What does everybody think of the idea of making it mandatory for all US citizens to learn a second language.
Give every citizen, say, 5 years to learn a second language. Think Teddy R. would approve?
What does everybody think of the idea of making it mandatory for all US citizens to learn a second language.
Give every citizen, say, 5 years to learn a second language. Think Teddy R. would approve?
I think second and third languages are a great idea, but should be voluntary!Quote:
Originally Posted by billyjeff2
On the other hand, if you plan on visiting a country that does not speak English, for any length of time, it behooves you to at least make an attempt to learn the language of the host country, and if your intention is to become a citizen of the host country, then whatever the language, you do your utmost to learn it!!
Q: What do you call someone who speaks two languages:
A: Bilingual.
Q: What do you call someone who speaks three languages?
A: Trilingual.
Q: What do you call someone who speaks only one language?
A: American.
Thought you'd enjoy a linguist joke.
j
PS: Could be the wrong thread for a joke?
:yfun-nee!!!!
OK there are two things that you guys go back and fort between
(1) Functional use of english - clearly beneficial for the person, this is market driven (if they don't speak the predominant language they are at disadvantage, in Miami that would be spanish). Note that the FAA example falls here - it is a job requirement, just as being a licensed pilot.
(2) What the title of this thread implies - a government (local or federal) requirement. The arguments here have nothing to do with the market. Let's consider one of them - to make the nation cohesive - would you also prefer all laws to be federal - that's along the same venue?
The truck driver regulation falls in the first category - part of the job is to be able to effectively communicate with the police. Now, if you think that every single person should be required to do so, not just drivers, well I would argue that English is not enough, there is a communications skills component. I can imagine that the obvious and worst possible solution is to administer a test and whoever fails it would be taken away from the society.
In any case certainly one can distinguish between citizens and non citizens, the former having a free pass just because they happened to be born here, but viewed objectively, I don't see a non-political reason for such distinction. Couly gave a good example how noncitizens are being screwed for what I see as no good reason.
And yes, I'm immigrant, I learned English (as well as several other languages) and I am not sure how long I would like to be in US. Which obviously doesn't preclude me from expressing my opinion in better than passable english :p.
This is one of those cases in which I could wish that conservatives would stand on their principles.
I'm specifically speaking of the principle that market forces, left alone without undue regulation, will result in the best outcome. Doesn't work all the time, I'm afraid, but I think it will work here.
In a country in which most people speak one language, and in which virtually all serious business is conducted in that language, it's a critical disadvantage for people who want to make their way not to speak that language. Thus, they learn it if they possibly can.
In my experience, which includes working youth programs in inner city neighborhoods of New York City, I noticed that in many cases, parents had a tough time learning English. It's a known fact that as you progress into adulthood, languages become incrementally more difficult. It's not that they didn't learn English; it's just that it took a long time, lots of work, and the results were often imperfect. Add to that the fact that somebody working two jobs doesn't usually have a lot of study time.
But the kids? Within six months, they could get by in English. In a year, they were speaking it. In two, they were, for all intents and purposes, English speakers. I'd hate to tell you how many times I've had a twelve-year-old kid act as interpreter for his parents. And the parents involved were obviously proud of him.
Let the market do its thing. We don't need more regulations.
j
I think you are confusing conservatism and capitalism here. They are not the same, and you are applying the rules applying to one to another group entirely. Not that there aren't capitalist conservatives, but there are also capitalist liberals. Ask Al Gore about his private jet, for example.
If an individual wishes to come here (or any other nation, for that matter) and remain-this is beyond a simple tourist visa or a quick visit. Everyone is welcome, but fact of the matter official business of the United States is conducted in English. Since there isn't an "official" language as of yet, people are allowed to ask for forms etc. also in their own languages for ease of comprehension. Unfortunately, the onus is on the immigrant wishing to stay to demonstrate compatibility with society. It is completely alright if the immigrating person wishes not to learn any of the language-but then I feel such people are often not actually "immigrants" but illegal aliens. Most true immigrants I've met have been extremely proud of their efforts and worked very hard for their citizenship. I'm sure this applies even to a few members here as well, but it is a double standard. On the one hand, the hard working, diligent, intelligent and (usually VERY) patriotic immigrant.....contrasted with illegal aliens who are often the opposite, hoping to avoid any contact with authorities while reaping every possible benefit they can. When approached the typical response is to pretend not to understand the language. It is quite easy to see how such people can hurt the reputations of others who do not deserve it.
On a different topic, I've heard often times people mocking the idea that Americans typically only speak English. I would say to these people, that for the most part, people who speak multiple languages also live within a few miles of someone who speaks the "other" languages that person knows. I'm sure if the only place a European or someone near the border was able to hear a foreign language was an airline ticket costing two months' pay away or inside a university (meaning no job and oh by the way, a few years' pay) they wouldn't be multilingual, either. My Grandfather spoke multiple languages, but he was also raised in pre-WWII Poland after being born in Pennsylvania. So of course, German, Polish, Hungarian, Russian, English, French, and Italian....were all spoken within a day's drive of him, and some of them within a day's walk. Like anything else, (just like my accent) it is best picked up when one grows up in it.
I digress.
The point of it all is, if one wants to become a citizen or resident alien or some such, and stay (well) beyond the 5 year mark, it is in the nation's rights and good sense to make sure that person really wants to be here and not simply collect benefits paid for by others. It is also within a nation's right to want those wishing to *stay here* to speak the common language of government and just about everything else. If not, then I feel that person should not receive the privileges which others who do make the effort receive; e.g. driving a car. Road and traffic signs-are in English. It may be important to know the difference between "Speed Limit-65" and "101 S".
Ultimately, I support the idea. 5 years is a long time and plenty long enough to demonstrate a person wishes to stay, perhaps even become a citizen. Learning the rudiments of a language in this time is not impossible at all. There are many here for whom English is not their first language and they are doing fine with it. For those who do not wish to stay-and leave before 5 years-there is no requirement to do so.
Nothing unfair about it at all. Every country is like this, and it actually surprises me that people would protest the idea of immigrants learning our language, official or not. I would not move to Germany, for instance, then demand to receive benefits paid for by German taxes (medical care/other social programs) all the while refusing to learn German. Understandably, many Germans do speak English, but that is in disrespect for the nation one wishes to assimilated into.
Again, I'm rambling. Someone will no doubt come along and summarize this into a 2 line sentence, I'm sure...
John P.
I agree, this issue should be decided by the markets, not compulsion. That holds true even in official state business.
What business have you or any government official in a free state have demanding somebody converse with you, period? That seems un-American.
An open marketplace, free from unwarranted regulation, is indeed a conservative principle, and has been a central plank of the Republican platform for as long as I, at least, can remember -- as has the notion that the federal government should only regulate what the states cannot. Both, unfortunately, have been more honored in the breach than in the observance, as far as Republican performance in office has been concerned. It's one reason I left the party.
j
Nord Jim, I think I have to agree with you on this one. If I moved to Rome I would have to do as the Romans or languish in Italy. This is the way my people made it when they came here, if you want to do something other than starve, you'd better learn to communicate. The shame these days is that now the marketplace is demanding that Americans speak spanish in order to take financial advantage of those coming from down south. I was raised aDemocrat, became a Reagan Republican, and they are both full of it. Hence my bashing of Gore earlier,GW would get the same.