language is important

recently there's been some discussion on the attempted passage of bills that make English the official language of West Virginia and the United States. (the odd thing is that the latest version of the West Virginia bill does not reflect what AP news, but i'm sure there's a valid reason.) what interests me is how the debate has largely been framed, and how both sides view the issue. from what i gather, people against english-only do not want legislation because of the possible disparagement of other languages in the United States, which is arguably already bad enough, and because it's un-American (1). people for legislation have cited economic, cultural, and communicative concerns for having one official language. while this guy surely offers a simple solution, i don't know if everyone will agree on it, and you can't blame him for speaking up.

for me, all languages are cool! i like learning about how different (and similar) human languages are, and when i get the chance, i like learning other languages than my native English. do i see multilingualism as valuable? certainly. i hope that everyone in the Unites States learns more than one human language. yet at the same time, i am confronted with a particular aspect of this country's history: from its inception (as far as i am aware, and please correct me if i am wrong!), government documents have been in English. without a doubt, many of the aristocratic founders of this country were polyglots, yet they had used English as the primary means of communication (which i think can be attributed to being an accident of history, since the States' territories were British colonies). i agree with S.I. Hayakawa that "bilingualism is fine, but not for a country", and i suggest that this may have been the intuition of the founding fathers. on the other hand, i don't think the founding fathers would have wanted the widespread monolingualism in the U.S. today, but i still maintain that they would have wanted pertinent government documents in one language.

over and over in my linguistics classes, i have heard the same thing: "no language is better than another". my understanding of this mantra is that you can express anything in any language, and in large part i agree. however, to understand what a given text says, i think it extremely beneficial to be fluent in the cultural tradition of the language used. do i fluently speak late 18th century English, the language of the Constitution, specially the Bill of Rights? hell no! that is an unfair expectation for any resident of the United States today. but i do think it is a fair expectation to learn the cultural tradition and the language receiving and transmitting the tradition (2). frankly, i see it as short-changing anyone by providing them the U.S. civilian life without its cultural and lingual tradition. the understanding of this tradition and the ability to read and understand the "law of the land" allows for true liberty in the U.S., since a person can refer directly to their acceptance and understanding of the tradition (and laws) to support their rights. so while essentially "no language is better than another", in the case of the United States, i believe the English language is the best language to understand immediate cultural and civil tradition. for any country, to don the civil garb of citizenship, i think it requisite to have the cultural tighty-whities and the lingual shoes (3).

now the status quo suggests to me that, for the most part, there is no need for legislation. if a state or this nation wants to enact such legislation, i think it is not inherently detrimental, but my biggest concern is the possibility of lingualism: harsh and derogatory attitudes towards another language and its usage is unacceptable to me, and i hope the reader agrees. yet the possibility for more lingualism is just that, a posssibility. the possibility for short-changing someone living here in the U.S. is possible and real. therefore, i'm stuck between a rock (pro English-only) and a hard place (against English-only) when discussing this issue. i think it's an important issue the United States continues to deal with, and i hope the population comes to a consesus soon.

(1) whatever that means, but it sure sounds meaningful, and that's why i think we all like to use it. return to text

(2) this does not necessitate abandoning one's own cultural, lingual, and civil traditions. at times, it's hard for me to forgive my maternal grandfather for doing this. i love going to Little Saigon and Chinatown in LA, and i greatly hope that those who are taking part in the economic tradition this nation offers are doing justice to its linguo-cultural and civil traditions.return to text

(3) the shoes allow you to move around and show your garb, and, when duty calls, to show your tighty-whities. return to text

[all posts in /ling/]  [permanent link]