Caught in the grips of linguistic paranoia

[Harold Schiffman]

Caught in the grips of linguistic paranoia

 By Nataly Kelly
August 11, 2008

WHAT MAKES the largest military power on earth tremble in its boots?
What causes an entire nation of people - the majority of whom
descended from non-English speakers - to shudder in fear? What
provokes outrage at debates and town hall meetings in the current
presidential campaign? Language, that's what.

Not every language is seen as Uncle Sam's nemesis - just the 6,911
languages that are not English. Americans often view other languages
as a threat their identity - both as individuals, and as a nation.
It's for this reason that a Pennsylvanian recently stood up and told
John McCain how angry it makes her to see the word entrada at the
entrance to her local Lowe's home improvement store. Barack Obama
dared to suggest last month that American children should learn a
language currently spoken by more people in the world than English:
Spanish. Hillary Clinton even stated, albeit jokingly, that it's time
for the United States to have a multilingual president.

Linguistic paranoia seems to have reached unprecedented levels in
recent years, a phenomenon that would probably shock our Founding
Fathers. After all, they intentionally decided not to declare an
official language for America, knowing full well that linguistic
dominance in the world is often in flux, and that doing so could
restrict the country's ability to both compete internationally and
respond to domestic needs.

The White House has a time-honored tradition of multilingualism. Our
second president, John Adams, spoke several languages fluently. He
believed in learning other languages and made sure that his son, John
Quincy Adams, studied four of them.

The third president, Thomas Jefferson, spoke between five and seven
languages. Herbert Hoover and his wife were fluent in Mandarin, and
they translated a book from Latin into English. Jackie Kennedy made
campaign speeches in Spanish, Italian, and French to appeal to
multilingual voters.

Is Obama wrong to point out the obvious, that when future generations'
knowledge of other languages is restricted, so is the prospective
well-being of our nation? The Quality of Life Index, published by The
Economist in 2005, showed that the five countries with the highest
standard of living were Ireland, Switzerland, Norway, Luxembourg, and
Sweden. Aside from having a European address, all of these countries
have one key thing in common - they promote multilingualism. In spite
of being the largest economic power in the world, the United States
came in 13th, just behind Spain, Singapore, and Finland.

We have the means to be a linguistic superpower. The United States is
one of the richest countries in the world when it comes to natural
language resources, with an estimated 311 languages spoken within our
borders - 162 of these are indigenous languages, and 149 come from
other countries. Our internal linguistic diversity has proved to be an
asset time and time again - Navajo was used for strategic military
purposes as a code language in World War II, and current operations
abroad would be impossible were it not for the help of the many US
linguists who risk life and limb each day.

McCain responded to the crowd in Pennsylvania with a plea for
appreciating our nation's diversity. Obama went on to say that
American children should learn not just Spanish, but other languages
as well. Across party lines, our presidential candidates are
acknowledging the important role of multilingualism both within the
United States and abroad. Their campaign managers also know the
importance of the multilingual voting demographic - our last census
tells us that 20 percent of US residents speak a language other than
English at home.

So why do the bald eagle's feathers get ruffled every time our
presidential candidates mention language issues? Fear of the unknown.
What we are not familiar with makes us uncomfortable. Accepting that
we are a multilingual nation is a challenge, because it requires
looking beyond our borders and outside our comfort zone. The only
solution? Know thy enemy.

Nataly Kelly is a senior analyst with Common Sense Advisory, a market

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2008/08/11/caught_in_the_grips_of_linguistic_paranoia/?s_campaign=8315


-- 
**************************************
N.b.: Listing on the lgpolicy-list is merely intended as a service to
its members
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. (H. Schiffman, Moderator)
*******************************************