Should English Be A Mandatory Language?

[Magic Man]

Well, I personally have never experienced anyone in the U.S. getting mad at me because I couldn't speak their language. That would be unreasonable of them, and it has nothing to do with whether English is made the official language of the country or not.

That said, if do you run into this a lot - where you can't help a client because of a language barrier and it's always the same language - it sounds to me like you either need to learn some of that language or hire an interpreter who can. Again, this has nothing to do with legalities, just sound business sense. If for some reason you can't serve your clients then you need to address the reason. Telling them that they should learn to speak English won't solve the situation.

I don't run into it a lot, but it has come up. It's not always the same language, and it's not always practical to learn the language or get an interpreter. I know that there will always be people who come over and don't speak English. We'll never not have to deal with some people like that. But that doesn't mean we should encourage people to come here and not learn English, and accomodate them in whatever way they need so that they don't have to learn English.

 

[yossarian22]

Like I said earlier just because something can be beneficial, doesn't mean it should be enforced.

Why not? I can understand special circumstances, but none seem applicable

And I don't see why a country that Constitutionaly never intended to have an official language should flip the script just because a bunch of people don't want to be inconveinenced when trying to communicate with someone.

The Constitution was never intended to outlaw slavery either (I am not in any way comparing the two), but the point is still valid. Just because our constitution does not address something, does not mean that the government can have no stance on the issue. That is the whole reason why our constitution can be amended in the first place.

Like a College diploma, it should be for the individuals own benefit, not everyone elses.

Why should we require that people go to school? Sure it is beneficial, but just because something can be beneficial, doesn't mean it should be enforced? School is, after all, for the individual's own benefit.

 

[lilithu]

I don't run into it a lot, but it has come up. It's not always the same language, and it's not always practical to learn the language or get an interpreter. I know that there will always be people who come over and don't speak English. We'll never not have to deal with some people like that. But that doesn't mean we should encourage people to come here and not learn English, and accomodate them in whatever way they need so that they don't have to learn English.

I'm just going to say one more thing and then I'm done. It's not that I'm mad or anything. I'm just tired of this conversation.

It's already quite hard to function in the U.S. without learning at least some English. There are strong economic and social pressures to learn English. If people don't learn, it's either because they have trouble doing so - some people have a really hard time with foreign languages - or because they live in a situation like my grandparents did, where they didn't really need to. Or both. Making learning English a legal requirement is not going to change much. Those who find it difficult to learn are still going to find it difficult to learn. All making English a requirement does is to tell non-native speakers of English that they are less welcome here than people who speak English.

 

[Magic Man]

Here is an interesting article I just came across on Yahoo. Very timely! All I'm saying is that people like those in the article should be expected to learn English, and the U.S. shouldn't be expected to make everything available to them in their own language. It's just the point that it's the fault of these people that they haven't learned English, but it's made out to be our fault for not providing more help and information in other languages.

 

[sallieran]

I think that everyone who intends to live in the US for more than a year should learn to speak english proficiently in order to function properly in society. I'm not saying that they can't speak their own language with people who know it for ease/social gatherings, but everyone should know how to speak english when at school or functioning in public and all official documents and law proceedings should definately be in English to standardize documents/proceedings and to unify all US citizens. Some exceptions may apply for those people who are over the age of 85 when they immigrate. This is my position. When in Rome do as the Romans...(speak latin, go to public baths, etc) when in the US speak English. Not only is it polite, it's efficient.

 

[Neo-Logic]

Whether English should be or shouldn't be a mandatory language is irrelevent. The pure economics of globalization alone will force people towards a common language - Tower of Babel if you will. As we mesh further, travel further, exchange commerce further, exchange cultures further, the gap of commmunication has to be bridged.

And since the British already conquered a hell of a lot of the world to begin with, and America currently is the superpower, I see no reason why people WOULD NOT, by their own accord, of self interest, or incentive, learn to speak English, either by necessity or convenience.

 

[Mister_T]

Why not? I can understand special circumstances, but none seem applicable

"Beneficial" is different for each person/group/region. A person should speak English for his/her own benefit, not everyone elses. It should be self serving, not an appeasement to a group of annoyed people.

