RE: Why can 't we do this in the US? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

DomKen -> RE: Why can 't we do this in the US? (3/6/2011 6:01:20 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub
Domken I hate to argue with you we often agree but I think you are being unreasonable about this.

There is nothing special... that is my point... to be a naturalized citizen you must show a rudimentary grasp of English so this law would not affect citizenship in any way.

What it will do is assure all citizens in this nation will be schooled in English and there will be less discrimination against those citizens and immigrants with poor communication skills.

English is just the majority language now… if it were Spanish I would say the same… it is not which language that is important just that there is a common language to allow all citizens to communicate.

I also believe all school children in all school districts no matter their ethnic configuration should be taught in English as the primary language and I think the national language should guarantee this.

A common language is not discrimination it is the opposite… It is an attempt to bring all people of different ethnic backgrounds together by communication.

As for ALS I didn’t mention it you did… but it has nothing to do with this discussion that I can see.

Butch

I think you fail to understand what most official language bills would require.

First that English would be the only language of government. No translations of official documents, no translators in court or police stations. No ASL interpreters.

Secondly restricting language on signs much like Quebec.

Third no native language instruction for recent immigrants in public school.

These laws aren't some symbolic thing but extremely harsh restrictions on how the government interacts with immigrants.



Edwynn -> RE: Why can 't we do this in the US? (3/6/2011 7:12:09 AM)


What masochists the Polish and Italians and Germans, etc. must have been to place such "extremely harsh" conditions upon themselves as to learn the language of the country they migrated to, and if so oftentimes not quite up to the task themselves, at least made sure that their kids got in on the game at the earliest opportunity.


"Third no native language instruction for recent immigrants in public school."

This one is utterly perplexing. You don't get out much, do you? Or maybe you live in the NE or Midwest of this country. Same difference as to ignorance of anything non-WASP.


Every Latino pre-schooler I hear in the grocery store talks to the parents in the "home" language. I some how suspect that no formal education was involved in the process, yet you seem to advocate for tax dollars being spent towards such a redundancy. Nevertheless, a  good many of the same family as 7-10 yr. olds speak English quite well. Perhaps we should investigate who it was that was so "extremely harsh" on these kids and lock them up.



To require that various laws, public signs, etc. all be translated to one particular foreign language to the exclusion of all others is the heighth of discrimination.


George I could hardly speak two sentences of English. George III could hardly speak two sentences of German. (guess the latter did not take Hanover to be his "home country" quite as much as his granddad did, we might surmise). Call it "extremely harsh" if you feel the need; just be aware that others might consider it as "getting a clue."






xBullx -> RE: Why can 't we do this in the US? (3/6/2011 7:31:36 AM)

I feel we should have a National Business Language, and call it that or something that denotes it as a public and professional consideration. Communication is important to success and a common language in the public business place seems valid. In my business I do have a bit of a time communicating with the employees of a certain few of my customers. I have a little Spanglish dictionary created just for the business I deal in and while it helps a great deal, it is not all that time efficient.

As for personal or private matters, I don't believe we should be creating a national mandate for anything.

Edited to provide a bit of background..




AriesHausdorff -> RE: Why can 't we do this in the US? (3/6/2011 7:57:16 AM)

As a German I can tell you this:
Having a national language can be nice, in so far as it can be the least denominator to differentiate betwee "them and us".
Or it can help establishing certain norms throughout the society.
It can even speed up administrative processes.
Then, take this:
The most successful country in Europe is - Switzerland.
The country which didn't have a distinct national language for the last 400 years.
They speak french, german and italian in switzerland, all of them in a slight dialect different from the mainstream national versions of their corresponding neighbours.

Speaking several languages in a country can be seen as an advantage:
People speaking several languages are on average a bit smarter and more flexible than people speaking only one language.
So, actually, my personal suggestion to the US would be not to pin itself down to one specific language, but instead check out the two to three most often spoken languages in each area ( english, spanish, french, german, chinese, portuguese ) and then teach the kids right from the start two to three of those languages.
Plus, the US grew big as an open country, a country with no prejudices. Why change that? The US is great because everybody who's is capable will have success there - why try to make that dependant upon a specific language?
Why limit onself, or ones country artifically?



