English as the National Language of the United States of America

[coolr]

Re: Re: Re: English as the National Language of the United States of America

coolr i believe you must live somewhere far from any major city. many languages are spoken in this country. english is only one of them. and i did some research and guess what i found out...spanish is the most spoken language in the world not english.

it may be the most spoken which i never said english was, but it's not actually considered and recognized by other countries as the international langage, and i know other languages are spoken in "big cities" as another person said, i grew up in one, but in the US, english is the national language

 

[AmishPope]

Re: Re: Re: Re: English as the National Language of the United States of America

it may be the most spoken which i never said english was, but it's not actually considered and recognized by other countries as the international langage, and i know other languages are spoken in "big cities" as another person said, i grew up in one, but in the US, english is the national language

didnt one of the first posts on this thread that we have no official langauge.

 

[AmishPope]

dixon here are some interesting facts to back up your arguement.


In 2001, the U.S. Latino population is 29.3 million, already over 10% of the total U.S. population, and still growing strong.

By 2010, the U.S. Latino population is estimated to reach 42 million, and will become the largest minority group in the U.S.

By 2040, the U.S. Latino population will be 25% of the total population in the U.S. One in every four people in the U.S. will be Latino.

Latinos in the U.S. represent $383 billion in purchasing power in 2001, and it will rise to $477 billion by 2002. Over 50% of U.S. residents who speak a second language, speak Spanish; and 89% of Latinos in the U.S. speak Spanish.

 

[Dixon Carter Lee]

Thanks, all that is interesting.

I think what people are getting caught up on here is the word "official". I believe that English will continue to be the language of the land because it's the language of our law, and our country's, if not completely our ethnic, heritage.

But, there is a BIG difference between that and legislating English as the official language. Earlier in the thread many of the trapdoors of such a law were intelligently discussed, and I suggest that the next person who wants to stand up and shout ENGLISH IS THE OFFICAL BLAH-BLAH please go back, read the thread, understand that no one is talking about what you're talking about, and bring me a Fresca.

 

[Ishmael]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: English as the National Language of the United States of America

Actually courts do interpret or decide what laws mean. It's their job. In some cases its the Supreme Court that decides what some laws mean, in other times in a more local level court. But the fact of the matter remains that courts do interpret laws. If not why do we have them?? Courts decide what laws mean no matter what language they are written in.

Courts DO NOT interpret the law. The administrators of the law 'interpret' the law. The courts decide the validity of the interpretation based on argument once a case reaches the courtroom. That outcome then becomes 'case' law. Other courts may rely on earlier findings, find new meaning based on new argument, or flatly overturn the law. Interpretation DOES not mean across many languages. The law is administered and findings are made based on the language of the law and the language the law was written in. In the case of the United States, that language is English.

The courts are not there to rule on the law. They are there to determine which law(s) may or may not apply to a particular case. In the instance of a jury trial, the jury is 'instructed' on the law. A judge that continually provides his/her own interpretation of the law is generally overturned by a higher court.

Arguments before the bar regarding the law are in English.

The alternative, all inclusivity, of which many allude to here would eventually lead to chaos. I can see the House of Representatives and the Senate turned into a mini UN with all the officials wearing ear pieces and banks and banks of sound proof booths filled with interpreters in the background. C-SPAN would require 400 channels of 'closed captioned' commentary. Government would grind to a halt while every elected official began to debate the meaning of "is" in their own language.

There are some that have interpreted the effects of such a law as a mandate for Engish only and a reason to punish those that speak any other language. I, for one, can readily write a law that would merely accomplish the task of mandating law and goverment to English. The de-facto status today anyway.

Ishmael

 

[AmishPope]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: English as the National Language of the United States of America

Courts DO NOT interpret the law. The administrators of the law 'interpret' the law. The courts decide the validity of the interpretation based on argument once a case reaches the courtroom. That outcome then becomes 'case' law. Other courts may rely on earlier findings, find new meaning based on new argument, or flatly overturn the law. Interpretation DOES not mean across many languages. The law is administered and findings are made based on the language of the law and the language the law was written in. In the case of the United States, that language is English.