The Constitution was never intended to outlaw slavery either (I am not in any way comparing the two), but the point is still valid. Just because our constitution does not address something, does not mean that the government can have no stance on the issue. That is the whole reason why our constitution can be amended in the first place.

And surely if the issue of language was creating such a problem in the function of society, it would have been ammended when immigrants from all over the world were coming here in droves on boats. That fact that it wasn't speaks volumes.

Why should we require that people go to school? Sure it is beneficial, but just because something can be beneficial, doesn't mean it should be enforced? School is, after all, for the individual's own benefit.

Heck why stop here in the U.S? Why not try to force the whole world to speak English since it is a "world language" and so widly spoken around the world? I mean after all, it would be to the world's benefit. Eating a healthy diet is beneficial for everyone, why don't we make that mandatory too?

Like the rest of the world, there are many areas in the U.S. where you can function just fine without speaking English or where English is the minority. Why should we enforce speaking English on an area that doesn't need it?

Speaking of schools, California high schools they require you to learn a languange other English in order to graduate. There were also a good number of kids who didn't speak English that graduated form my high school. They may have been required to understand and be able to read a certain amount of English, but they were never required to speak it.

 

[Magic Man]

"Beneficial" is different for each person/group/region. A person should speak English for his/her own benefit, not everyone elses. It should be self serving, not an appeasement to a group of annoyed people.

It's not an appeasement for a group of annoyed people. It's a matter of funding, communication and respect. I know you're looking at it wrong, and I'm trying to help you see it a different way.

And surely if the issue of language was creating such a problem in the function of society, it would have been ammended when immigrants from all over the world were coming here in droves on boats. That fact that it wasn't speaks volumes.

Heck why stop here in the U.S? Why not try to force the whole world to speak English since it is a "world language" and so widly spoken around the world? I mean after all, it would be to the world's benefit. Eating a healthy diet is beneficial for everyone, why don't we make that mandatory too?

Why do we pay taxes? Why do we have to have insurance to drive a car? I know you're exagerating, but we're talking about one country here. One country is supposed to be unified, the whole world is not.

Like the rest of the world, there are many areas in the U.S. where you can function just fine without speaking English or where English is the minority. Why should we enforce speaking English on an area that doesn't need it?

Speaking of schools, California high schools they require you to learn a languange other English in order to graduate. There were also a good number of kids who didn't speak English that graduated form my high school. They may have been required to understand and be able to read a certain amount of English, but they were never required to speak it.

Yes, many schools require you to take foreign language classes to graduate. What's the point? Your last sentence points out how you see it wrong. You admit that they could use English well enough to do official things. That's all we're asking for, as has been said many times in this thread.

If you know enough English to get through a normal American high school, then you fit into the category of "being able to operate in society". I do find it hard to believe that they never had to speak it at all, though.

 

[Mister_T]

It's not an appeasement for a group of annoyed people. It's a matter of funding, communication and respect. I know you're looking at it wrong, and I'm trying to help you see it a different way.

Like I've stated earlier, language is entirely dependant on where you live. I know it's a point that you have no sensible rebuttal for, and I'm trying to help you see it a different way.

Why do we pay taxes? Why do we have to have insurance to drive a car? I know you're exagerating, but we're talking about one country here. One country is supposed to be unified, the whole world is not.

So we can't acheive unity in the U.S. unless everyone speaks English? And would you care to address the first part of what you quoted instead of side stepping it?

Yes, many schools require you to take foreign language classes to graduate. What's the point?

My point is that learning a "foreign" language in the United States is not limited to non-English speaking folks, and that if you English speaking folk are having trouble with a language barrier in certain parts of the U.S, then maybe you need to pick up another langauge.

Your last sentence points out how you see it wrong. You admit that they could use English well enough to do official things. That's all we're asking for, as has been said many times in this thread.

If you know enough English to get through a normal American high school, then you fit into the category of "being able to operate in society".

The above quoted shows that you excel at back peddaling. The issue (that you've been pushing) is people being fluent in speaking English, not a rudimentry reading and comprehension requirement to obtain a high school diploma. School isn't even the point. If you can't rebuttal what you quoted directly, just say so.

