The ‘English-only’ debate is believed to have stemmed in the 1980s, “out of nowhere” (Crawford J., 1996) due to the nervousness that the national language of the United States was under a serious threat due to intrusion from the assimilation of other languages spoken in America, thereby necessitating ‘legal protection’ (Crawford J., 1996). As a result of this potential threat to the language, several legal actions have been taken to protect it from being infringed from other languages and to give it an ‘official status’ (Crawford J., 1996).
The United States serves the home to a hundred and seventy-five languages, more than half of which were in use much before the arrival of the Europeans (Krauss, 1996).
The proponents of the ‘English-only’ movement argue that the language is under potential siege from the severe and rapid immigration of the United States. Making English an official language will serve many benefits. The proponents of the movement debate that English has always served as the adhesive factor and a link between the diverse citizens of the United States. As a result of rapid, incessant immigration, English is losing its importance in its own land, and the move is necessary to restore its status to the language. The supporters of the ‘English-only’ movement include the likes of former senator of Idaho, Steve Symms, who caution that innumerable Indians have lost their lives due to “language riots”, and that there is likelihood for a “similar situation” to be replicated in America (Linda Chávez, 1995). Social scientists such as Citrin et al. (1990), debate that the ‘English-only’ movement mirrors the ‘positive attachment’ of the loyalists of America and will serve to harness feelings of uniformity among its speakers. The initial crusaders of the movement including Benjamin Franklin, asserted that the ‘English-only’ campaigns will avert the potential “disorders and inconveniences” arising due to lack of assimilation (Franklin, B. 1961).
Proponents argue that America is becoming a melting pot not only in terms of cultures, but also in terms of languages. The assimilation of other ethnic languages in the country has diversified the varieties of English in the current scenario. This has posed a considerable threat to the native English language. If English is then the only language, it becomes a compulsion for the ethnic minorities to learn the correct use of the language which will ultimately increase its accurate usage.
The employment of ‘English-only’ edification would serve to provide the same platform of language to all the learners. In this way, it would also serve to generate “sameness of sentiment, and thought”, thereby incorporating of “customs and habits” in similar patterns which would gradually and ultimately eliminate any problems arising due to language differences (Atkins, 1887).
The crusaders of the English-only campaign have cited that a commonly spoken language is a necessity to reconcile any discrepancies in a peaceful manner. They state that the knowledge of English language would serve in ‘civilizing’ the ‘barbarous’ (Atkins, 1887).
Fishman (1992), states that the increased importance of English will, if not stop, at least reduce the congestion, criminal activities, decline of the American life-style and coarseness, which have been regarded as having emerged due to the increased migration in the United States of America.
The opponents of the English-only movement provide substantial arguments to support their stance. They debate that, learning more than one language not only makes one tolerant to other people, but also opens one’s mind to the diverse cultures.
Researchers have firmly asserted that the acquisition of second language is immensely advantageous to learners. It has been proved that those students who are language- minority students, often fail, not because they have received lesser tutoring in English but because they have not received enough tutoring in their own language (Ramírez et al., 1991).
The English-only crusade would serve to threaten the minority communities of the United States. This campaign would symbolize the intolerance of the government towards the ethnic communities living in America. There is a potential danger of subjugation in case English gained status as an official language, sending the silent message that the nation is no longer ready to recognize the rights and status of the minorities living there (Crawford J., 1996). There would be a demand restricting the use of the mother tongue, which would ultimately disrupt the current social arrangement.
In study conducted in 1925, it was reported that, when a similar initiative was taken by the government in Puerto Rico to make the edification of the students in the English language mandatory, there was a drop-out rate to the tune of eighty-four percent students by the end of the third grade (Osuna, 1949). President Franklin Roosevelt appointed an administrator to increase English education in the year 1937, was reported stating that the situation was “regrettable” that after thirty-eight years, numerous Puerto Ricans had “little and virtually no knowledge of the English language” (Roosevelt, 1937). Ultimately, in the year 1948, Spanish was restored as the prime language of edification in schools. Thus we can gauge that such an initiative in the current scenario, is then likely to generate similar if not the same results. Tensions will evolve as a result of religious sentiments being hurt. The minorities in the United States today, do form a considerable number of the population.
Most language experts are of the common view that those children who have the knowledge of two or more languages are in a better position than their peers who are mono-lingual. They assert that this bilingualism among individuals promotes social skills which result due to the ability of ‘switching’ from one language to another (Crow K.,).
She reiterates the fact that the bilingualism gives a better edge professionally to aspiring adults, making second language the “golden ticket”, to a blooming career. In today’s society, where there is enhanced globalization, the knowledge of only one language would definitely hamper the prospects of a successful career.
Contrary to popular American belief, it is the minority languages are threatened by the English language. In his article ‘Bilingualism Persists, But English Still Dominates’, Richard Alba points that although bilingualism does exist in societies today, it is on the decline. Alba states that English remains to be the preferred language of most immigrants. He elucidates the pattern of “three-generation shift” towards mono-lingualism of English. He states that the initial generations of the immigration families that came to the U.S., were primarily speakers of their mother-tongue, learning just enough English to survive. The children of these immigrants were reared in homes where the parents spoke their mother-tongue, but the children were sent to English speaking schools. These children used English extensively in the society as a means of communicating with their peers, friends and sometimes even their parents, as a result, these children in spite of having the knowledge of their mother-tongue, are primarily speakers of English. It is then highly likely that the children of this generation may have little or no knowledge of their mother-tongue, resulting in monolingulism in English.
References
Alba R., ‘Bilingualism Persists, But English Still Dominates’, Web.
Atkins, J. D. C. 1992 [1887]. ‘Annual report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs’. Excerpted in Crawford 1992b.
Chavez L., 1995. ‘One nation, one common language’. Reader’s Digest, 87-91.
Citrin, J., Reingold, B., Walters, E. and Green, D. P. (1990). The ‘Official English’ movement and the symbolic politics of language in the United States. Western Political Quarterly 43 (3).
Crawford, J. 1996. Buchanan presidential campaign takes a Pratt fall. Hispanic Link Weekly Report, Mar. 4, 4.
Crawford, J., 1995. Bilingual education: History, politics, theory, and practice. 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Bilingual Educational Services.
Crawford J., 1992a. Hold your tongue: Bilingualism and the politics of “English Only.” Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Crawford, J., ed. 1992b. Language loyalties: A source book on the official English controversy.Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992.
Fishman, Joshua A. 1988. ‘The displaced anxieties of Anglo-Americans’. In Crawford 1992b.
Franklin, B., 1961. ‘The papers of Benjamin Franklin, vol. 4’. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Krauss M., 1996. ‘Status of Native American language endangerment.Stabilizing indigenous languages’, ed. by Gina Cantoni.
Osuna, Juan José. 1949. A history of education in Puerto Rico. Río Piedras, PR: Editorial de la Universidad de Puerto Rico.
Ramírez, J. David; Yuen, Sandra D.; and Ramey, Dena R. 1991.Final report: Longitudinal study of structured English immersion strategy, early-exit and late-exit transitional bilingual education programs for language-minority children. San Mateo, CA: Aguirre International.
Roosevelt, Franklin D. 1937. Letter to José M. Gallardo. The public papers and addresses of Franklin D. Roosevelt, 1937. New York: Macmillan, 1941.
Symms S., 1983. ‘Statement in Congressional Record’, 98th Cong.