The courts are not there to rule on the law. They are there to determine which law(s) may or may not apply to a particular case. In the instance of a jury trial, the jury is 'instructed' on the law. A judge that continually provides his/her own interpretation of the law is generally overturned by a higher court.

Arguments before the bar regarding the law are in English.

The alternative, all inclusivity, of which many allude to here would eventually lead to chaos. I can see the House of Representatives and the Senate turned into a mini UN with all the officials wearing ear pieces and banks and banks of sound proof booths filled with interpreters in the background. C-SPAN would require 400 channels of 'closed captioned' commentary. Government would grind to a halt while every elected official began to debate the meaning of "is" in their own language.

There are some that have interpreted the effects of such a law as a mandate for Engish only and a reason to punish those that speak any other language. I, for one, can readily write a law that would merely accomplish the task of mandating law and goverment to English. The de-facto status today anyway.

Ishmael

heres the problem i see ish. you say courts dont interpret laws than you explain that they do. wether they decide after hearing arguemnets made by counsel or not. an example would be when the massachusettes supreme court ruled that slavery was illegal based on the wording of the declaration of independence.

further more several of our representatives at congress do speak several languages allready. and arguements made by the bar are sometimes made in languages other than english simply because not all witnesses speak english. ever hear of a court translator?

 

[Unclebill]

Originally posted by AmishPope
allright dude lets review. first of all i never said you said anything. i simply pulled that quote from your post and said hey this quote pisses me off.

My statement was their immigration here implied they perceived America's culture as better, not that they disliked their culture of origin. Believe it or not, that is a difference.

Originally posted by AmishPope
and where do you get that all cultures are equal equals slavery??? it's the ethnocentrism of believeing one culture is better than another that leads to slavery. its guys thinking "hey thsoe people are savages and we're better and smarter than they are. so we have the right to make them slaves."

Collectivism is a societal organization that is in essence slavery; the degree of slavery varies widely but the principle is a common thread of collectivism. I equate being a little bit enslaved to being a little bit pregnant. America is the only nation of which I'm aware which puts individual rights and freedoms beyond the reach of government (unalienable rights as identified in the Declaration of Independence).

Since you seem to be able to equate a government or culture like that of America to that of the Taliban, it's a bit difficult to offer much of a reasoned discussion since I see them as antitheses. What else can the following statment mean if not that?

i really get upset when people think our culture is better than someone elses. why? no one culture is better than another.
AmishPope

Originally posted by AmishPope
further more people come here for economiuc opportunities that dont exist elsewhere. most of the countries you named are 3rd world countries. and in thsoe places you arent free to have the culture you want. certianly not china and certainly not in the former pakistan regime.

Based on your quote above, if any culture is as good as another, why don't the opportunities exist in all those other equally valid and good cultures thus obviating the incentive for emigration? If all cultures are equally good and valid, why do you use the term "third world"? What makes them third rate (isn't that what third world means?) if their culture is equivalent to America's?

If their cultures are equivalent to America's why don't they produce the propserity America does? Why don't these cultures produce the technological, medical, engineering and societal advances of America?

Originally posted by AmishPope
heres the problem i see ish. you say courts dont interpret laws than you explain that they do.

Perhaps the problem is that you're confusing interpret (to explain or clarify) which is what courts do with interpret (to translate from one language to another) which is NOT what courts do.
Edited for spelling

 

[mayi]

wow......heavy thread

mayi

 

[Ishmael]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: English as the National Language of the United States of America

heres the problem i see ish. you say courts dont interpret laws than you explain that they do. wether they decide after hearing arguemnets made by counsel or not. an example would be when the massachusettes supreme court ruled that slavery was illegal based on the wording of the declaration of independence.

further more several of our representatives at congress do speak several languages allready. and arguements made by the bar are sometimes made in languages other than english simply because not all witnesses speak english. ever hear of a court translator?

UncleBill succinctly answered part I.

They do NOT speak foriegn languages while conducting the peoples business. Nor should they. Court translators are provided as a convienience and are sometimes required in the dispensation of the law. Which is written in, oh my do I dare say it, ENGLISH. The language of the litigant is of no consequence, or of any particular interest. It is the law that we are talking about. And the law is in English.

And arguments concerning the law, are made in the higher courts, before the justices of same, by attorneys who speak English and heard by judges that understand the same language. Quite elegant, don't you think?

