NorthSideSox72 Posted May 28, 2008 Share Posted May 28, 2008 QUOTE (jackie hayes @ May 28, 2008 -> 10:32 AM) But the statement was that Tex would learn Spanish adequately because he was surrounded with it. If he moved to an area with a large English-speaking community, went to bars that beamed English-language broadcasts on the tvs, and had access to English-language newspapers at the Siete-Once every morning, I don't see how he would be surrounded by Spanish, at all. No little once-weekly English (or Spanish) class is going to overcome that. We can criticize people for living in such a community, but asking people to live in enforced loneliness is something I could never honestly demand of anyone. Enforced loneliness? If you move to a community, or a country, where the dominant language isn't one you know... you can learn it if you make the effort. Or, you can choose loneliness. But here in this case, we have a community who speaks majority Spanish, in a county/state/country that is majority English. So it goes beyond just that. A choice has to be made about how to bridge the gap, or whether to bridge it at all. Any path you take will have costs and issues - but IMO, the path of English will cause the fewest problems in the long run, for government purposes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted May 28, 2008 Share Posted May 28, 2008 QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ May 28, 2008 -> 10:27 AM) Businesses wouldn't print their order forms in 30 different languages if the cost to do so would outweigh the benefits of doing so. If the government doesn't do that, they get sued by the ACLU. Hell, we may have to redesign and print all our money because a minority doesn't like that they can't use it (blind people). So the cost to accomodate blind people will be in the billions, for both government and private businesses who have to adapt to whatever new money designs come out. Not a very efficient use of resources to offer 'service for our blind customers.' Should we start printing our money with Spanish words as well? If the people are going to work here, live here, use social services here, at least try to fit in, just a little bit. Nobody is asking them to become white, just learn a little language to get by. I'm done. I see where this is going. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted May 28, 2008 Share Posted May 28, 2008 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ May 28, 2008 -> 10:37 AM) Enforced loneliness? If you move to a community, or a country, where the dominant language isn't one you know... you can learn it if you make the effort. Or, you can choose loneliness. But here in this case, we have a community who speaks majority Spanish, in a county/state/country that is majority English. So it goes beyond just that. A choice has to be made about how to bridge the gap, or whether to bridge it at all. Any path you take will have costs and issues - but IMO, the path of English will cause the fewest problems in the long run, for government purposes. OK, there are 3,000 people in this community who need to learn English, how does that happen? Where do they go? Who pays for it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted May 28, 2008 Share Posted May 28, 2008 QUOTE (Texsox @ May 28, 2008 -> 10:50 AM) OK, there are 3,000 people in this community who need to learn English, how does that happen? Where do they go? Who pays for it? I believe setting up English classes would cost less than hiring a few new offices and government employees that can speak Spanish. Hire some high school or college Spanish teachers to set up classes a few days a week. If they have to spend money on something,this would bring back the biggest return. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted May 28, 2008 Share Posted May 28, 2008 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ May 28, 2008 -> 11:37 AM) Enforced loneliness? If you move to a community, or a country, where the dominant language isn't one you know... you can learn it if you make the effort. Or, you can choose loneliness. But here in this case, we have a community who speaks majority Spanish, in a county/state/country that is majority English. So it goes beyond just that. A choice has to be made about how to bridge the gap, or whether to bridge it at all. Any path you take will have costs and issues - but IMO, the path of English will cause the fewest problems in the long run, for government purposes. Or...you can move to a community where the dominant language is the one you know, within the country that has a different dominant language. I don't see how simply demanding that hundreds, maybe thousands of people do something quite difficult involves fewer problems or lower costs than making available one person with the ability to translate. More generally, you have a community that is "overwhelmingly" Spanish-speaking. Instead of asking the government to serve its community -- an idea that strikes me as being more fundamentally American than the English language -- you're asking the community to serve the government. That (and the impracticality) is what bothers me about your position, not anything about "culture". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted May 28, 2008 Share Posted May 28, 2008 QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ May 28, 2008 -> 10:55 AM) I believe setting up English classes would cost less than hiring a few new offices and government employees that can speak Spanish. Hire some high school or college Spanish teachers to set up classes a few days a week. If they have to spend money on something,this would bring back the biggest return. How many people in each class? 