RE: Why can 't we do this in the US?

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

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

Message

Hillwilliam -> RE: Why can 't we do this in the US? (3/6/2011 5:07:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub You seem to think we allow people to become citizens without passing an English competency test. That is incorrect. Sorry, Ken. They give the test in Espanol under certain circumstances. That doesnt count those born here who dont speak English. Until recently, accredited private schools in FL (mostly Dade County) could teach K-12 totally in Spanish if they wanted.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Why can 't we do this in the US? (3/6/2011 5:08:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub You seem to think we allow people to become citizens without passing an English competency test. That is incorrect. Sorry, Ken. They give the test in Espanol under certain circumstances. That doesnt count those born here who dont speak English. Until recently, accredited private schools in FL (mostly Dade County) could teach K-12 totally in Spanish if they wanted. I tried to trim the quotes and screwed up.

jack8007 -> RE: Why can 't we do this in the US? (3/6/2011 5:47:57 PM)
quote: s a government official should not be required to post a version of legislation in every language of the world The problem comes when we start having any level of international traffic - people here legitimately or not find themselves in family or other courts, and due process requires that the defendant is advised of what's going on. Apart from the fact that the US economy demands labor that we aren't willing to provide legal documents for, a lot of the demand for foreign languages in the courts come from refugee communities.

kdsub -> RE: Why can 't we do this in the US? (3/6/2011 7:17:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jack8007 quote: s a government official should not be required to post a version of legislation in every language of the world The problem comes when we start having any level of international traffic - people here legitimately or not find themselves in family or other courts, and due process requires that the defendant is advised of what's going on. Apart from the fact that the US economy demands labor that we aren't willing to provide legal documents for, a lot of the demand for foreign languages in the courts come from refugee communities. Jack how would having a translator in the court room or translated documents have anything to do with a national language? Just because the documents would have to be filed in English and English translated during the trial would not prohibit a fair trial would it? Butch

jack8007 -> RE: Why can 't we do this in the US? (3/6/2011 8:15:48 PM)
quote: how would having a translator in the court room or translated documents have anything to do with a national language? Just because the documents would have to be filed in English and English translated during the trial would not prohibit a fair trial would it? I think the issue of a "national language" only complicates what is better solved in small increments as we go along - because eg language isn't a static thing. For example, the declaration of a national language doesn't say anything about what we're going to do about it. Language in courts has been a matter of efficient administration - managing evidence in a way that is best calculated to get to a fair result efficiently. As far as I know, documents do have to be filed in English, with whatever translation is needed, and I don't see a national language bill changing that. But most courts have a simaltaneous translation arrangement for live testimony. Languages never translate exactly, and so feedback is important. Remember, it's not just about parties, but also witnesses. I just see it as a symbolic issue that is only going to complicate matters. The reality is that people live in limited circles, figurative ghettos until they learn English, and people just don't want that.

kdsub -> RE: Why can 't we do this in the US? (3/6/2011 8:23:35 PM)
Then jack you are not arguing with me you are agreeing. In your previous post you called it a problem... now you admit it is not... You vaguely say a national language would complicate things... complicate what... it is already working that way in the courts and always has been. What is the problem you think needs to be solved in small increments...and what are these increments? Butch

jack8007 -> RE: Why can 't we do this in the US? (3/6/2011 8:30:47 PM)
I think you misunderstand. I am generally inclined to think that we don't need any "national language", because such a declaration only complicates things. Communication is best handled on an individual basis, I suspect. I'm reluctant to solve problems that aren't there yet. quote: what are these increments? It's up to the people involved to solve the problem ad hoc.

kdsub -> RE: Why can 't we do this in the US? (3/6/2011 8:36:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jack8007 I think you misunderstand. I am generally inclined to think that we don't need any "national language", because such a declaration only complicates things. Communication is best handled on an individual basis, I suspect. I'm reluctant to solve problems that aren't there yet. quote: what are these increments? It's up to the people involved to solve the problem ad hoc. How can all citizens being able to communicate with each other be a complication? Should this not be a goal ...after all education is the backbone of our society. Now as I told DomKen, in so many words, the goal is noble and not discriminatory but I too may change my mind if the bill comes out differently than I believe it should…We just don’t know yet. Butch

jack8007 -> RE: Why can 't we do this in the US? (3/6/2011 8:46:43 PM)
quote: all citizens being able to communicate with each other be a complication? Who has the problem? I'd suggest they should be the ones to try to solve it 1st. Generally speaking, I don't think govt should get involved in something until there is a significant benefit. I use translators when I need to. I don't personally encounter many people who complain about the problem, excepting people who have other issues getting along too. That's my experience only, and I don't claim to have been everywhere & seen everything. Frankly, I think it's more likely a larger problem to the non-English speakers. Of course, spanish speakers are pretty common, and there are places you can go that all business is done in Spanish. But you go to tijuana, even Pemex would just as soon take my dollars as pesos, and they find a way to talk to me - they oblige me more than I do them - but again, I often begin conversations apologizing for my lack of spanish. The next largest groups are refugees, and these are often very poorly educated groups, often from places like the Asian highlands, Somalia, etc. But it's all the same, if you want to be a citizen and be exempt from deportation, you learn English, maybe 3rd or 4th grade level will do.

kdsub -> RE: Why can 't we do this in the US? (3/6/2011 9:15:57 PM)
There would be a significant benefit...and there is a problem...and there can be a solution why not pursue it? I'm glad you have access to translators... by the way are they free? I want people to work towards communication...There is nothing that isolates people more then a language barrier. We've sorta talked this thread out...I guess we will just have to have a difference of opinion. Butch

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

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125