Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!uwvax!uwmacc!anderson
From: anderson@uwmacc.UUCP (Jess Anderson)
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Subject: Re: Bilingualism: A negative viewpoint
Message-ID: <526@uwmacc.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 19-Nov-86 00:15:08 EST
Article-I.D.: uwmacc.526
Posted: Wed Nov 19 00:15:08 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 19-Nov-86 02:34:23 EST
References: <783@ukecc.UUCP> <1018@ptsfb.UUCP> <524@uwmacc.UUCP>
Organization: UWisconsin Madison Academic Comp Center
Lines: 50
Keywords: incentive

In article <524@uwmacc.UUCP>, edwards@uwmacc.UUCP (mark edwards) writes:
[much abridged...]
>      My wife's japanese, if everyone spoke only japanese and give her
>    everything she wanted to hear, read, or needed in japanese she would
>    have no use to even bother with english.
[...]
But Mark, that "if" is not very realistic, is it? I've studied a fair
number of languages, for a variety of reasons, mostly to get access to
literatures that are untranslated or difficult to render into English, with
the added dividend (again, largely aesthetic, as opposed to practical) of
being able to speak some of those languages. Yet if I were to move to one
of those countries, I would welcome the opportunity to become *more*
multilingual, that is, I would not *want* to give up my native language
just because I was surrounded by a new milieu. Rather, I'd want to add to
my experiences in *both* languages.
[...]
>      If you make up centers that distribute information or what ever in
>    a particular language then you will probably get groupings around this
>    center of that language, hence chinatowns or whatever will emerge 
>    every where. I am not saying this is bad, but very probably undesirable.

I would agree that language enclaves present social, political, and
other complexities, but on balance, I think they're more beneficial
than harmful. I see no good reason why the whole society cannot share
the (admittedly more expensive) costs *and* benefits of cultural
diversity, especially when it promotes the general enrichment. If
indeed we mean it when we say we respect others, I think that means
respecting them as they are, possibly at some inconvenience (higher
taxes, special schooling, multilingual political processes, etc.) to
ourselves. I don't think language manifestations of ethnic diversity
are fundamentally different from other manifestations, and I think
any program that seeks to diminish the vigor of such diversities tends
toward a conformity that in the last analysis works against us. In all
of this (I think this was one of your points, or maybe Rob Bernardo's),
I am assuming that those who wish to learn *our* language have good
opportunities for doing so *if they choose to.* Given the obvious
advantages, many would want to, I assume. But why reduce the options
of those who do *not* want to, especially if doing so goes against
not only their interests, but ours as well?
   (Of course, most of us could know any of the languages we happen
to know better, again to our benefit. For example, illiteracy rates
in the US are shockingly high, and quite a few of us have trouble
with clear, simple, correct prose (not to mention spelling!) :-)
[...]
>  mark
-- 
==ARPA:====================anderson@unix.macc.wisc.edu===Jess Anderson======
| UUCP: {harvard,seismo,topaz,                           1210 W. Dayton    | 
|    akgua,allegra,ihnp4,usbvax}!uwvax!uwmacc!anderson   Madison, WI 53706 |
==BITNET:============================anderson@wiscmacc===608/263-6988=======