30? That would be 100 classes. How often should they meet? How about three times per week. 300 class hours would be about 8 or 9 teachers. Where should the lessons be held? Maybe we need a building? Either get High Schhol grads to move here and take these jobs, or have the company that makes the profits hire some bilingual emplyees for the local government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted May 28, 2008 Share Posted May 28, 2008 There have been plenty of enclaves in the past where people never bothered to learn English, or never bothered to assimilate. And that is the case with many first generation immigrants. It's why there are strong Chinese communities in New York City, it's why there are Polish and Russian radio stations in Chicago. Hell, its why Delta advertises in Russian on billboards in Coney Island. The first generation is not as apt to assimilate as its children. I live in a very hispanic neighborhood. The parents might not speak English well, but the kids do. In fact the kids don't really speak Spanish all that well. If we're really concerned about foreign workers coming in and taking over our culture, maybe we need to stop allowing our employers to encourage that labor pool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted May 28, 2008 Share Posted May 28, 2008 QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ May 28, 2008 -> 11:30 AM) There have been plenty of enclaves in the past where people never bothered to learn English, or never bothered to assimilate. And that is the case with many first generation immigrants. It's why there are strong Chinese communities in New York City, it's why there are Polish and Russian radio stations in Chicago. Hell, its why Delta advertises in Russian on billboards in Coney Island. The first generation is not as apt to assimilate as its children. I live in a very hispanic neighborhood. The parents might not speak English well, but the kids do. In fact the kids don't really speak Spanish all that well. If we're really concerned about foreign workers coming in and taking over our culture, maybe we need to stop allowing our employers to encourage that labor pool. And historically, the government didn't try to learn their languages. That fact was among the reasons why the youth then adapted - because they had to. If not, the business of the country would have become much more difficult and costly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted May 28, 2008 Share Posted May 28, 2008 Both of your posts are exactly right historically. 1st generations never really bothered to learn English, or leave their own neighborhoods. Its usually the 2nd and 3rd that assimilate. But its also very true that the government made no accomidations for other people. If you wanted governmental service, usually the kids were brought down to the local office to translate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted May 28, 2008 Share Posted May 28, 2008 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ May 28, 2008 -> 11:40 AM) And historically, the government didn't try to learn their languages. That fact was among the reasons why the youth then adapted - because they had to. If not, the business of the country would have become much more difficult and costly. It costs more to translate a document 10,000 times while people wait in line then to translate it once in an office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrunkBomber Posted May 28, 2008 Author Share Posted May 28, 2008 Its pretty obvious we all have very different ideas about language barriers and what we feel is the best way to handle them. Im sure everyone gathered I am adamantly opposed to stuff like the topics in the two articles in the thread and I personally think to be a citizen you should at least have to attempt to learn the language and assimilate yourself. I dont care what means they use to do it or how they accomplish it either. If people that live in this country dont make any effort to learn the language that the vast majority speak than it shouldnt be our jobs to accommodate them. If you want to be a part of American culture you should at least try to fit in instead of moving to a small community where nobody speaks English. I can see the other sides point and I can understand where theyre coming from but since as of right now there are no laws to force anyone to speak either language than its basically two sides with different opinions that no matter how good of an argument the other side makes nobody will change their views. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted May 28, 2008 Share Posted May 28, 2008 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 28, 2008 -> 11:44 AM) Both of your posts are exactly right historically. 1st generations never really bothered to learn English, or leave their own neighborhoods. Its usually the 2nd and 3rd that assimilate. But its also very true that the government made no accomidations for other people. If you wanted governmental service, usually the kids were brought down to the local office to translate. Absolutely, and while the kids were translating, our parents were standing in line getting impatient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted May 28, 2008 Share Posted May 28, 2008 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 28, 2008 -> 11:44 AM) Both of your posts are exactly right historically. 1st generations never really bothered to learn English, or leave their own neighborhoods. Its usually the 2nd and 3rd that assimilate. But its also very true that the government made no accomidations for other people. If you wanted governmental service, usually the kids were brought down to the local office to translate. Actually, that's not entirely true. It was common practice in the US in the mid to late 1800s to print legal notices in German in German language newspapers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts