Official English movement: Difference between revisions
imported>John Stephenson (Start) |
imported>John Stephenson (altered the intro to clarify that EO is a name of the campaign, not the names of 'pro-English' group; also slight edits elsewhere) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{subpages}} | {{subpages}} | ||
'''English Only''' refers to | '''English Only''' refers to campaigns in the [[United States of America]] which call for [[English language|English]] to be made the only [[official language]] of the country; however, many campaigners reject this term, which is often used by [[civil liberties]] groups to describe the debate. Those arguing for the promotion of English in U.S. politics and education prefer terms such as 'pro-English' or 'official English'. | ||
The U.S. currently has no official language, but local legislation has made it [[Languages of the United States of America#Official languages at state level|official in a majority of states]]. [[Hawaii]] and [[New Mexico]] are the only officially bilingual states, with [[Hawaiian language|Hawaiian]] and [[Spanish language|Spanish]] respectively the other official languages; many participants on both sides of the debate are of Hispanic/Latino descent, because the biggest language after English in the U.S. is Spanish. Tempers occasionally flare in cases of what one side sees as unjust treatment, and the other activity necessary to promote English; for example, in 2006 a bar in [[Ohio]] hit the headlines due to a "For Service Speak English" sign placed outside.<ref>''Fox News'': '[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,234791,00.html Ohio Bar Owner Changes 'For Service Speak English' Sign Following Discrimination Complaint]'. December 6 2006. See also ''Bill may push for English only: State-documents idea called rights violation'' (''Columbus Dispatch'' newspaper, October 31 2005).</ref> | The U.S. currently has no official language, but local legislation has made it [[Languages of the United States of America#Official languages at state level|official in a majority of states]]. [[Hawaii]] and [[New Mexico]] are the only officially bilingual states, with [[Hawaiian language|Hawaiian]] and [[Spanish language|Spanish]] respectively the other official languages; many participants on both sides of the debate are of Hispanic/Latino descent, because the biggest language after English in the U.S. is Spanish. Tempers occasionally flare in cases of what one side sees as unjust treatment, and the other activity necessary to promote English; for example, in 2006 a bar in [[Ohio]] hit the headlines due to a "For Service Speak English" sign placed outside.<ref>''Fox News'': '[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,234791,00.html Ohio Bar Owner Changes 'For Service Speak English' Sign Following Discrimination Complaint]'. December 6 2006. See also ''Bill may push for English only: State-documents idea called rights violation'' (''Columbus Dispatch'' newspaper, October 31 2005).</ref> | ||
==Support for English as the sole official U.S. language== | ==Support for English as the sole official U.S. language== | ||
The most notable 'English Only' | The most notable supporter of 'English Only' is 'U.S. English', a 1.8-million-member strong organisation founded in 1983 by [[U.S. Republican Party|Republican]] Senator S.I. Hayakawa, himself an immigrant.<ref>''U.S. English'': '[http://www.us-english.org/inc/about/hayakawa.asp Biography of Senator S.I. Hayakawa]'.</ref> Hayakawa argued that "Bilingualism is fine, but not for a country," a policy which sums up the organization's official position: it supports the teaching of other languages and their private use, but argues that it is "common sense" that immigrants should be taught English rather than benefit from services in their native tongue.<ref>''U.S. English'': '[http://www.us-english.org/view/15 Misconceptions About Official English]'.</ref> | ||
==Opposing viewpoints== | ==Opposing viewpoints== | ||
Groups opposing 'English Only' | Groups opposing 'English Only' point to civil liberties arguments and the culture of the U.S. - a [[multilingualism|multilingual]] nation of hundreds of languages, both indigenous and imported, with a tradition of tolerance and respect for diversity. 'English Only' is argued to violate the Fourteenth Amendment, as it might lead to legislation that would interfere with people's rights in law - perhaps bans on courtroom interpretation or bilingual voting, positions that stand outside the Equal Protection Clause. Opponents also argue that 'English Only' hinders the integration of immigrants into society, because it makes it more difficult for people who are yet to learn English to function effectively. Another point is that it perpetuates [[stereotyping]] of people who do not speak English.<ref>''American Civil Liberties Union of Florida'': '[http://www.aclufl.org/take_action/download_resources/info_papers/6.cfm English Only]'.</ref> To this could be added the claims that action is unnecessary since 82% of Americans are monolingual English speakers, and most others do learn the language anyway - in 2000, about 3.36 million people, or about 1% of the population, reported that they could not use English at all.<ref>Shin HB & Bruno R: '[http://www.census.gov/prod/2003pubs/c2kbr-29.pdf Language Use and English-Speaking Ability: 2000].' Accessed 29th September 2007.</ref> Some scholars discuss the rise of 'English Only' through identifying it as part of a wider fear that 'American values' are eroding.<ref>Rickford (2004); Wardhaugh (2006: 368); Schmid (2001); Huntington (2004).</ref> One has branded it a form of [[fascism]].<ref>[http://www.springerlink.com/content/w52r11342h041191/fulltext.pdf Pullum (1987)] (access requires membership).</ref> | ||
==Bilingual education== | ==Bilingual education== | ||
Revision as of 21:49, 3 June 2008
English Only refers to campaigns in the United States of America which call for English to be made the only official language of the country; however, many campaigners reject this term, which is often used by civil liberties groups to describe the debate. Those arguing for the promotion of English in U.S. politics and education prefer terms such as 'pro-English' or 'official English'.
