Received: from meol.mass.edu (meol.mass.edu [134.241.27.23]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.6.8/940311.01ccg) with SMTP id KAA01040 for <nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov>; Mon, 6 Nov 1995 10:08:24 -0500 Received: by meol.mass.edu; id AA29750; Sat, 4 Nov 1995 22:34:05 -0500 Date: Sat, 4 Nov 1995 22:34:04 -0500 (EST) From: David Rosen <rosen@meol.mass.edu> To: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov Cc: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: Re: English Only Gets Hearing in Congress In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.951103002525.29465C-100000@amanda.dorsai.org> Message-Id: <Pine.OSF.3.91.951104222128.29280A-100000@meol.mass.edu> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: RO X-Status: Meg, No brickbats. The opposition to English Only DOESN'T oppose learning English. Quite the opposite. The opposition SUPPORTS learning English (which, oddly, English Only doesn't appear to care about.) The opposition to English ONLY (in Massachusetts, for example, the group opposing English Only is called English Plus) believes that knowing English in the U.S. is important for everyone. It also believes that it is important for everyone to know (an)other languages. The other language(s) could be one's first language (for example in the case of those whose are learning English) or a new language. I don't think those who oppose English Only are trying to protect anyone from learning English. Instead they are arguing that it is a terrible loss to lose one's first language while learning a second language, and that knowing only English is just not enough for an American in a twentieth century multicultural, economically and politically interdependent world. David Rosen <DJRosen@world.std.com> On Fri, 3 Nov 1995, ESLTEACHER wrote: > My name is Meg Gam. I've been lurking on this list for a long time, > wondering how I feel about English Only, and all this discussion about > legislation. I still am working on it, but I'm going to take a giant > risk here and tell you what one of my intermediate ESL students told the > class today. > One student asked this young fellow, "What would you do if you lived in > a house where everyone spoke a different language? Would you try to > teach them your language, or would you try to learn something of their > languages?" > > (I thought this was a very good description of our "house" here in New > York City, when I heard the question) > > Marcos answered without a moment's hesitation: > "I would suggest that we all go to school to learn English. That way we > could have one strong language in common instead of bits of lots of > languages, not very well learned. I mean, we *are* in the United States, > after all." > > This came from a gang member, not a college-educated adult, friends. > (and he didn't have an exam pending over his head, or any other reason to > try to butter me up - of course, he was a member of an ESL class) > > The comment immediately sparked a discussion among the 17 students > there (a mixed group: two businessmen, three gang members - yes, we've > discussed it openly in class- several factory workers, a manicurist, two > cooks, and a couple of busboys). So I decided to take a > chance and I asked them what they thought of the English Only business. > OH! I should mention that we had 8 different languages represented > tonight. The students' first questions back to me were, "Well, if you're > going to do everything in another language, which one? Or are you > planning to do everything in every language? How can you make street > signs like that?" They decided, with no input from me, that it was a > better idea for everyone to just buckle down and learn English. To tell > you the truth, I was a little surprised. These are the folks you guys here > are talking about protecting. > > I promise you this event really happened tonight. The young man's name is > really Marcos. > > Okay. Now I'm going to duck under the table. > > Meg Gam >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 11 2000 - 13:21:41 EST