It takes more than a language to unify a nation

[Dave Wilton]

I would strongly urge anyone interested to actually read the bill in
question. You can find it by going to
http://thomas.loc.gov/home/c110query.html and searching on bill number
HR997.

It's my (non-lawyer) understanding that English-language laws and
regulations are already de facto privileged in the US. When there is an
issue with the language the courts always go to the original text for
interpretation, which is in all cases English. This argument is a stalking
horse used to get otherwise reasonable people to support the measure.

This bill does indeed require those petitioning or doing business with the
government to do so in English (except in a small number of exceptional
instances). Non-criminal court proceedings (which would include immigration
and deportation hearings) would have be conducted in English with no
obligation for the government to provide translation--and if provided it
would be the translator's English words that would be the privileged
version, not the words of the person giving the testimony.

Furthermore, the bill is not limited to the federal government, but also
imposes the English-only rules on the 50 states and the District of Columbia
regardless of the wishes and needs of the local legislators and people.

The only good thing about this bill is that it has little chance of actually
going anywhere in the Democrat-controlled House.


-----Original Message-----
From: American Dialect Society [mailto:ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of
Joel S. Berson
Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 5:15 AM
To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: It takes more than a language to unify a nation

Wilson, I think you've over-interpreted me.  I did not say that
English should be made the privileged language of the U.S. de jure,
only of juries -- and I suppose not even that, since juries are not
supposed to interpret the law, only judges are.

I was speaking *only* of the language in which U.S. law should be
interpreted, not of any other aspects of the "English only" thesis,
with which I disagree.  For example, while I am sympathetic towards
requiring laws to be interpreted in the language in which they were
written (so English, in the U.S.), I would oppose a law requiring
that testimony in court be given in English.  Or that those speaking
to the government, to hospitals, etc. be required by law to speak English

Joel

At 2/23/2007 12:19 AM, you wrote:
>Not "Why shouldn't we?" but "Why should we?" English is already de
>facto so privileged in this country. What requiires that it be made so
>de jure? The fact that the E.U., consisting of several different
>countries speaking an even larger number of distinct languages, does
>so? The fact that the French do so?
>
>-Wilson
>
>On 2/22/07, Joel S. Berson <Berson at att.net> wrote:
>>---------------------- Information from the mail header
>>-----------------------
>>Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
>>Poster:       "Joel S. Berson" <Berson at ATT.NET>
>>Subject:      Re: It takes more than a language to unify a nation
>>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
>>
>>At 2/22/2007 09:48 PM, Dennis Baron wrote:
>> >King's bill also reveals the paranoia
>> >behind all official language legislation. It privileges the English
>> >versions of our laws because the bill's sponsors, who surely don't
>> >object to translating the Bible into English, insist that translating
>> >our laws, not to mention sacred secular texts like the Star-Spangled
>> >Banner and the Pledge of Allegiance, will distort or pervert their
>> >meaning.
>>
>>The E.U. privileges the language in which the law of a country is
>>written, as being the most accurate rendition of meaning.  Why
>>shouldn't Americans privilege the English language verions of U.S. laws?
>>
>>Joel
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------
>>The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>
>
>--
>All say, "How hard it is that we have to die"---a strange complaint to
>come from the mouths of people who have had to live.
>-----
>-Sam'l Clemens
>
>------------------------------------------------------------
>The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org