I do find it hard to believe that they never had to speak it at all, though.

Maybe you should get out more often.

 

[Magic Man]

The above quoted shows that you excel at back peddaling. The issue (that you've been pushing) is people being fluent in speaking English, not a rudimentry reading and comprehension requirement to obtain a high school diploma. School isn't even the point. If you can't rebuttal what you quoted directly, just say so.

Maybe you should get out more often.

Ah, then maybe you should have said that. What I was arguing is whether English should be the official language. I said it should. That would mean that people living here would be able to do official things, like get through high school, and get a driver's license (if they want), etc. Apparently you've been arguing some different. What exactly is your argument then?

 

[Sola'lor]

I don't think it should for the reasons I stated above. What do you think?

I think English should be the official language of the United States. No spanish or other languages on packaging or signs. Everyone should be able to speak and read English. I'm not saying people should have to speak only english in the United States. If people want to speak chinese while shopping that's fine. But all labels, directions, etc. should be in English only.

I bought something the other day and tries to read the instructions. It took me probably five minutes to find the English.

I went to Home Depot and realized I had to be multi lingual to shop there.

I also think that Americans should at least bi-lingual. Learning and speaking another language helps brain function and would help people understand things better. Not to mention we could probably have more intelligent conversations here on RF.

 

[Magic Man]

Not to mention we could probably have more intelligent conversations here on RF.

Well, anything's a step up from the intelligence level around here.

 

[Mister_T]

Ah, then maybe you should have said that.

I have been. Maybe you should read things more carefully.

That would mean that people living here would be able to do official things, like get through high school, and get a driver's license (if they want), etc.

Um, people can do those things now without English being the official language. :sarcastic

So once again Mball, what is the purpose of making English the official language other than the fact that you want to be able to talk to everyone in English?

What I was arguing is whether English should be the official language. I said it should. Apparently you've been arguing some different. What exactly is your argument then?

My argument has been outlined numerous times and has been pretty consistent throughout this thread, so I suggest you read it over. When you rediscover what exactly the point of your argument was, get back to me.

 

[Magic Man]

I have been. Maybe you should read things more carefully.

Um, people can do those things now without English being the official language. :sarcastic

So once again Mball, what is the purpose of making English the official language other than the fact that you want to be able to talk to everyone in English?

My argument has been outlined numerous times and has been pretty consistent throughout this thread, so I suggest you read it over. When you rediscover what exactly the point of your argument was, get back to me.

My point, as has been clearly outlined here, is that people who move here should be able to do anything public they need to in English. The idea of making it the official language is to get rid of the idea that it's our fault if we can't communicate with every immigrant that doesn't speak English. The article I referenced is a good example. They make it seem like it's our definciency, and not the immigrants' fault. That shouldn't be the case.

 

[Mister_T]

My point, as has been clearly outlined here, is that people who move here should be able to do anything public they need to in English.

You've been flip-flopping as to why. Please tell us why this must be.

The idea of making it the official language is to get rid of the idea that it's our fault if we can't communicate with every immigrant that doesn't speak English.

But such an idea towards non-English speaking folks is permissable? Sounds pretty prejudice to me.

The article I referenced is a good example. They make it seem like it's our definciency, and not the immigrants' fault. That shouldn't be the case.

It is your deficeincy if you're working in an area that is heavily populated with non-English speaking citizens. If you don't want to work with non-English speaking patients, then move to an English speaking area of the city. If you have a problem with the U.S. not having English as their official language, move to a country that does.

 

[Magic Man]

You've been flip-flopping as to why. Please tell us why this must be.

You have a skewed idea of flip-flopping, then. It should be because it costs many people here too much time and money when they don't speak English.

But such an idea towards non-English speaking folks is permissable? Sounds pretty prejudice to me.

See, that's the problem. You see it as prejudiced. You seem to be in the group of overly-politically-correct people. It's good to respect people for who they are. But, it's not disrespecting them to ask them to learn another language when moving here, no matter what you might think. You could take your line of reasoning to ridiculous degrees. What if it's against people's culture to pay taxes, or it's part of their culture to sacrifice animals in their home? Should we just let them do whatever they want because it's part of their culture? No, we impose some limits. This is even less intrusive than either of the limits I just put out there. It's not asking much, and it's not changing anything about the people.