The U.S. currently has no official language, but local legislation has made it official in a majority of states. Hawaii and New Mexico are the only officially bilingual states, with Hawaiian and Spanish respectively the other official languages; many participants on both sides of the debate are of Hispanic/Latino descent, because the biggest language after English in the U.S. is Spanish. Tempers occasionally flare in cases of what one side sees as unjust treatment, and the other activity necessary to promote English; for example, in 2006 a bar in Ohio hit the headlines due to a "For Service Speak English" sign placed outside.[1]
Support for English as the sole official U.S. language
The most notable supporter of 'English Only' is 'U.S. English', a 1.8-million-member strong organisation founded in 1983 by Republican Senator S.I. Hayakawa, himself an immigrant.[2] Hayakawa argued that "Bilingualism is fine, but not for a country," a policy which sums up the organization's official position: it supports the teaching of other languages and their private use, but argues that it is "common sense" that immigrants should be taught English rather than benefit from services in their native tongue.[3]
Opposing viewpoints
Groups opposing 'English Only' point to civil liberties arguments and the culture of the U.S. - a multilingual nation of hundreds of languages, both indigenous and imported, with a tradition of tolerance and respect for diversity. 'English Only' is argued to violate the Fourteenth Amendment, as it might lead to legislation that would interfere with people's rights in law - perhaps bans on courtroom interpretation or bilingual voting, positions that stand outside the Equal Protection Clause. Opponents also argue that 'English Only' hinders the integration of immigrants into society, because it makes it more difficult for people who are yet to learn English to function effectively. Another point is that it perpetuates stereotyping of people who do not speak English.[4] To this could be added the claims that action is unnecessary since 82% of Americans are monolingual English speakers, and most others do learn the language anyway - in 2000, about 3.36 million people, or about 1% of the population, reported that they could not use English at all.[5] Some scholars discuss the rise of 'English Only' through identifying it as part of a wider fear that 'American values' are eroding.[6] One has branded it a form of fascism.[7]
Bilingual education
Since 'English Only' campaigns on what language should be used as the medium of instruction in schools and other institutions, it is involved in the debate on 'bilingual education' - the position that children whose background does not include English should be taught in their native language at the outset, moving to English over time. This is widely supported by academic research, and there is a little linguistic evidence that the alternative, 'total immersion' in English from the start, leads to higher attainment.[8]
Footnotes
- ↑ Fox News: 'Ohio Bar Owner Changes 'For Service Speak English' Sign Following Discrimination Complaint'. December 6 2006. See also Bill may push for English only: State-documents idea called rights violation (Columbus Dispatch newspaper, October 31 2005).
- ↑ U.S. English: 'Biography of Senator S.I. Hayakawa'.
- ↑ U.S. English: 'Misconceptions About Official English'.
- ↑ American Civil Liberties Union of Florida: 'English Only'.
- ↑ Shin HB & Bruno R: 'Language Use and English-Speaking Ability: 2000.' Accessed 29th September 2007.
- ↑ Rickford (2004); Wardhaugh (2006: 368); Schmid (2001); Huntington (2004).
- ↑ Pullum (1987) (access requires membership).
- ↑ Krashen & McField (2005); Krashen (2006); Crawford (1997); Crawford (2005);