injection of reality

Hi. So metro councilman Eric Crafton has this proposal to legislate English as our official language. It’s really popular in the anti-Mexican anti-immigrant circles. Just ask Kay Brooks (who has a good summary of the legislation, by the way):

I understand that there is tension between our society’s heart to extend hospitality and essential services in emergency situations and the practicals of how much and at what cost? The more we try and accommodate various languages the more expensive our government gets and the less new immigrants will assimilate.

or Donna Locke, in the comments:

Immigrants are supposed to be learning English. Our traditional assimilation model has been defeated – the loss of English as our common language is the canary in the mine – because we are taking in more immigrants annually than we ever did before the changes in our immigration policy a few decades ago.

Man, it sounds like things are pretty bad, huh? It won’t be long until the U.S. succumbs to invading hordes and is reclaimed for Aztlan.

I hate to be the one to rain on a parade of endless debate by injecting actual facts. After all, Donna’s point would be a pretty good one – if it were true. It’s true, right? Sadly, no. As I’ve pointed out time and time again, language (and cultural) rates of immigrant assimilation are higher than ever:

The vast majority of first-generation immigrants who come to the US as children speak English well. Among first-generation Mexican children, 21 percent do not speak English well; among first-generation Chinese children, the comparable figure is 12 percent. In other words, 79 percent of first-generation Mexican children and 88 percent of Chinese speak English well (or very well).

Bilingualism is common among second-generation children. Most children who grow up in immigrant households speak an immigrant language at home, but almost all are proficient in English.

English-only is the predominant pattern by the third generation. These children speak only English at home, making it highly unlikely they will be bilingual as adults.

High immigration levels of the 1990s do not appear to have weakened the forces of linguistic assimilation. In other words, the incentives to convert to English monolingualism by the third generation do not seem to have changed. Mexicans, by far the largest immigrant group during the 1990s, provide a compelling example. In 1990, 64 percent of third-generation Mexican-American children spoke only English at home. In 2000, the equivalent figure had risen to 71 percent.

So wait, you mean our culture isn’t under siege by immigrants threatening to destroy our way of life? Huh. So that would make this entire debate a pointless exercise in hysteria, wouldn’t it?


Comments

So that would make this entire debate a pointless exercise in hysteria, wouldn’t it?

Yeah, pretty much.

I think that territorialism is deeply embedded in our psychology; just like a dog barking at anything that comes anywhere near his yard, it’s natural for humans to draw lines and bark furiously at anything that seems to be lurching out of the darkness.

We can rise above this urge and recognize that the reaction isn’t appropriate, but that requires 1) self-awareness and 2) motivation to change. And there really isn’t much personal cost to hating immigrants, so not much motivation.

Chris, while I admire and applaud your diligence in researching and reporting the facts…which certainly blow a hole in the rationale put forth for this ridiculous legislation….let me throw this out (and remember I support your stance, I can go on and on about this from real day to day in the trenches experience illustrating not only a command of English but a desire and tenacious effort to master it)…but…….if English is really truly being assimilated and mastered at the rate you cite then could one not make the argument that Spanish is really NOT required as a “press two” option on all communications by Metro?? After all…….as you cite…….English is pretty well mastered.

su Madre (abogado de diablo)

Yes, you can – but no one is really talking about a proposal to massively increase the funding for multilingual infrastructure. The bureaucratic processes that go on to decide what the appropriate level of infrastructure to support other languages has and will (barring this legislation’s passage) go on and work just fine.

The proposal is the converse – to arbitrarily mandate, for no particular reason, that all communications be done in English.

Arbitrarily, that is, without any rational justification. It’s a political red herring.

“The bureaucratic processes that go on to decide what the appropriate level of infrastructure to support other languages has and will (barring this legislation’s passage) go on and work just fine.” Clarify please.

Gandalph MantoothSeptember 20, 2006 at 04:01 · reply

Deborah, you’re missing one thing perhaps. He sez that English proficiency is high among “first generation children.” [my em added] That does allow for recent immigrant adults who still would need that press 2 option. The recent immigrants need their children to become proficient and become so quickly, btw, to help them navigate when the press 2 option is not available. Just another reason the legislation is so unecessary and stupid and (shhh, r-word)

Thanks! Your comment has been submitted and will appear shortly.


Leave a comment