It is your deficeincy if you're working in an area that is heavily populated with non-English speaking citizens. If you don't want to work with non-English speaking patients, then move to an English speaking area of the city. If you have a problem with the U.S. not having English as their official language, move to a country that does.

Nope. It's still their deficiency. They're still in America, where more than 82% speak English as a native language, and many, many more speak it fluently.

 

[Mister_T]

You have a skewed idea of flip-flopping, then.

Seems pretty spot-on to me.

It should be because it costs many people here too much time and money when they don't speak English.

Case in point. First it's "them" making it seem like it's your definiciency, now it's because it costs too much money. In either case, please support your backpeddalings with something other than your opinion. At least then people might have some sort of justification for whining about their inconvenience.

See, that's the problem. You see it as prejudiced

Sounds like your problem. If the shoe fits...

You seem to be in the group of overly-politically-correct people.

Hardly. I just see groups of people needing to conform to to a larger group out of sheer inconvenience as bunk.

It's good to respect people for who they are. But, it's not disrespecting them to ask them to learn another language when moving here, no matter what you might think.

You're right. It's not disrespectful: It's arrogant and it's not necessary.

You could take your line of reasoning to ridiculous degrees. What if it's against people's culture to pay taxes, or it's part of their culture to sacrifice animals in their home?

Yes because we all know that tax avoidance and animal sacrifice go hand-in-hand with not speaking English.

Should we just let them do whatever they want because it's part of their culture?

Should we allow the same for you and your culture? You don't seem to have a problem wanting impose your culture on others.

No, we impose some limits.

Yes we do, which is why people aren't forced to speak English.

This is even less intrusive than either of the limits I just put out there. It's not asking much, and it's not changing anything about the people.

Not asking much? No, you just want to force millions of people to speak a language for your convenience. That's certainly a better solution (and less costly) than taking a few minutes to find a bi-lingual person to translate something for you. :sarcastic

Really though, bi-lingual people aren't that hard to find in areas heavily populated with non-english speakers, so forcing everyone to speak English isn't even an issue.

Nope. It's still their deficiency. They're still in America, where more than 82% speak English as a native language, and many, many more speak it fluently.

And in America, people don't need to speak English regardless of how many people speak it. That's they way it's always been. Any deficiency anyone has, is their own. If you don't find that satisfactory, their are a number of other countries you can move to that have the offical language of your choice. :yes:

 

[Fluffy]

I can't think of a situation in which English should be mandatory. I don't think that extra effort should be spent on accommodating those who don't speak English unless it is in places like airports or if it involves giving free English classes.

If a particular level of communication is required for a job and then people involved don't all share a common language to a sufficient degree then I think it is fine for an employer to not hire somebody for this reason. It need not be English though. If all your workers speak Polish better than English then it would be stupid to fire somebody because they only speak Polish.

 

[Magic Man]

Seems pretty spot-on to me.

I know. that's the problem.

Case in point. First it's "them" making it seem like it's your definiciency, now it's because it costs too much money. In either case, please support your backpeddalings with something other than your opinion. At least then people might have some sort of justification for whining about their inconvenience.

I'm not really sure what this means. Could you repeat it in English?

Sounds like your problem. If the shoe fits...

And, in your opinion, even if the shoe doesn't fit...

Hardly. I just see groups of people needing to conform to to a larger group out of sheer inconvenience as bunk.

You're right. No one should ever get along. Let's keep "respecting" each other to the point of not understanding each other.

You're right. It's not disrespectful: It's arrogant and it's not necessary.

Wouldn't arrogance be disrespectful? Arrogance is thinking that I'm better than someone. Asking someone to speak the language of the country they're moving to in no way implies being better than that person.

Yes because we all know that tax avoidance and animal sacrifice go hand-in-hand with not speaking English.

Brilliant tactic! Completely avoid the question, and say that the two things can't be compared even when they're very similar. Maybe you could explain why one is acceptable and the other is not.