Edwynn -> RE: Why can 't we do this in the US? (3/6/2011 8:48:03 AM)




What's "artificial" about it?

I don't disagree at all with what you propose as to the benefits of learning another language at an early age. Witness my first post to this thread propounding that same notion (not the latest 2 posts).

The majority of educated Germans speak English, along with a good many French, Polish, Italians, etc. But do any of those countries 'require' that official documents be available in that foreign language?

Die Schweiz is a different case, and you know it. All the languages contained therein have been thus situated for centuries. You can't equate the situation there with the situation of relatively recent migrants, such as the Latinos in the US or the Turkish in Deutschland or Österreich. How much Turkish do you know? Just curious.

Of course it is a very good thing for basic brain development to learn other languages (AND music, AND art) at an early age, and you would find me advocating for that all the time. As soon as a foreign language or music class gets added to the elementary schools (grundschule) they get cut two years later when budget issues come up. But of course the sports programs stay, no matter what! Apparently is the case that aggression training and "be a team player" training are more valued by the corporate world. No surprise there.


What is being addressed here is how much accommodation to extend to those that display great reluctance in involving themselves to much of any extent in the culture (which happens to include the language) of the country they migrated to.


But yes, every struggle I'm having in trying to learn this darn Deutschsprache at this late age just makes me more ticked off that I didn't have this opportunity at age 10 or somewhere thereabouts.


I feel like a complete idiot, and I don't understand why we don't mandate that the -opportunity- (not the requirement) exist for at least 3 other languages in the latter part of elementary schools.


Like xBullx, I once found myself having to work with a lot of recent Latino immigrants. I went to the trouble of taking a semester of Spanish, got two different dictionaries and a basic grammar book for it, etc., while the immigrants were doing likewise with English. What the original post is about concerns those who don't bother with the effort at all. How much tax money should we spend on those who don't make the effort, while so many of their compatriots and not a few Americans make the effort to accommodate each other, often times at their (or our) own expense?








DomKen -> RE: Why can 't we do this in the US? (3/6/2011 9:29:14 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn


What masochists the Polish and Italians and Germans, etc. must have been to place such "extremely harsh" conditions upon themselves as to learn the language of the country they migrated to, and if so oftentimes not quite up to the task themselves, at least made sure that their kids got in on the game at the earliest opportunity.


"Third no native language instruction for recent immigrants in public school."

This one is utterly perplexing. You don't get out much, do you? Or maybe you live in the NE or Midwest of this country. Same difference as to ignorance of anything non-WASP.


Every Latino pre-schooler I hear in the grocery store talks to the parents in the "home" language. I some how suspect that no formal education was involved in the process, yet you seem to advocate for tax dollars being spent towards such a redundancy. Nevertheless, a  good many of the same family as 7-10 yr. olds speak English quite well. Perhaps we should investigate who it was that was so "extremely harsh" on these kids and lock them up.



To require that various laws, public signs, etc. all be translated to one particular foreign language to the exclusion of all others is the heighth of discrimination.


George I could hardly speak two sentences of English. George III could hardly speak two sentences of German. (guess the latter did not take Hanover to be his "home country" quite as much as his granddad did, we might surmise). Call it "extremely harsh" if you feel the need; just be aware that others might consider it as "getting a clue."

You need to go peddle your racist crap somewhere else.



Edwynn -> RE: Why can 't we do this in the US? (3/6/2011 9:34:16 AM)



You need to go peddle your dimwitist crap somewhere else.









xBullx -> RE: Why can 't we do this in the US? (3/6/2011 9:47:37 AM)

Gentlmen,

I do believe peddling anything around these parts requires a permit.

Perhaps knowing that to maintain credibility within the context of debate you should know anyone employing such ridiculous theatrics tends to draw disgust from the discerning crowd.



Termyn8or -> RE: Why can 't we do this in the US? (3/6/2011 10:55:55 AM)

FR

Newsflash : An official language bill was passed making English the official language of the US.

