learning), so I went with that on my language elective. I'd have carried on with German (though everyone but me and my teacher would have been surprised until Results Day where the A revealed that I can do languages, but I'm not great at active skills like writing and speaking), but having a limit to four subjects (I could have done a fifth) and a lack of interest from my peers meant it was never to be.
'Why isn't english the official language of the United States?' Because it will be superseded by Spanish in the next century (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.skyscrapercity.com%2Fimages%2Fsmilies%2Ftroll.gif&hash=9db891b0ab7310f1953b0474d5855692351a3ca5).
Besides that, there's a grammar mistake in the poll.
Quote from: J N Winkler on July 17, 2014, 12:08:42 AM
Quote from: billtm on July 16, 2014, 11:57:48 PMMy high school.
Then times have changed. When I was going to high school, foreign languages were elective, but students who were attempting what was called a "college-preparatory curriculum" (which was not a formal requirement) were strongly urged to have at least two years of a foreign language. I took four years of Latin.
It isn't new to me. We had two years required at my public school–four years recommended–a few decades ago now. Also two years required in junior high.
College (again, state school) required two passing semesters or testing out (thanks to the six years of preparation, I was able to test out).
Quote from: billtm on July 16, 2014, 11:57:48 PM
Quote from: realjd on July 15, 2014, 12:33:37 PM
Quote from: US 41 on July 15, 2014, 12:25:32 PM
The way I see it is that I'm an American and I shouldn't have to learn a second language.
Who is forcing you to learn a new language?
My high school.
US41 was saying he shouldn't be forced to learn Spanish to get by in society. Having a foreign language requirement for school is different. For one, it doesn't specify what language. I'll bet you have at least Spanish and French to choose from, if not German and Latin as well. And secondly, even if you don't become fluent (or even conversational) in a foreign language, studying one is a valuable academic experience and will help you better understand English grammar.
I took Latin in HS and Spanish in college and am glad I did.
Quote from: realjd on July 16, 2014, 10:26:09 AM
Quote from: Laura on July 16, 2014, 08:17:12 AM
A point most people forget: it usually takes until the second generation of American born children for a "native" language to disappear culturally from an immigrant family. For instance: when my great grandparents came here from Italy (generation zero), they spoke no English. They learned enough to get by, but mostly associated with other Italian Americans and lived in the Little Italy neighborhood of Baltimore. They had children, including my grandfather (first generation American), who knew Italian to communicate with his family but learned English in school and spoke English in most areas of his life. He was raised in America and wanted to fit into mainstream culture. He had an Italian first name but went by an American nickname (which he legally added to his name as an adult). Sure, he lived in Maryland, which has lots of Catholics, but his family was from Southern Italy, so they were "different" and the "wrong type of European" so they were on the lower end of the white totem pole. By the time my dad was born (generation 2) and was raised entirely in English. All of the native Italians were getting old and died when my father was young. My dad learned some Italian words, but nowhere near enough to speak or read fluently. Anything remotely Italian now culturally in our family is family tradition, which is a hybrid of Italian-American ideals and a far cry from native Italy.
My point: unless entirely secluded from the general population for multiple generations, most immigrant families will eventually speak English. The exception would be if you lived in a region of the country where a huge chunk of the population still speaks that language, which at this point has historically been happening for centuries.
Miami is a good example of this. The older Cuban population still has a number of folks who don't speak English but their kids and especially their grandkids are all bilingual. Spanish is definitely the primary language down there and I don't see that changing but I've rarely, if ever, run into a true language barrier.
I got along just fine using English only in Miami. However, I sometimes had to say no habla, no comprende.
Quote from: realjd on July 17, 2014, 08:44:18 AM
Quote from: billtm on July 16, 2014, 11:57:48 PM
Quote from: realjd on July 15, 2014, 12:33:37 PM
Quote from: US 41 on July 15, 2014, 12:25:32 PM
The way I see it is that I'm an American and I shouldn't have to learn a second language.
Who is forcing you to learn a new language?
My high school.
US41 was saying he shouldn't be forced to learn Spanish to get by in society. Having a foreign language requirement for school is different. For one, it doesn't specify what language. I'll bet you have at least Spanish and French to choose from, if not German and Latin as well. And secondly, even if you don't become fluent (or even conversational) in a foreign language, studying one is a valuable academic experience and will help you better understand English grammar.
I took Latin in HS and Spanish in college and am glad I did.
To imply that one can't get by in society without knowing Spanish is a stretch, to put it kindly. That implication makes it sound like "It's not fair that those people write and say things I can't read. I'm entitled to know what they're saying!" because other than things like that, you're not currently being prevented from a fulfilling, normal life.
