Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Question of the day

Posted in:

Illinois

First, the setup…

Fierce opposition to a proposed English-only ordinance in Carpentersville continued Tuesday night as residents voiced concerns that it would cause legal problems and force businesses out of town.

Reviving part of a debate that saw 3,000 protesters turn out last year, village trustees planned to deliberate on the proposed ordinance, which would make English the village’s official language.

The proposal, more restrictive than an English-only resolution passed last month in far northwest suburban Hampshire, says making English the official language will “establish a linguistic unity that brings a critically needed cohesion to a village as diverse, multiracial and multiethnic as Carpentersville.”

Now, the question: Illinois law already designates English as the official language. So do you think this ordinance is necessary? Racist? Xenophobic? Practical? Necessary? Etc.? Explain.

Also, a stern warning: I don’t want to make this a debate about illegal immigration. I’m sure you’ve already stated your position elsewhere on the blog. Let’s keep it to the topic at hand, please, or you may find your comment deleted. Thanks.

posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, May 16, 07 @ 10:08 am

Comments

I feel this is logical, necessary and needed. Look to Canada for an example of the futility of two official languages.

How can new immigrants assimilate unless English is maintained as the “core” language for business and government?

Comment by Ken in Aurora Wednesday, May 16, 07 @ 10:17 am
Dieses ist eine dumme Idee.

Comment by Rob_N Wednesday, May 16, 07 @ 10:20 am
As an article in the Elgin Courier put it a few years ago, in interviewing some foreigners

“It’s so easy to get along here with no English. So we don’t have a lot of need to learn it”.

Comment by Pat collins Wednesday, May 16, 07 @ 10:25 am
The Illinois law that “designates” English as the official language has the same force and effect as the designation of the square dance as the state’s official dance. It doesn’t mean that everyone must learn and know it, it’s just an honorarium.

Now, it’s undeniable that some of those who support practicable “English-only” laws do so out of racism and xenophobia. But that doesn’t necessarily mean it’s a bad idea.

Just from a public safety perspective, wouldn’t it be sensible for there to be a common language that everyone was expected to know? It’s impossible to post every sign, notice and warning; print every waiver, release form and instruction; or teach all emergency personal EVERY language, so the most practical (and fair) thing to do is let everyone know that they are expected (for their own good) to know the “official” language of the land.

Comment by grand old partisan Wednesday, May 16, 07 @ 10:50 am
I think we’ve already lost this battle, if it needs to be fought. I spend a couple of months in Miami each year (I speak Spanish fluently ) and I can conduct business in either language wherever I go there–the businesses all have bilingual personnel. Miami is the future, like it or not.

To be on the safe side, I also recommend Chinese.
But I think English will continue to be the world’s imperial language for the foreseeable future. Wherever you go in the world, everybody wants to practice their English on you. Even the
French.

Comment by Cassandra Wednesday, May 16, 07 @ 10:56 am
Ken in Aurora says,

Look to Canada for an example of the futility of two official languages.

Huh? How is bilingualism in Canada futile? For that matter, how are Belgium, Luxembourg (highest per capita GNP in the world!), Switzerland, or India harmed by being multi-lingual countries?

In fact, the Canadian example shows just how unnecessary an “English-only” law really is. If the vast majority of Carpentersville residents are monolingual, the de facto language will be English — just like English is the language of the Western provinces of Canada.

Btw, Canadian support for bilingualism in all of Canada is growing. What Carpentersville is trying to do is much like Quebec’s French-only law — a law roundly criticized by many conservatives in Canada.

There are only two reasons I can think of for supporting an English-only law in Carpentersville, neither of them very flattering. Either the supporters simply don’t like people who speak a foreign language. Or, the supporters are insecure in their intellectual ability to learn a second language.

Comment by the Other Anonymous Wednesday, May 16, 07 @ 11:10 am
When we Americans go to Europe and are able to measure our level of ignorance compared to most europeans who can speak three and more languages at the time. What is the problem with learnig several languages? I understand the need to have a common language, but why limit the possiblility of having ourselfs and/or our children speaking several languages?

Comment by For Crying outloud Wednesday, May 16, 07 @ 11:19 am
“Huh? How is bilingualism in Canada futile? For that matter, how are Belgium, Luxembourg (highest per capita GNP in the world!), Switzerland, or India harmed by being multi-lingual countries?”

Have you ever seen the costs forced on residents of primarily English speaking regions of Canada to comply with bilingualism? It’s been a few years, but I have gotten a real earful about this from friends in Manitoba and Saskatchewan.

Comment by Ken in Aurora Wednesday, May 16, 07 @ 11:24 am
I’m confused.

Spanish is an official language in Carpentersville and this requires legal remedy?

Please explain.

