LANGUAGE IN INDIA

IN DEFENSE OF "ENGLISH ONLY":
LANGUAGE MOVEMENTS IN THE U.S.A. - - PART 2.

M. S. Thirumalai, Ph.D.

1. PRIMACY OF ENGLISH IN THE UNITED STATES ATTACKED AND DEFENDED

Who would have expected that one-day the primacy of English, as the sole medium of government and day-to-day transactions in the United States would be challenged? Who would have expected the need for a people's movement to spring up in defense of English? As we described in the first part of this article last month (Lanuage Movements in the U.S.A., Language in India, May 2002), many powerful and vociferous organizations began to demand space for the other languages within the polity of the United States. While a small minority makes the demand, their arguments have had some success in changing the direction of government involvement in so far as the non-English languages are concerned. However, the vast majority of the people, including the recent immigrants, appear to support, and argue for, the maintenance of the English Only policy. The immigrants notice that the practical advantages of mastering the English language are immense, not to be missed by their children.

Statements from two organizations are presented below. The first statement is from the American Civil Liberties Union that argues in favor of the non-English languages. The second statement is from the U.S. English, Inc., that argues in favor of passing legislation and constitutional amendment to make English as the only official language of the United States. This organization was founded and led by well-known semanticist, S. I. Hayakawa.

2. ACLU BRIEFING PAPER: "ENGLISH ONLY"

Copyright [1997}, American Civil Liberties Union Reprinted with permission of the American Civil Liberties Union http://www.aclu.org

From its inception, the United States has been a multilingual nation.

At the time of the nation's founding, it was commonplace to hear as many as 20 languages spoken in daily life, including Dutch, French, German and numerous Native American languages. Even the Articles of Confederation were printed in German, as well as English. During the 19th and early 20th centuries, the nation's linguistic diversity grew as successive waves of Europeans immigrated to these shores and U.S. territory expanded to include Puerto Rico, Hawaii and the Phillipines.

Just as languages other than English have always been a part of our history and culture, debate over establishing a national language dates back to the country's beginnings. John Adams proposed to the Continental Congress in 1780 that an official academy be created to "purify, develop, and dictate usage of," English. His proposal was rejected as undemocratic and a threat to individual liberty.

Nonetheless, restrictive language laws have been enacted periodically since the late 19th century, usually in response to new waves of immigration. These laws, in practice if not in intent, have punished immigrants for their foreignness and violated their rights.

In the early 1980s, again during a period of concern about new immigration, a movement arose that seeks the establishment of English as the nation's official language. The "English Only" movement promotes the enactment of legislation that restricts or prohibits the use of languages other than English by government agencies and, in some cases, by private businesses. The movement has met with some success, "English Only" laws having been passed in several states. And, for the first time in the nation's history, an English Language Amendment to the Constitution has been proposed.

The ACLU opposes "English Only" laws because they can abridge the rights of individuals who are not proficient in English, and because they perpetuate false stereotypes of immigrants and non-English speakers. We believe, further, that such laws are contrary to the spirit of tolerance and diversity embodied in our Constitution. An English Language Amendment to the Constitution would transform that document from being a charter of liberties and individual freedom into a charter of restrictions that limits, rather than protects, individual rights.

Here are the ACLU's answers to some questions frequently posed by the public about "English Only" issues.

Q: What is an "English Only" law?

A: "English Only" laws vary. Some state statutes simply declare English as the "official" language of the state. Other state and local edicts limit or bar government's provision of non-English language assistance and services. For example, some restrict bilingual education programs, prohibit multilingual ballots, or forbid non-English government services in general -- including such services as courtroom translation or multilingual emergency police lines.

Q: Where have such laws been enacted?

A: Sixteen states have "English Only" laws, and many others are considering such laws. In some states, the laws were passed decades ago during upsurges of nativism, but most were passed within the last few years. The "English Only" states are Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Mississippi, Nebraska, North Carolina, North Dakota, South Carolina, Tennessee and Virginia.

Q: What are the consequences of "English Only" laws?

A: Some versions of the proposed English Language Amendment would void almost all state and federal laws that require the government to provide services in languages other than English. The services affected would include: health, education and social welfare services, job training, translation assistance to crime victims and witnesses in court and administrative proceedings; voting assistance and ballots, drivers' licensing exams, and AIDS-prevention education.

Passage of an "English Only" ordinance by Florida's Dade County in 1980, barring public funding of activities that involved the use of languages other than English, resulted in the cancellation of all multicultural events and bilingual services, ranging from directional signs in the public transit system to medical services at the county hospital.

Where basic human needs are met by bilingual or multilingual services, the consequences of their elimination could be dire. For example, the Washington Times reported in 1987 that a 911 emergency dispatcher was able to save the life of a Salvadoran woman's baby son, who had stopped breathing, by coaching the mother in Spanish over the telephone to administer mouth-to-mouth and cardio-pulmonary resuscitation until the paramedics arrived.

Q: Do "English Only" laws affect only government services and programs?

A: "English Only" laws apply primarily to government programs. However, such laws can also affect private businesses. For example, several Southern California cities have passed ordinances that forbid or restrict the use of foreign languages on private business signs.

Some "English Only" advocates have opposed a telephone company's use of multilingual operators and multilingual directories, Federal Communications Commission licensing of Spanish-language radio stations, and bilingual menus at fast food restaurants.

Q: Who is affected by "English Only" laws?

A: "English Only" campaigns target primarily Latinos and Asians, who make up the majority of recent immigrants. Most language minority residents are Spanish-speaking, a result of the sharp rise in immigration from Latin America during the mid-1960s.

While the overwhelming majority of U.S. residents -- 96 percent -- are fluent, approximately ten million residents are not fluent in English, according to the most recent census.

Q: How do "English Only" laws deprive people of their rights?

A: The ACLU believes that "English Only" laws are inconsistent with the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. For example, laws that have the effect of eliminating courtroom translation severely jeopardize the ability of people on trial to follow and comprehend the proceedings. "English Only" laws interfere with the right to vote by banning bilingual ballots, or with a child's right to education by restricting bilingual instruction. Such laws also interfere with the right of workers to be free of discrimination in workplaces where employers have imposed "speak English only" rules.

In 1987, the ACLU adopted a national policy opposing "English Only" laws or laws that would "characterize English as the official language in the United States...to the extent that [they] would mandate or encourage the erosion" of the rights of language minority persons.

Q: What kinds of language policies were adopted with regard to past generations of immigrants?

A: Our nation was tolerant of linguistic diversity up until the late 1800s, when an influx of Eastern and Southern Europeans, as well as Asians, aroused nativist sentiments and prompted the enactment of restrictive language laws. A 1911 Federal Immigration Commission report falsely argued that the "old" Scandinavian and German immigrants had assimilated quickly, while the "new" Italian and Eastern European immigrants were inferior to their predecessors, less willing to learn English, and more prone to political subversion.

In order to "Americanize" the immigrants and exclude people thought to be of the lower classes and undesirable, English literacy requirements were established for public employment, naturalization, immigration and suffrage. The New York State Constitution was amended to disfranchise over one million Yiddish-speaking citizens. The California Constitution was similarly amended to disfranchise Chinese, who were seen as a threat to the "purity of the ballot box."

Ironically, during the same period, the government sought to "Americanize" Native American Indian children by taking them from their families and forcing them to attend English-language boarding schools, where they were punished for speaking their indigenous languages.

The intense anti-German sentiment that accompanied the outbreak of World War I prompted several states, where bilingual schools had been commonplace, to enact extreme language laws. For example, Nebraska passed a law in 1919 prohibiting the use of any other language than English through the eighth grade. The Supreme Court subsequently declared the law an unconstitutional violation of due process.

Today, as in the past, "English Only" laws in the U.S. are founded on false stereotypes of immigrant groups. Such laws do not simply disparage the immigrants' native languages but assault the rights of the people who speak the languages.

Q: Why are bilingual ballots needed since citizenship is required to vote, English literacy is required for citizenship, and political campaigns are largely conducted in English?

A: Naturalization for U. S. citizenship does not require English literacy for people over 50, and/or who have been in the U. S. for 20 years or more. Thus, there are many elderly immigrant citizens whose ability to read English is limited, and who cannot exercise their right to vote without bilingual ballots and other voter materials. Moreover, bilingual campaign materials and ballots foster a better informed electorate by increasing the information available to people who lack English proficiency.

Q: Doesn't bilingual education slow immigrant children's learning of English, in contrast to the "sink or swim" method that was used in the past?

A: The primary purpose of bilingual programs in elementary and secondary schools, which use both English and a child's native language to teach all subjects, is to develop proficiency in English and, thus, facilitate the child's transition to all-English instruction. Although debate about this approach continues, the latest studies show that bilingual education definitely enhances a child's ability to acquire the second language. Some studies even show that the more extensive the native language instruction, the better students perform all around, and that the bilingual method engenders a positive self-image and self-respect by validating the child's native language and culture.

The "sink or swim" experience of past immigrants left more of them underwater than not. In 1911, the U. S. Immigration Service found that 77 percent of Italian, 60 percent of Russian, and 51 percent of German immigrant children were one or more grade levels behind in school compared to 28 percent of American-born white children. Moreover, those immigrants who did manage to "swim" unaided in the past, when agricultural and factory jobs were plentiful, might not do so well in today's "high-tech" economy, with its more rigorous educational requirements.

Q: But won't "English Only" laws speed up the assimilation of today's immigrants into our society and prevent their isolation?

A: In fact, contrary to what "English Only" advocates assume, the vast majority of today's Asian and Latino immigrants are acquiring English proficiency and assimilating as fast as did earlier generations of Italian, Russian and German immigrants. For example, research studies show that over 95 percent of first generation Mexican Americans are English proficient, and that more than 50 percent of second generation Mexican Americans have lost their native tongue entirely.

In addition, census data reveal that nearly 90 percent of Latinos five years old or older speak English in their households. And 98 percent of Latinos surveyed said they felt it is "essential" that their children learn to read and write English "perfectly ." Unfortunately, not enough educational resources are available for immigrants -- over 40,000 are on the waiting list for over-enrolled adult English classes in Los Angeles. "English Only" laws do not increase resources to meet these needs.

The best insurance against social isolation of those who immigrate to our nation is acceptance -- and celebration -- of the differences that exist within our ethnically diverse citizenry. The bond that unites our nation is not linguistic or ethnic homogeneity but a shared commitment to democracy, liberty, and equality.

3. DEMAND FOR MAKING ENGLISH AS THE OFFICIAL LANGUAGE OF THE UNITED STATES

U.S.ENGLISH, Inc. is the nation's oldest, largest citizens' group dedicated to preserving the unifying role of the English language in the United States. Founded in 1983 by the late Senator S.I Hayakawa, an immigrant himself, U.S. English now has 1.5 million members nationwide.Mauro E. Mujica, an architect and international businessman as well as an immigrant from Chile, has been the Chairman/CEO of U.S.ENGLISH Inc. since 1993 and prior to that, served on the Board of Directors beginning in 1992. Because of his commitment to keeping this nation unified through a common language and his own experience as an immigrant, Mr. Mujica has succeeded in making U.S.ENGLISH Inc. one of the fastest-growing interest groups in the country.

U.S.ENGLISH believes that the passage of English as the official language will help to expand opportunities for immigrants to learn and speak English, the single greatest empowering tool that immigrants must have to succeed. Currently, U.S.ENGLISH is working with members of the House of Representatives and Senate to help pass official English legislation in the 107th Congress. In 1996 U.S.ENGLISH was instrumental in helping to pass "The Bill Emerson English Language Empowerment Act of 1996" in the House of Representatives. This bill passed the House of Representatives by a vote of 259-169, with 36 Democrats joining Republicans in this historic vote. Unfortunately, the Senate failed to act on the bill before the session was over.On the state level, 27 states have English as their official language and several more are considering similar legislation. In the last six years, Alaska, Georgia, Iowa, Montana, New Hampshire, South Dakota, Utah, Virginia, Wyoming and Missouri have enacted some form of official English legislation with the help of U.S.ENGLISH.

U.S.ENGLISH, Inc. is a separate organization from the U.S.ENGLISH Foundation, which promotes English education and public awareness of issues surrounding our common language.

About the Issue

Declaring English the official language means that official government business at all levels must be conducted solely in English. This includes all public documents, records, legislation and regulations, as well as hearings, official ceremonies and public meetings.

Official English legislation contains common-sense exceptions permitting the use of languages other than English for such things as public health and safety services, judicial proceedings (although actual trials would be conducted in English), foreign language instruction and the promotion of tourism.

In 1996, U.S.ENGLISH was instrumental in passing H.R. 123, "The Bill Emerson English Language Empowerment Act of 1996." That bill, making English the official language of the U.S. government, passed in the House of Representatives with a bipartisan vote of 259-169. Unfortunately, the Senate did not act on the bill before the end of the session. Currently, U.S.ENGLISH is working with Rep. Bob Barr of Georgia and Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama to help pass official English bills in the 107th Congress.H.R. 1984 is pending in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Twenty-seven states have some form of official English law. Most recently, Iowa passed official English legislation in 2002. U.S.ENGLISH is currently working in several additional states to pass official English bills.

Why Is Official English Necessary?

Declaring English the official language is essential and beneficial for the U.S. government and its citizens. Official English unites Americans, who speak more than 329 languages (1990, U.S. Census), by providing a common means of communication; it encourages immigrants to learn English in order to use government services and participate in the democratic process; and it defines a much-needed common sense language policy.

Official English promotes unity. Our national motto is E pluribus unum-out of many, one. Immigrants of many nationalities built our nation, but the "melting pot" melded us into one people. This long tradition of assimilation has always included the adoption of English as the common means of communication. Unfortunately, the proliferation of multilingual government sends the opposite message to non-English speakers: it is not necessary to learn English because the government will accommodate them in other languages. A study published by the U.S. Department of Labor found that immigrants are slower to learn English when they receive a lot of native language support. (Monthly Labor Review, December 1992.) Thus, multilingual government services actually encourage the growth of linguistic enclaves. This division of the United States into separate language groups contributes to racial and ethnic conflicts. Designating English as the official language will help reverse this harmful process.

Official English empowers immigrants. Immigrants will benefit from the elevation of English to official status. Instead of the mixed message government sends by making it possible to file tax returns, vote, become U.S. citizens and receive a host of other services in a variety of languages, immigrants will understand that they must know English to fully participate in the process of government. Providing multi-lingual services creates dependence on "linguistic welfare." Life without English proficiency in the United States is a life of low-skilled, low-paying jobs. Studies of Census data show that an immigrant's income rises about 30% as a result of learning English. Knowledge of English leads to the realization of the American dream of increased economic opportunity and the ability to become a more productive member of society, which benefits everyone.

Official English is common sense government. The designation of official English will eliminate the needless duplication of government services in multiple languages. It is not the responsibility of the government to provide services in the 329 different languages spoken in the United States. It is the responsibility of each individual to either learn English or to find a friend or family member to translate. The money formerly spent on multi-lingual services can instead provide immigrants with the assistance they really need-classes to teach them English.

Official English legislation recognizes the need for common sense exceptions permitting the use of other languages for emergency, safety and health services; judicial proceedings; foreign language instruction and tourism promotion. Of course, because official English is only a limitation on government, it does not affect the languages spoken in private businesses, religious services or private conversations.

Frequently Asked Questions

Isn't English already our official language?

No, despite the fact that most Americans speak English, it is not the official language of the United States. Contrary to popular myth, English did not win out over German by one vote to become our official language. The Founding Fathers never really discussed this issue because over 90 percent of the voting population was of British ancestry. It was not until the 1960s that the U.S. began its current multilingual policies and the need for English to be the official language became evident.Why is it necessary to declare English our official language?Official English promotes unity, and empowers immigrants by encouraging them to learn English, the language of opportunity in this country.

What happens when English is declared the official language?

All official documents, records, legislation and regulations, as well as hearings, ceremonies and public meetings are conducted solely in English, with some common sense exceptions.

When are languages other than English permitted in government under official English legislation?

Official English legislation allows a variety of common sense exceptions permitting the use of languages other than English: public health and safety, international relations and national security, judicial proceedings (although actual trials would be conducted in English), tourism, foreign language instruction, terms of art or phrases from other languages, etc.

How does official English affect private businesses and private citizens' daily lives?

Official English legislation only applies to government functions. Language policies in private business are not affected, and private citizens are still free to use any language they wish in their daily lives.

Is there official English on the state level?

Twenty-seven states have official English laws and several more are considering similar legislation. Most recently, Iowa, Alaska, Missouri, New Hampshire, Montana, South Dakota, and Wyoming have declared English their official language.Is there an official English language bill pending on the federal level?With the support of U.S.ENGLISH, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 123 -- "The Bill Emerson English Language Empowerment Act of 1996," with a bipartisan vote of 259-169 in August 1996. Unfortunately, the Senate failed to act before the end of the session. Named in honor of the late Congressman Bill Emerson (R-MO), this bill would have made English the official language of the U.S. government. The bill was reintroduced by Rep. Bob Barr (R-GA) in the 106th Congress, H.R. 1984. On the Senate side, Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL) has a similar bill.

Does official English legislation affect bilingual education or bilingual ballots?

While bilingual education is not directly addressed by official English legislation, U.S.ENGLISH supports the reform of bilingual education to favor programs that are English-intensive, short-term and transitional.

Does official English legislation imply that English is better than other languages or that there is anything wrong with speaking other languages?

Official English legislation discourages multilingualism only at the government level. There is no question that being proficient in other languages in addition to English is extremely advantageous to an individual. Multilingualism in government, however, actually discourages immigrants from gaining proficiency English.

Does official English legislation violate "freedom of speech" and has this ever been brought up in the courts?

What happens when English is declared the official language?

All official documents, records, legislation and regulations, as well as hearings, ceremonies and public meetings are conducted solely in English, with some common sense exceptions.

When are languages other than English permitted in government under official English legislation?

Official English legislation allows a variety of common sense exceptions permitting the use of languages other than English: public health and safety, international relations and national security, judicial proceedings (although actual trials would be conducted in English), tourism, foreign language instruction, terms of art or phrases from other languages, etc.

How does official English affect private businesses and private citizens' daily lives?

Official English legislation only applies to government functions. Language policies in private business are not affected, and private citizens are still free to use any language they wish in their daily lives.

Is there official English on the state level?

Twenty-seven states have official English laws and several more are considering similar legislation. Most recently, Iowa, Alaska, Missouri, New Hampshire, Montana, South Dakota, and Wyoming have declared English their official language.Is there an official English language bill pending on the federal level?With the support of U.S.ENGLISH, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 123 -- "The Bill Emerson English Language Empowerment Act of 1996," with a bipartisan vote of 259-169 in August 1996. Unfortunately, the Senate failed to act before the end of the session. Named in honor of the late Congressman Bill Emerson (R-MO), this bill would have made English the official language of the U.S. government. The bill was reintroduced by Rep. Bob Barr (R-GA) in the 106th Congress, H.R. 1984. On the Senate side, Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL) has a similar bill.

Does official English legislation affect bilingual education or bilingual ballots?

Does official English legislation violate "freedom of speech" and has this ever been brought up in the courts?

Because official English legislation is a limitation on government, not private individuals, it does not violate the principle of freedom of speech. The courts have usually held that the government is under no general obligation to provide services in a language other than English. The Arizona State Supreme Court did overturn Arizona's official English law on the basis that it was too broad. Other state official English laws are not affected because Arizona's law was unique.

Is official English legislation anti-immigrant?

Official English legislation is actually pro-immigrant. A study published by the U.S. Department of Labor found that immigrants learned English more quickly when there was less native language support around them. A "linguistic welfare" system that accommodates immigrants in their native languages lowers the incentive to learn English and restricts them to low-skilled, low-paying jobs. Official English legislation encourages immigrants to learn English so they can truly enjoy the economic opportunities available to them in this country.

Misconceptions About Official English

Let's clear up some misconceptions about Official English...

Can other languages be used in our day-to-day private lives?

Of course!

Can other languages be used by government officials in emergency situations or in the investigation of crimes?

Absolutely!

Can other languages be taught and promoted in our society?

We encourage it!

Can other languages be used by elected officials to communicate with constituents?

You bet!

Can non-English terms of art, names, phrases or expressions be used?

Can other languages be used for international trade, tourism and diplomacy?

Definitely!

So what's the fuss all about?

We don't know.

Official English benefits every resident of this wonderful melting pot called America. The melting pot works-because we have a common language.

English is the key to opportunity in this country. It empowers immigrants and makes us truly united as a people. Common sense says that the government should teach people English rather than provide services in multiple languages. What would happen if our government had to provide services in all 329 languages spoken in the U.S.? Without a common language, how long would we remain the "United" States?

*** *** ***

HOME PAGE | Linguistic and Social Characteristics of Indian English | In Defense of "English Only": Language Movements in the U.S.A. | Mother Tongues of India, According to the 1961 Census | CONTACT EDITOR