It happened around the year 1800, maybe a few years before the turn of that century. I heard that German was in contention, and in a way I wish it was German because I think it is a very good language in many ways, for many reasons. However since I don't know German I might be wrong.

But this terrible legislation did pass and since then, millions of poor immigrants were forced to learn English before they could help build this country to the greatness it once had, and prosper for themselves and their families in the process. All they wanted was freedom and opportunity, and we forced our toungue on them. The inhumanity of it all.

How could we expect them to compete when English was their second language ? They must have suffered terribly.

As Switzterland requires multiple languages, so should we. First start with English of course, because they don't seem to be teaching that too well. But why would a country require more than one language ? Could it have something to do with not being at a disadvantage ? If you don't think the disadvantage is severe, consider the possibility that in a setting such as a meeting between foreign representatives, the translator has an ulterior motive, or significant bias towards one side of the table or the other. Maybe a bit far fetched, but concievably a translator could start WW3.

I worked for Greeks. One coworker told me " Go up to the boss and tell him '...............' ", something I didn't understand (it was literally Greek to me). I had no way of knowing if it was some kind of prank, or a play in "office politics". That is a disadvantage. Had I been multilingual one of the languages I would've known might be close enough that I would have at least some idea what it meant.

On another note, most Johnnies can't really read anyway. When people don't understand the difference between where and wear, whether and weather, affect and effect, too/too/two, that means they learned to read phonetically. We all did, sounding out the words. But some apparently still "sound it out" like I did when I was three years old.

So there is literacy and then there is literacy apparently. Even I have a bit of a problem with yours and your's. Believe it or not sometimes when I am composing something I have to call Mom. Really. But the thing is that I CAN. Why do I need a septuagenerian on hand for this ? Because they learned it the right way.

People who read, (I can't think of the word) ,, 'phonetically' (?) can't read as fast as one who reads "directly' (?). This is somewhat like what people meant when they said "Move their lips when they read". It hampers one's comprehensive skills I think.

Like all the youtube references given on fora, look Man, can you give me a transcript ? Then I can skip the 15 minute video and read the thing in 5 minutes. And I don't have to endure the theatrics. What's more, people who can read have this propensity to highlight ceratin portions of a text that they deem important. That is the perogative of the author, who may use italics, bold text or undrerlined text for emphasis. If the author wrote and you read, you capitulate that the author knows more about the topic at hand (in the case of a textbook) . So what is it that gives YOU the wisdom to decide which portions of the text are to be enphasized ?

Language is the tool of communication, and therefore learning. I am starting to think the human race needs a firmware upgrade.

T^T



DomKen -> RE: Why can 't we do this in the US? (3/6/2011 11:34:16 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

FR

Newsflash : An official language bill was passed making English the official language of the US.

It happened around the year 1800, maybe a few years before the turn of that century.

No. There was never any such law.



Moonhead -> RE: Why can 't we do this in the US? (3/6/2011 11:38:00 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or
It happened around the year 1800, maybe a few years before the turn of that century. I heard that German was in contention, and in a way I wish it was German because I think it is a very good language in many ways, for many reasons. However since I don't know German I might be wrong.


A Japanese poet, A French poet and a German poet are arguing about whose language is the most poetic. The discussion's getting very heated, and the barman of the pub is starting to get annoyed.

"French is the most beautiful of all languages," the French poet says. "Just look at the French word for 'butterfly' which is 'papillion'. That's an even prettier word than the creature itself."

"Not so fast," the Japanese poet says. "The Japenese word for 'butterfly' is 'chocho' which is a prettier word still."

The German poet looks narked, and bangs on the table irritably. "Are you bastards trying to say," he shouts, "that 'flughabergeschnapper' is not a poetic word?"



jack8007 -> RE: Why can 't we do this in the US? (3/6/2011 11:42:26 AM)

quote:

Language is the tool of communication


Obviously there should be standards, and those standards have evolved of themselves.  

Does anybody think it's a good ideas to make communication standards mandatory & universal?



