Caught in the grips of linguistic paranoia

Tue Aug 12 20:44:10 UTC 2008

I suggest Stan and Andrea (and anyone else interested)  take a look at  
Fishman's " Empirical explorations of two popular assumptions: Inter- 
polity perspective on the relationships between linguistic  
heterogeneity, civil strife, and per capita gross national product" ,  
easiest found in Dick's and my sociolinguistic reader  
(Paulston&Tucker, SOCIOLINGUISTICS: THE ESSENTIAL READINGS, Oxford:  
Blackwell's..  In spite of the impossible title, it is one of Fishmans  
most interesting articles but rarely cited.  It'll answer your  
questions. It is statistically complicated so you need to read it.)   
Christina
On Aug 12, 2008, at 12:06 PM, Anthea Fraser Gupta wrote:

> Yes -- I agree with Stan -- it would be hard to make any correlation.
>
> I'm a bit baffled by one of the measures on this list, which is  
> 'climate
> and geography', and which is based on 'latitude to distinguish between
> warmer and colder climes'.
>
> Now climate seems to me very much a matter of personal preference --  
> is
> warmer better or is colder?  Humid or dry? Do you like a 'real winter'
> or not? People don't seem to agree on this. On this measure US (.177)
> does a lot better than UK (-.064) and UK, bizarrely, does better than
> Ireland (-.049). Does US do better because there is a lot of choice
> about climate (you could be a Florida kind of person or an Alaska kind
> of person)? Or just becaus it goes a long way south?  And why should  
> UK
> do better than Ireland (no noticeable difference in climate or
> latitude).  And why should the Irish climate (cool in summer, warm in
> winter, plenty of rain) get such a low score -- seems like a very nice
> climate to me.
>
> 'Community life' is another one I don't understand: "Dummy variable
> taking value 1 if country has either high rate of church attendance or
> trade-union membership; zero otherwise." Hm.
>
> All rather dodgy, methinks.
>
> Anthea
> *     *     *     *     *
> Anthea Fraser Gupta (Dr)
> School of English, University of Leeds, LS2 9JT
> <www.leeds.ac.uk/english/staff/afg>
> NB: Reply to a.f.gupta at leeds.ac.uk
> *     *     *     *     *
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-lgpolicy-list at ccat.sas.upenn.edu
>> [mailto:owner-lgpolicy-list at ccat.sas.upenn.edu] On Behalf Of
>> Stan-sandy Anonby
>> Sent: 12 August 2008 15:18
>> To: lgpolicy-list at ccat.sas.upenn.edu; Harold Schiffman
>> Subject: Re: Caught in the grips of linguistic paranoia
>>
>> Interesting article. I have a question, though. It says 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.
>>
>> That's a really cool list. I looked at it, and noticed that
>> most of the countries with the lowest standard of living were
>> also pretty mulitlingual.
>>
>> I'm all in favour of quality of life, and I'm all in favour
>> of multilinguilism. I'm just not sure what the Quality of
>> Life Index can tell us about the correlation between the two.
>>
>> Stan Anonby
>>
>> On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 08:05:52 -0600
>> "Harold Schiffman" <hfsclpp at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 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)
>>> *******************************************
>>>
>>
>>
>