Bilinguialism Sleight of Hand

In a recent speech, Senator Barack Obama opined in answer to a question about English-only laws:

Transcript of key point:

Now, I agree that immigrants should learn English. I agree with that. But understand this. Instead of worrying about whether immigrants can learn English — they’ll learn English — you need to make sure your child can speak Spanish. You should be thinking about, how can your child become bilingual? We should have every child speaking more than one language.

You know, it’s embarrassing when Europeans come over here, they all speak English, they speak French, they speak German. And then we go over to Europe, and all we can say [is], “Merci beaucoup.” Right?

You know, no, I’m serious about this. We should understand that our young people, if you have a foreign language, that is a powerful tool to get ajob. You are so much more employable. You can be part of international business. So we should be emphasizing foreign languages in our schools from an early age, because children will actually learn a foreign language easier when they’re 5, or 6, or 7 than when they’re 46, like me.

Some on the right are calling this an outrage, but the guys at OTB are more sanguine:

Alex Knapp: This, to me, seems pretty uncontroversial. I personally consider it a woeful deficiency in my education that I speak only the barest smattering of French and Spanish–certainly not enough to carry on a conversation–and am completely ignorant of any Chinese or Japanese. Indeed, I recall a time not too long ago when conversatives lamented the fact that multilinguism, once a foundation of what was considered a well-rounded education, had fallen to the wayside. ...

UPDATE (James Joyner):  While I agree with Alex about the silliness of this as an “outrage” and even agree that bilingualism has its uses, Obama has stumbled on one of my pet peeves with this one:

    You know, it’s embarrassing when Europeans come over here, they all speak English, they speak French, they speak German. And then we go over to Europe, and all we can say [is], “Merci beaucoup.” Right?

Europeans speak English because they live in geographically small countries and have regular occasion to speak other languages. English has become the default lingua franca because of the reach of the British Empire followed by the rise of the United States as a world power. If you live virtually anywhere in the world where English is not your first language, then your choice of a second language is rather obvious.

In contrast, I think Jonah Goldberg got this one right:

Obama has a great gift at sounding insightful when he insipidly changes the subject to something completely different and more helpful to his cause. But, if Obama honestly thinks the argument against bilingualism has anything to do with the importance of teaching kids a second language, he really has no idea whatsoever what the argument is about. More likely, this is his way of sounding like a brave-truth-teller by offering a “criticism” pretty much every middle class parent already agrees with and deflecting an issue that might put him crosswise with Democratic Hispanic activists and other multiculturalists.

For the record, I agree that students should learn a second language whenever possible. But, as Jim asks, “Has anyone demanded foreign language classes be ‘English-Only?” The stupidity or dishonesty of Obama’s rhetorical switch-a-roo would be manifestly obvious if he’d said:

    Now, I agree that immigrants should learn English. I agree with that. But understand this. Instead of worrying about whether immigrants can learn English — they’ll learn English — you need to make sure your child is a lot better at math. You should be thinking about, how can your child become really good at math? We should have every child doing advanced math.

Still, Obama’s verbal sleight of hand shouldn’t surprise us at this point. After all he was able to put a black religious demagogue into his magic hat and with showy rhetorical prestidigitation pull back his own racist grandmother. You’d just think more folks would see the wires at this point.

I think that’s mostly right, but I have one quibble. English-only laws really aren’t about encouraging assimilation by immigrants or even about ensuring that immigrant children learn English in school. They are about discouraging immigration by raising the barriers to entry by making it more costly for non-English speaking immigrants to work and live in the US. Immigration policy is the real question. The debate about language is pure surplusage.

Posted on Wednesday, July 09 2008 | Permalink

Everyone who’s familiar with who kicked NativoLopez off the SantaAna schoolboard is probably having a good laugh at Bainbridge right now.

And, most people have missed the key point: BHO would start the U.S. down the road to becoming like Canada. Learning languages is good, but BHO singled out one language and commanded that people teach it to their children. He wants us to assimilate to immigrants, not the other way around.

Posted by TLB  on  07/09  at  04:28 PM

English-only laws really aren’t about encouraging assimilation by immigrants or even about ensuring that immigrant children learn English in school. They are about discouraging immigration by raising the barriers to entry by making it more costly for non-English speaking immigrants to work and live in the US. Immigration policy is the real question.

That sounds about right.

Instead of worrying about whether immigrants can learn English — they’ll learn English ...

From my time living in California, I know several cases where immigrants lived in the US for years and did not learn English.  Obama should know better.  Should all immigrants speak English?  I’m not really convinced.  It’s definitely in their best interests.  But it’s naive to think that they all do learn English.

You know, it’s embarrassing when Europeans ... all speak English, they speak French, they speak German.

Europeans don’t learn these languages just for kicks.  They learn these languages out of necessity.  And that necessity comes from the fact that neither the French or the Germans of the English conquered all of Europe.  Contrasting that with the US, the English did conquer most all of North America, and the Spanish did conquer most all of South America.  Knowing German simply isn’t much of a marketable skill in the US.  Knowing Spanish is, and I will be teaching my children Spanish as they get older.  Not just for kicks, but because it is a highly marketable skill.

Posted by  on  07/09  at  04:43 PM

I don’t disagree that US Immigration policy is the real question, but I strongly disagree that the debate about language is pure surplusage.  To begin with, all countries with two official languages are countries that are divided (Switzerland included).

Then there are economic issues:
People like myself whose first language is Spanish know that any immigrant in the US who doesn’t learn proper, correct English is limiting their potential and missing out on the opportunities this country offers to everyone.  The best paid professions in the world use English.

Additionally, people don’t just “learn English” or any language.  They have to be taught, and the public schools increasingly neglect the teaching of rigorous academic subjects while adding “feel good, self-esteem” material.

(I expand on this subject in my post if you care to read it - with apologies for the self promotion)

Posted by Fausta  on  07/09  at  04:59 PM

English only laws have little or no effect.  It is purely symbolic.  An English only law basically requires that government documents will only be printed in English.  that is the best thing that could happen to Spanish speakers.  I would love if my tax forms were in a foreign language.

English-only laws would not affect private businesses.  Businesses are free to approve or disapprove of any speech (First Amendment stuff here).  An English speaking requirement for businesses serving the public may be constitutionally valid, but where is the free market fun in that?  If you go to a restaurant and can’t order because they don’t speak your language, you will not return to that business.  the free market will sort that stuff out (the notable exception to this free market argument is services without consumer choice like hospitals in an emergency etc.).

Posted by  on  07/09  at  06:05 PM

I don’t think you can reasonably read the statement to mean only Spanish when you look at the whole thing.  It’s pretty clear he’s just using that as an example and rhetorical counterpoint.  Hence the reference to learning languages (plural) later on.

I’m also not sure that English-only laws are actually about raising the bar to immigration higher, though that might be one effect.  I think they are mostly a gesture of cultural orthodoxy.

Posted by Ken  on  07/09  at  07:19 PM

I think denying the need to learn another language (or saying everybody should learn English), is almost like the protectionist policy of the U.S. in the 40’s.  It is almost like denying that the world is changing, and refusing to be a part of it.

Posted by Learn Spanish in Mexico  on  07/13  at  09:15 AM
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

Introduction


Recent Punditry Entries


Hot Topics on Food & Wine

Hot Topics on Law & Business



Punditry RSS Feed

Flickr

Archives

My Books



Blogroll