Newsgroups: sci.lang
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!gatech!csulb.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-10.sprintlink.net!eskimo!news
From: Richard Wojcik <rickw@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: English official language of the U.S.?
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: tia1.eskimo.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-ID: <32B58EB5.5BAA@eskimo.com>
Sender: news@eskimo.com (News User Id)
Reply-To: rickw@eskimo.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: Eskimo North (206) For-Ever
References: <32B0CED6.779E@corenet.net> <58qlic$ds2@qualcomm.com> <32B22269.C5A@earthlink.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 1996 18:02:29 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (Win95; I)
Lines: 50

Michael McBroom wrote:
> 
> Jill Lundquist wrote:
  <snip>
> > I've heard a number of Official English arguments (pro and con),
> > but this one has always seemed silly to me.  Is there really a
> > substantial number of people in the USA who *don't* believe that
> > speaking English is going to help them in business and building
> > relationships (at least with English speakers)?

Right.  These tend to be the people who promote English-only laws.  :)

> I would venture to say more than substantial... Tremendous is more like
> it.  I noticed a sign of the times just the other day: stopped by a
> local supermarket that's part of a major California grocery chain to
> pick up a few things, and noticed several signs posted which were
> advertizing various items in Spanish.  Not even any English subtitles.
> Geez, I thought we won that war . . .

I don't suppose you could just ignore the signs and shop elsewhere, where
the signs are all in English?  If the seller doesn't want to cater to the
English-speaking market (which is not a small one in the US), why does that
bother you?  Are they asking to be paid in pesos?

> Seriously, though, we are doing ourselves a vast disservice by not
> facing this issue in a level-headed and rational manner.  We should put
> aside both the jingoistic rhetoric and the clueless "we're all one big
> happy melting pot of diversity" nonsense, and start doing some serious
> language planning before things escalate beyond our ability to control
> them.  English should be the "Official Language" of the U.S., if for no
> other reason than to provide at least ONE common link between all the
> various and diverse cultures who now call this place home.  What can we
> look to as a strong enough unifying factor, if not a common language?
> If it's good enough for Papua New Guinea, Indonesia, Singapore, China,
> South Africa, the Arab world, etc., then why isn't it okay here?

Are you arguing that we should emulate repressive cultures?  I'm not quite
sure what argument you are making here.  The problem in multi-lingual 
countries is not the lack of single-language laws, but attempts by
central authority to impose such laws.  That's why they have called some
of the violent outbreaks "language riots".  You are trying to promote
unity, but your methods seem to head us in the direction of divisiveness.
English already is the official language of the country.  This is a nation
of immigrants.  There is no need to beat others over the head with their
linguistic disabilities.  If the parents can't overcome their language
difficulties, the children will.

-- 
Rick Wojcik                                       Bellevue, WA
rickw@eskimo.com                                  http://www.eskimo.com/~rickw