Ishmael

 

[Guest]

Re: Re: Re: Re: English as the National Language of the United States of America

A written law that plainly says 'X' in one language and says 'Y'in another will lead to problems. That eventuality is inevitable where multiple languages are accomodated. Those countries where it's been tried have eventually fallen into civil insurrection.

Ishmael

This must be news to the Canadians on this board. They have always had two official languages and it seems to work pretty well.

 

[Weevil]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: English as the National Language of the United States of America

This must be news to the Canadians on this board. They have always had two official languages and it seems to work pretty well.

Do you know anything about Canada?

 

[CelestialBody]

 

[Guest]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: English as the National Language of the United States of America

Do you know anything about Canada?

Yes, I do.

 

[Weevil]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: English as the National Language of the United States of America

Yes, I do.

Really then did you know we came a few thousand votes from breaking apart as a country seven years ago.

 

[Guest]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: English as the National Language of the United States of America

Really then did you know we came a few thousand votes from breaking apart as a country seven years ago.

Look up the meaning of insurrection. That was a legitimate electoral exercise. Canada is still one.

 

[Monazwx]

I think that English should be the official language of the United States. If foreigners (like myself) want to settle and live here, we just have to adapt. I'm not saying that I would give up my culture or things that make me, me, but English should be a required element.

I don't know much about Canada, but where I live in Miami, it annoys me (no, it pisses me off) to ask someone a question only to be told, "No habla ingles." And these are usually employees!

Even if they want to enact official languages in the U.S., they need to ensure that English is the first language in the minds of its citizens!

 

[Guru]

 

[Unclebill]

Originally posted by Guru
American (English) as it's used in California, or American as it's used in Georgia, or in Virginia, or in New England?

as used in guvmint or is it gummint?

 

[Dixon Carter Lee]

American (English) as it's used in California, or American as it's used in Georgia, or in Virginia, or in New England?

As used in New York's fashion distict, 37th and 7th, at 8:45 every morning, before coffee.

 

[Ishmael]

Re: Re: English as the National Language of the United States of America

American (English) as it's used in California, or American as it's used in Georgia, or in Virginia, or in New England?

As used in Nachitotches, La. in the late evening after 6 trips to the drive up Daquiri window.

Ishmael

 

[AmishPope]

My statement was their immigration here implied they perceived America's culture as better, not that they disliked their culture of origin. Believe it or not, that is a difference.Collectivism is a societal organization that is in essence slavery; the degree of slavery varies widely but the principle is a common thread of collectivism. I equate being a little bit enslaved to being a little bit pregnant. America is the only nation of which I'm aware which puts individual rights and freedoms beyond the reach of government (unalienable rights as identified in the Declaration of Independence).

Since you seem to be able to equate a government or culture like that of America to that of the Taliban, it's a bit difficult to offer much of a reasoned discussion since I see them as antitheses. What else can the following statment mean if not that?Based on your quote above, if any culture is as good as another, why don't the opportunities exist in all those other equally valid and good cultures thus obviating the incentive for emigration? If all cultures are equally good and valid, why do you use the term "third world"? What makes them third rate (isn't that what third world means?) if their culture is equivalent to America's?

If their cultures are equivalent to America's why don't they produce the propserity America does? Why don't these cultures produce the technological, medical, engineering and societal advances of America?

Perhaps the problem is that you're confusing interpret (to explain or clarify) which is what courts do with interpret (to translate from one language to another) which is NOT what courts do.
Edited for spelling

unclebill you make some very interesting points. however you have misunbderstood several points in my previous post. at no time do i compare american to the former taliban regime or to any other country. at no point did i say that one culture is as good as another. i said no one culure is better than another. and the difference is this..every culture has its flaws, no one culture is perfect. ours certainly isnt. as much as i love my country we arent perfect. far from it.

further more the term 3rd world nations deals with how economically developed a country is. and other countries just dont have the economic opportunities we've been blessed with here. and most people moved here for economic reasons not cultural.

as far as prosperity is concerned thats a very personal definition. i may say a culture is prosperous and you may say it isnt. i'd also like to point out that some of the advances in science in technology you mention were made by people in other countries and from other cultures. or in some cases were made by people born in other cultures and then came here.