And FYI, I realize this is mostly about personal convenience, but in a shorter time than it'll take to get English made the official language, you could develop a good working knowledge of Spanish. Your choice.
Quote from: J N Winkler on July 17, 2014, 12:08:42 AM
Quote from: billtm on July 16, 2014, 11:57:48 PMMy high school.
Then times have changed. When I was going to high school, foreign languages were elective, but students who were attempting what was called a "college-preparatory curriculum" (which was not a formal requirement) were strongly urged to have at least two years of a foreign language. I took four years of Latin.
When I was growing up, Fairfax County offered two diplomas, a 20-credit version and a 22-credit version. The 20-credit version was aimed more at people who were focusing on vocational courses and the 22-credit version was aimed more at people heading for college. To get the 22-credit diploma you either had to take at least three years of one foreign language or at least two years each of two foreign languages. I took five years of Latin (one in junior high, the other four in high school) and I then made the mistake of taking a further semester's worth in college despite having placed out of the UVA foreign language requirement via test scores.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on July 17, 2014, 07:02:28 AM
Quote from: J N Winkler on July 17, 2014, 12:08:42 AM
Quote from: billtm on July 16, 2014, 11:57:48 PMMy high school.
Then times have changed. When I was going to high school, foreign languages were elective, but students who were attempting what was called a "college-preparatory curriculum" (which was not a formal requirement) were strongly urged to have at least two years of a foreign language. I took four years of Latin.
It isn't new to me. We had two years required at my public school–four years recommended–a few decades ago now. Also two years required in junior high.
College (again, state school) required two passing semesters or testing out (thanks to the six years of preparation, I was able to test out).
When I was in college, it was three semesters of foreign language. Then it was changed to FOUR semesters.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on July 17, 2014, 07:02:28 AM
Quote from: J N Winkler on July 17, 2014, 12:08:42 AM
Quote from: billtm on July 16, 2014, 11:57:48 PMMy high school.
Then times have changed. When I was going to high school, foreign languages were elective, but students who were attempting what was called a "college-preparatory curriculum" (which was not a formal requirement) were strongly urged to have at least two years of a foreign language. I took four years of Latin.
It isn't new to me. We had two years required at my public school–four years recommended–a few decades ago now. Also two years required in junior high.
College (again, state school) required two passing semesters or testing out (thanks to the six years of preparation, I was able to test out).
My high school requires either three years of one language or four years of two different languages. For example, one could either take three years of French or take two years of French followed by two years of Spanish.
Where I went to college, the German I took in High School satisified the requirements for my BS degree. But some college foreign language (don't know how much) was required for a BA degree.
I took Latin for my foreign language. While it greatly expanded my vocabulary, it has little practical use.
Quote from: The Nature Boy on July 17, 2014, 04:34:58 PM
I took Latin for my foreign language. While it greatly expanded my vocabulary, it has little practical use.
I know a fellow who is constantly being asked for translations, usually for mottos.
Quote from: J N Winkler on July 16, 2014, 11:09:31 AM
Quote from: Laura on July 16, 2014, 08:17:12 AMMy point: unless entirely secluded from the general population for multiple generations, most immigrant families will eventually speak English. The exception would be if you lived in a region of the country where a huge chunk of the population still speaks that language, which at this point has historically been happening for centuries.
This situation also isn't as rare as some might think.
Indeed. My grandparents came here not knowing English. My grandfather learned enough to get by as a construction worker but my grandmother learned none for a solid 25 years living in the US because she had no need. Her family, her neighbors, the person behind the counter at the store down the street, etc. all spoke Italian. What forced her to start learning English was when my parents started dating, since my mother and her family didn't speak Italian. Even after that, my grandmother's English was very rudimentary and she would still always speak to my father in Italian. My parents attempted to raise me bilingual, but it didn't really work out and my understanding of Italian today is even more rudimentary than my grandmother's understanding of English was. I do have a lot of appreciation for my Italian heritage but really, I am American much more than anything else.
So, chalk it up to another case of there being nothing new under the sun. My ancestors faced the same discrimination 50-100 years ago that immigrants from Latin America face today, for many of the same reasons. Yawn.
As for foreign language being a requirement in high school, they do that because college admissions boards usually look for it and high schools don't want their students to graduate unable to get into college. Most people don't become competent speakers of the language they study, but that isn't really the point - the point is that when you study a language you aren't a native speaker of, it forces you to deconstruct it logically and it gives you a much greater appreciation for how language works. This in turn improves your writing, speaking, and listening skills in your native language.
