<h2 class="art-PostHeaderIcon-wrapper">
<span class="art-PostHeader"><a href="http://www.worldpolicy.org/blog/2012/03/27/when-should-language-be-restricted" title="When Should Language Be Restricted?">When Should Language Be Restricted?</a></span>
</h2>
<div class="art-PostHeaderIcons art-metadata-icons">
March 27, 2012 - 11:07am | admin </div>
<div class="field field-type-filefield field-field-node-img">
<div class="field-items">
<div class="field-item odd">
<a href="http://www.worldpolicy.org/sites/default/files/node_img/4891695155_d044a60b8e.jpg" class="imagecache imagecache-node imagecache-imagelink imagecache-node_imagelink"><img src="http://www.worldpolicy.org/sites/default/files/imagecache/node/node_img/4891695155_d044a60b8e.jpg" alt="" title="" class="imagecache imagecache-node" height="366" width="488"></a> </div>
</div>
</div>
<p><em>“When should language be restricted?”</em></p>
<p><em>In </em>World Policy Journal<em>’s <a href="http://www.worldpolicy.org/journal/spring2012">spring 2012</a> issue, <a href="http://www.worldpolicy.org/journal/spring2012/big-question">The Big Question</a>
investigates the use and abuse of language. We asked a diverse group of
scholars, authors, bloggers, artists, and journalists to share with us
their personal views on the boundaries of free speech. Dr. Roseann
Dueñas González contributed one compelling piece, drawing from her
extensive experience as a consultant to Congress. We would now like to
give her response the space it deserves and publish it online as an
extension of </em>WPJ<em>’s The Big Question.</em></p>
<p><b><span style="vertical-align:baseline">By Roseann Dueñas González</span></b></p>
<p><span style="vertical-align:baseline">Language is the most vital
expression of identity and lies at the center of the human ego. As such,
the restriction of language is injurious to the essential well-being of
humanity. As a result, restrictive language policies disempower
language minorities and ultimately limit their social mobility.</span></p>
<p><span style="vertical-align:baseline">Great strides have been made in
the extension of language access to linguistic minorities in the United
States. I’ve spent my entire professional life ensuring that persons
have the right to all of the benefits and privileges of the country
through competent interpreter services, regardless of their national
origin, primary language, race, or ethnicity. In 2000, President Bill
Clinton’s Executive Order 13166 reinvigorated Title VI of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964. This progressive, but unfunded, order reminds United
States agencies who receive federal funding that they have a legal
obligation to provide competent language and interpreting services’. It
was the policy answer that I had been waiting for many years.</span></p>
<p><span style="vertical-align:baseline">The legal responsibility–in
particular for courts, social service, education, and health care
institutions–has been judiciously monitored and enforced by the
Department of Justice since the beginning of the Obama Administration.
This will advance the opportunity for language minorities who are not
proficient in english to pursue the educational, economic, and social
benefits. This recommitment to equitable treatment of language
minorities will do much to advance their ability to defend themselves
from criminal accusations, testify as a victim, protect their property
and families in civil litigation, or to seek legal or governmental
benefits. It also implies a reinforcement of civil rights that will
prevent the myriad medical mistakes and harms that result from
non-english speakers not able to communicate in a medical setting. </span></p>
<p><span style="vertical-align:baseline">Still despite these advances in
the extension of language access to language minorities in the United
States, restricting language use of undesirable immigrants and residents
has expanded in other ways in U.S. society—again. Courts should not
mandate a blanket “english proficiency” unless it is supported by
rigorous empirical study of the actual language needed on the job. In
Arizona, Proposition 203, “English for the Children,” is an example of a
language policy intended to prevent rather than enable children
speaking limited English from accessing and benefiting from education.
Unfortunately, this is one of many initiatives implemented to obstruct
the upward mobility of Spanish speakers in Arizona. While situations
exist where proficiency in english is a bona fide requirement, the
arbitrary nature of when it is required in the United States has
prevented minorities across the country from getting jobs and supporting
their families.</span></p>
<p class="rtecenter">*****</p>
<p class="rtecenter">*****</p>
<p><span style="vertical-align:baseline">Roseann Dueñas González, author of the book <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/search?index=books&linkCode=qs&keywords=0805840540" rel="nofollow"><em>Language Ideologies: History, Theory, and Policy</em></a></span><span style="vertical-align:baseline">, is a professor of english and director of the National Center for Interpretation at the University of Arizona.</span></p>
<p><a href="http://www.worldpolicy.org/blog/2012/03/27/when-should-language-be-restricted">http://www.worldpolicy.org/blog/2012/03/27/when-should-language-be-restricted</a><br><span style="vertical-align:baseline"></span></p>
<p><span style="vertical-align:baseline"><br></span></p><br><br>-- <br>**************************************<br>N.b.: Listing on the lgpolicy-list is merely intended as a service to its members<br>and implies neither approval, confirmation nor agreement by the owner or sponsor of the list as to the veracity of a message's contents. Members who disagree with a message are encouraged to post a rebuttal, and to write directly to the original sender of any offensive message. A copy of this may be forwarded to this list as well. (H. Schiffman, Moderator)<br>
<br>For more information about the lgpolicy-list, go to <a href="https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/">https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/</a><br>listinfo/lgpolicy-list<br>*******************************************<br>
<br>