Arpig -> RE: Why can 't we do this in the US? (3/6/2011 11:49:19 AM)

quote:

I have always felt we should have a national language.
just make sure you pick ONE...bilingualism is a major pain



Termyn8or -> RE: Why can 't we do this in the US? (3/6/2011 12:06:48 PM)

"No. There was never any such law. "

This time you got me. I'll fucking admit it.

However, the Constitution was written in English. (if you disprove that you're damn good)

T^T



kdsub -> RE: Why can 't we do this in the US? (3/6/2011 3:14:37 PM)

Check again... I posted the test earlier.

Butch



kdsub -> RE: Why can 't we do this in the US? (3/6/2011 3:32:52 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


I think you fail to understand what most official language bills would require.

First that English would be the only language of government. No translations of official documents, no translators in court or police stations. No ASL interpreters.

Secondly restricting language on signs much like Quebec.

Third no native language instruction for recent immigrants in public school.

These laws aren't some symbolic thing but extremely harsh restrictions on how the government interacts with immigrants.


I must admit I don't know the particulars of our proposed bill... could you provide a link?

I believe all official documents should be in English... so we disagree here for sure. If someone wants a copy in another language it should be up to them to translate or pay for a translation... I… as a government official should not be required to post a version of legislation in every language of the world. This is not practical and down right silly to me anyway.

The same with signs...anyone licensed to drive in the US should understand our signing or not drive...We disagree again...It is very expensive for multiple signing... I know I supervised traffic control for many years.

There is nothing stopping private schools from teaching in any language they choose... However public schools should have a primary language of English with alternate classes in language if and as needed.

I'm sorry I can't see how an official language will make harsh restrictions on immigrants. Remember they must have a green card and fulfill the residency requirements before the can be naturalized... That gives them plenty of time to learn the rudimentary English needed.

Butch



DomKen -> RE: Why can 't we do this in the US? (3/6/2011 3:54:17 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub
I must admit I don't know the particulars of our proposed bill... could you provide a link?

I believe all official documents should be in English... so we disagree here for sure. If someone wants a copy in another language it should be up to them to translate or pay for a translation... I… as a government official should not be required to post a version of legislation in every language of the world. This is not practical and down right silly to me anyway.

The same with signs...anyone licensed to drive in the US should understand our signing or not drive...We disagree again...It is very expensive for multiple signing... I know I supervised traffic control for many years.

Never said anything about traffic signs, they are in the standard international format everywhere I've been. I was talking about private business signage being required to be only in English or that the English must be larger than the other language, go to Montreal and you'll see what I mean.

quote:

There is nothing stopping private schools from teaching in any language they choose... However public schools should have a primary language of English with alternate classes in language if and as needed.

Most of the proposed bills would disallow any instruction in students non English native language. No matter the need.

quote:

I'm sorry I can't see how an official language will make harsh restrictions on immigrants. Remember they must have a green card and fulfill the residency requirements before the can be naturalized... That gives them plenty of time to learn the rudimentary English needed.

Butch

You seem to think we allow people to become citizens without passing an English competency test. That is incorrect.



kdsub -> RE: Why can 't we do this in the US? (3/6/2011 4:24:24 PM)

Having an official language will not prohibit speaking or learning any other language Aries.. To me it would just mean all will be able to at least speak one common language. I've already listed why I believe this is important.

Butch



kdsub -> RE: Why can 't we do this in the US? (3/6/2011 4:34:32 PM)

I still don't understand your reasoning about signing... there will no prohibition to signing private businesses... no language is even needed for signs. I think you are reaching for straws.

Like I said all public tax supported schools should teach in English as their mandated language...But there will be no prohibition in teaching another language or in private schools from teaching in any language they please.

DomKen.. They already do have to pass an English comprehension test to become naturalized citizens.. I posted the link to the test earlier… That is why I said it is not a big deal when it comes to citizenship… re-read my earlier post.

Perhaps we will just have to disagree on this subject... at least until a bill is proposed to see what prohibitions there will be…Maybe I will change my mind then.

Butch



kdsub -> RE: Why can 't we do this in the US? (3/6/2011 4:52:55 PM)

Moonhead that was good

Butch



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875