Filed under: Uncategorized
In today’s paper, USA Weekend reported that the English language is losing ground in the United States as an increasing number of U.S. households feature a language other than English as the one primarily spoken at home.
Despite the Senate’s 2006 vote on the Inhofe amendment designating English as the national language, the tone of the story was alarmist, implying that what many might interpret as a positive sign of the increasing linguistic and cultural diversity of the U.S. is, in fact, a threat to the sovereignty of English. The report referred to such non-English-first households as “linguistically isolated,” with families facing a “serious barrier” that not only undermines job prospects, but possibly hampers their ability to access public services like the fire department– thus representing a visceral threat to their corporeal safety.
While it’s no secret that the number of bilingual or non-English speaking households in the United States has been on the rise, the cultural isolationalist tone of the article comes as a surprise in the wake of our recent vote of “yes” to diversity in the presidential elections. And given the well-documented benefits to cognitive development of bilingualism, it’s also surprising that the article fails to point out that children growing up in the U.S. in non-English speaking homes may actually have an advantage over their monolingual counterparts.
In 2007, the New York Times reported on the rising interest in second-language instruction for native English speakers in U.S. schools. If schools across the country are recognizing the benefits of bilingualism and second-language learning, why do we continue to view the growth of the non-native-English speaking population as a threat to our national identity, rather than embracing opportunities for rich cultural exchange and diversity that it represents?