Should we allow the same for you and your culture? You don't seem to have a problem wanting impose your culture on others.

That's right. As I've said, if I move to a country where the majority speaks another language, I have no problem whatsoever with them imposing that part of their culture on me.

Yes we do, which is why people aren't forced to speak English.

And, ironically, also why they should be.

Not asking much? No, you just want to force millions of people to speak a language for your convenience. That's certainly a better solution (and less costly) than taking a few minutes to find a bi-lingual person to translate something for you. :sarcastic

You're really stuck on this convenience thing, huh? With the last sentence you're finally starting to understand, though. Just go with that thought, and you'll get it right.

Really though, bi-lingual people aren't that hard to find in areas heavily populated with non-english speakers, so forcing everyone to speak English isn't even an issue.

They're harder to find than, say, English-speakers, though.

And in America, people don't need to speak English regardless of how many people speak it. That's they way it's always been. Any deficiency anyone has, is their own. If you don't find that satisfactory, their are a number of other countries you can move to that have the offical language of your choice. :yes:

Or I can hope that this country will get it right someday. :yes:


How do you figure places in America where people don't speak English got that way? Do you think maybe it's because people moved there without learning English? You know, not learning the language of the area they were going to live in? As I've said before, if those people had done what you even agree is the right thing to do, then those areas would be English-speaking areas, too. Then we wouldn't be in this mess.

(Oops, I'm sorry. I guess you were trying to ignore that part, though, huh? If so, just forget I said anything.)

 

[Mister_T]

I know. that's the problem.

Only for you.

I'm not really sure what this means. Could you repeat it in English?

I'll take that as "No, I can't back up my assertions with anything other than my opinion."

And, in your opinion, even if the shoe doesn't fit...

If the shoes don't fit, then don't wear them.

You're right. No one should ever get along. Let's keep "respecting" each other to the point of not understanding each other.

Everyone seems to be getting along just fine (with the exception of a few English speakers) without having an an official language.

Wouldn't arrogance be disrespectful? Arrogance is thinking that I'm better than someone. Asking someone to speak the language of the country they're moving to in no way implies being better than that person.

Only the country that they're moving in has no official language. So asking someone to speak a language when it isn't even necessary, is indeed arrogant.

Brilliant tactic! Completely avoid the question, and say that the two things can't be compared even when they're very similar. Maybe you could explain why one is acceptable and the other is not.

Perhaps you'd like to explain this nonsense to eveyone? How are taxes and animal sacrifice even remotley related to speaking English?

That's right. As I've said, if I move to a country where the majority speaks another language, I have no problem whatsoever with them imposing that part of their culture on me.

Only here, you're imposing something that is not ment to be imposed. We have no official language, numbers don't matter. The government has no intention of imposing such a thing and that's all that really matters in regards to immigrants.

And, ironically, also why they should be.

Which thankfully, is a view the government hasn't shared since it's inception.

You're really stuck on this convenience thing, huh? With the last sentence you're finally starting to understand, though. Just go with that thought, and you'll get it right.

You're quite observant. Yes, I am stuck on the "convenience" thing. Convenience is a two way street in regards to language in this country. And that last sentence was one of sarcasm.

They're harder to find than, say, English-speakers, though.

Well that's a tragedy: People might actually have to take a few extra minutes of their time to find a bi-lingual person, instead of it being readily available at their convenience. Such a shame, really. :no:

Or I can hope that this country will get it right someday.

A hope that isn't looking so bright.

How do you figure places in America where people don't speak English got that way? Do you think maybe it's because people moved there without learning English?

You answered your own question. This country is working as intended on the language front.

As I've said before, if those people had done what you even agree is the right thing to do, then those areas would be English-speaking areas, too. Then we wouldn't be in this mess.

Those people have been doing with what I agree with, which is why you have areas that don't have English as their dominant langauge. No mess to be found, it's working as intended, which fortunately doesn't line up with the "mandatory english" mentality. Those are the breaks.

(Oops, I'm sorry. I guess you were trying to ignore that part, though, huh? If so, just forget I said anything.)

When you cut down on your backpeddaling and can start remembering everything you said, I might actually take your suggestion seriously.