i will agree that when i say a court interprets a law i am using it in the sense that the courts clarify,explain and define the laws. look foward to hearing form you again.




ishmeal dude.......

first of all not all laws in this country are written in english. try visiting a reservation sometime. several laws use latin words like quid pro quo. as for the definition of the word insurrection here it is. an insurrection an organized attempt by a group of people to defeat the government or the person who is in power and take control of the country, usually by violence . in essence a insurrectiion is an unseccesful revolution and last time i looked canada never had one of those. but hey we did even though we were 'using' english as our language. i like living in a place where i can walk down one street hear one language and walk 2 blocks over and hear another language. and just because someone doesnt speak english doesnt make them any less a valuable member of society.

 

[Ishmael]

Are you listening?

ishmeal dude.......

first of all not all laws in this country are written in english. try visiting a reservation sometime. several laws use latin words like quid pro quo. as for the definition of the word insurrection here it is. an insurrection an organized attempt by a group of people to defeat the government or the person who is in power and take control of the country, usually by violence . in essence a insurrectiion is an unseccesful revolution and last time i looked canada never had one of those. but hey we did even though we were 'using' english as our language. i like living in a place where i can walk down one street hear one language and walk 2 blocks over and hear another language. and just because someone doesnt speak english doesnt make them any less a valuable member of society.

While it's true that Canada had a referendum on seperation, the more radical French sepratists caused more than their share of problems in the interim, and will probably continue to do so. Insurrection, revolution, violent protest, call it what you will, it's still trouble. You know, in a funny way I'm sorry that the referendum failed. It would have been interesting to see the aftermath. My guess that would have been --- Ontario and the Territories remaining 'Canada', BC forming it's own country, and the Prarie Provinces applying for Statehood with the US. The Maritimes, who know's?

The law is in English, the use of "SOME" latin phrases goes back to roots in Engilsh Common Law. While there may be some tribal lands that use their language in reservation law, that law ends at the tribal boundries and the tribal courts do not extend into the US legal system.

You, and a few others here have arbitrarily decided that making English the "official" languae is an 'all or nothing' act. Why is that? It has been denied by all who have supported same, but you continually insist that it still is. Is that because you have choosen NOT to read our statements? Or that you have choosen to ignore same so you can continue to argue that same tired line?

Ishmael

 

[Unclebill]

Originally posted by AmishPope
unclebill you make some very interesting points. however you have misunbderstood several points in my previous post. at no time do i compare american to the former taliban regime or to any other country. at no point did i say that one culture is as good as another. i said no one culure is better than another. and the difference is this..every culture has its flaws, no one culture is perfect. ours certainly isnt. as much as i love my country we arent perfect. far from it.

You have me totally baffled by your logic here. If none is better, the corollary is that none is worse, thus all are equivalent. If, as you state, no culture is better than another, that implicitly declares that assessing a level of good for any culture is a measure of every culture, i. e., no notable differentiation.

And just for clarity, I've never implied any was perfect. Nor did I say you compared America to the Taliban, only that you equated them which by itself involves an implicit comparison. How else to you reach a decision of equivalence (none is better/worse) if there is no comparison?

Originally posted by AmishPope
further more the term 3rd world nations deals with how economically developed a country is. and other countries just dont have the economic opportunities we've been blessed with here. and most people moved here for economic reasons not cultural.

Since, by your implicit declaration, all are equivalent, why was it necessary for immigration to America for these people to accomplish their achievements? An equivalent environment would obviate the need for emigration. You are ignoring that the reason for economic development is precisely due to the culture/government/societal organization as integral components of the societies. Oppressive totalitarian regimes of whatever degree they impose are the oppressors of freedom and freedom directly correlates to economic development. The economic opportunities we've been blessed with here are the precise result of freedom, of a government specifically crafted as a protector of freedom rather than the source of revocable rights and freedoms at political whim, the difference between freedom and slavery.

 

[Dixon Carter Lee]

Aside from a few Colonial Flag-Waving Yahoos this is the most interestingly debated thread I've read in a long time. Who started it?

 

[seXieleXie]

your mom.









(sorry, i'm a little loopy. i think i'll go to bed now.