Newsgroups: sci.lang
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!gatech!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uchinews!woodlawn!rmk4
From: rmk4@woodlawn.uchicago.edu (Robert Knippen)
Subject: Re: Can you define a language?
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: midway.uchicago.edu
Message-ID: <D8C8rI.4vB@midway.uchicago.edu>
Sender: news@midway.uchicago.edu (News Administrator)
Reply-To: rmk4@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: The University of Chicago
References: <troyer-0905951201340001@tcrmac.mitre.org>
Date: Wed, 10 May 1995 01:14:06 GMT
Lines: 24

In article <troyer-0905951201340001@tcrmac.mitre.org>,
Tom Royer <troyer@mitre.org> wrote:
>I just read a newspaper article which quotes Patrick Buchanan
>as calling for the establishment of English as the official
>language of the U.S.
>
>Without getting into the pros and cons of that, I have a
>question.  Is it possible to define what English is in a manner
>that is precise enough to a court of law?

Are you kidding me?  The American legal system is built on notions like
"reasonable doubt," "community standards," "preponderance of evidence,"
(just to name some of the cliches); I think very little of the real
foundation of law is stateable in precise terms.  I should think that
a court wouldn't even think twice about trying to define the term "English."

It does make one think, though, about what would end up being counted
as English by the legal system.  I'm thinking specifically about AAE and
creoles.

Bob Knippen
r-knippen@uchicago.edu