For this reason I absolutely support requiring high school students to study a foreign language, although I really do wish schools would broaden their choices. My high school offered Latin, Spanish, French, and Italian - all Romance languages, so really a rather undiverse set of options. Although I suppose public schools can only offer so much with funds available and it isn't practical for them to cover anywhere near all the world's major languages.
I was not required to take any foreign language classes in college, and I did not... although I could have, and it would have counted towards my elective requirements.
My high school offered only Spanish and Latin. The bare minimum seems to be to just offer Spanish. I assume because it's easier to find teachers who can teach high school level Spanish.
And I once met a dude whose grandmother only spoke Navajo. Of course, she'd probably call this thread BS.
I have nothing more than long-forgotten high school Spanish. I believe the foreign language regents is required in New York. My district offered a choice of Spanish, French, and German for those who started in 6th grade but for those who got held back to 8th grade like me, Spanish was the only one (a pity, French would be much more useful for me due to NY's proximity to Quebec). At the high school level, Russian and Latin were available as electives but otherwise didn't count towards graduation.
I can't say I got better at grammar or language... everything was essentially rote memorization of vocabulary and verb conjugations (they claim that romance languages have less exceptions than English, but it sure didn't feel like it!).
I'm dropping in with my own two cents as usual . . . My high school offered English (what?), Spanish, German, French, Japanese, Korean, and ASL (which counts in the Puyallup School District as a foreign language).
You are required to take two years of a foreign language, but they suggest three.
There are no options for foreign languages before grade.
Quote from: vdeane on July 17, 2014, 10:22:49 PM
I can't say I got better at grammar or language... everything was essentially rote memorization of vocabulary and verb conjugations (they claim that romance languages have less exceptions than English, but it sure didn't feel like it!).
That's the fault of your teacher using a bad teaching method, equivalent to teaching history by forcing the memorization of dates or geography by the memorization of capitals and population figures. The facts are an intellectual curio you can carry around, but you haven't learned much because you don't know the context of the facts you have to learn. (Knowing New Delhi is the capital of India doesn't tell you much about India at all, knowing the date of a battle doesn't tell you why it was important or what its causes or effects were, and knowing that "bufanda" is Spanish for "scarf" is pointless if you can't form a sentence around it.)
In Indiana you are not required to take a foreign language. English is the official language in our state.
Quote from: US 41 on July 18, 2014, 08:36:30 AM
In Indiana you are not required to take a foreign language. English is the official language in our state.
I live in Indiana and I am required to take a foreign language.
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 18, 2014, 03:31:49 AM
Quote from: vdeane on July 17, 2014, 10:22:49 PM
I can't say I got better at grammar or language... everything was essentially rote memorization of vocabulary and verb conjugations (they claim that romance languages have less exceptions than English, but it sure didn't feel like it!).
That's the fault of your teacher using a bad teaching method, equivalent to teaching history by forcing the memorization of dates or geography by the memorization of capitals and population figures. The facts are an intellectual curio you can carry around, but you haven't learned much because you don't know the context of the facts you have to learn. (Knowing New Delhi is the capital of India doesn't tell you much about India at all, knowing the date of a battle doesn't tell you why it was important or what its causes or effects were, and knowing that "bufanda" is Spanish for "scarf" is pointless if you can't form a sentence around it.)
The curriculum could use some work. I had it even worse as I started late and essentially missed two years. The typical sequence is typically Intro to [language] -> grade 7 [language] -> grade 8 [language] -> [language] 2 -> [language] 3 -> [language] 4 (optional) -> [language] 5. Mine was Intro to Spanish -> Spanish 1 (which was actually just a repeat of Intro to Spanish because only the middle school had the special classes for those who start late; Spanish 1 was actually the high school make-up class for those who failed the grade 8 state test! This flaw has since been fixed with a Spanish 1B class for those who start late covering the grade 7 and grade 8 material, but it was too late for me) -> Spanish 2 (did I mention that the teacher I had for Spanish 2 was brand new and didn't know that Spanish 1B didn't exist for my year?) -> Spanish 3 -> Spanish 4 (optional). A good fraction of my teachers were native speakers, but there's no denying that nobody wants to grade a test that has more than a little listening, writing, or any speaking at all (I entered public school at the same time as New York converted everything to be "teach to the test", though my school district resisted more than most, but if you weren't in advanced classes, which I obviously was not for Spanish, it wasn't noticeable by the time I got to high school).