Comment by Viator Wednesday, May 16, 07 @ 11:41 am
What I’d like to know is how Carpentersville intends to enforce it. Every child is, by law, entitled to a public education. If the schools won’t accommodate a second language for children who don’t speak English yet, they are in violation of the child’s rights. If a court won’t provide an interpreter because they don’t have to accommodate a non-official language, they will violate a defendant’s rights. Are the immigrants too lazy to learn English, or are the English-speaking residents to lazy to learn Spanish? I say it’s racism.

Comment by Ferdy Wednesday, May 16, 07 @ 11:48 am
Ken,

Seriously, what costs? Labels have to printed in two languages; how much extra is that? Other than that, I really don’t know what other costs are involved or mandated. (This isn’t meant in a challenging way; I really can’t think of any other costs.)

Besides, how are those costs relevant to an English-only ordinance in Carpentersville? There’s no mandate for bilingualism on businesses in Carpentersville; a business will incur the costs — if any — of operating in two or more languages to appeal to new and additional customers.

In fact, I would suggest that businesses in Carpentersville stand to lose Spanish-speaking customers if they are forced to operate in English only. (And yes, I understand that the ordinance would not force them to do so.)

In the case of the Carpentersville ordinance, I still suggest that the only two reasons people support it are dislike of foreign speakers; and fear of learning (or, more appropriately, fear of not being able to learn) a second language.

Comment by the Other Anonymous Wednesday, May 16, 07 @ 11:51 am
¡No Más!

Comment by Enough Already Wednesday, May 16, 07 @ 11:52 am
The Village of Hampshire already passed a similar resolution.

Immigrants who come to the US ought to learn English. It is arrogant of them to demand that we learn their language when they are in our country.

My Grandmother used to tell a story of her father emigrating from Germany. The kids would pester him to speak German. After a while, he would get mad and tell them to go away, he was an American and spoke English.

Immigrants used to be proud to assimilate into American society. It was a badge of honor for an immigrant to be able to speak English.

Comment by Huh? Wednesday, May 16, 07 @ 12:03 pm
Playing devil’s advocate for just a moment, would making english the “official” language prevent a future law suit from someone who does not speak english but needs fire/ambulance/police assistance? I would think some basic understanding of english by all U.S. citizens and prevent misunderstanding. But if you want to speak french/spanish/german/pig latin/ whatever with your friends and family why would that be an issue to concern any one?

Comment by leigh Wednesday, May 16, 07 @ 12:29 pm
Xenophobic and ridiculous.

Comment by Way Northsider Wednesday, May 16, 07 @ 12:34 pm
Even though I prefer the English language, I wish I had learned a foreign language as my sons have learned. English as the primary language is a good idea because there are so many other cultures in this country, how do we decide which one is going to be the secondary?

Comment by Little Egypt Wednesday, May 16, 07 @ 12:37 pm
If I understand the ordinance, it requires all buisness of the town, town publications/form documents, and signs to be English only.

Much of this debate seems to exalt form over substance. Many documents, publications, forms etc are used for the benefit of all by providing guidance on how to comply with ordinaces, zoning etc. If a large percentage of your population read a language other then english, then isntead of printing up 1000 english forms, print 500 of each.

I agree that town should be able to designate meetings should be conducted in english, but the town shopuld provide an interpreter so that those who do not speak english can have their oppinions heard as well. i.e. you are not prohibited from speaking, there just needs to be a translator available.

Comment by Ghost Wednesday, May 16, 07 @ 1:03 pm
Huh? says, “Immigrants who come to the US ought to learn English. It is arrogant of them to demand that we learn their language when they are in our country.”

…Whose asking anyone to learn another language? There’s a reason there are so many neighborhoods in the city of Chicago — folks who spoke the same language stuck together whether it be Swedish, Polish, Greek, Chinese, Spanish or whatnot.

Nobody’s asking you to learn a language you don’t want to learn “Huh?” … at least not yet.

Comment by Rob_N Wednesday, May 16, 07 @ 1:29 pm
A waste of time … but we’ve got a fois gras ban in Chicago.
To make this less xenophobic, the English-only ordinance needs to accompany intensive ESL (English as a Second Language) training so that all residents have the opportunity to learn English. This would mean having classes at hours that meet the needs of those who do not speak English - late evenings, early mornings, daytimes. There would also need to programs to help families that do not speak English to integrate the use of English into their everyday activities. This would increase the skill-base of the non-English speaking population, thus putting them in better positions to get jobs … leaving monolingual whitey without a job.

Comment by cg Wednesday, May 16, 07 @ 1:49 pm
One word baby: Esperanto !!

Comment by Wile Coyote Wednesday, May 16, 07 @ 2:43 pm
When I was in college I wrote a primary source research paper on my hometown (Schaumburg, IL). Settled by German immigrants in the mid-nineteenth century, St. Peter’s Lutheran Church on Schaumburg Road had it’s last German-language religious service well into the second half of the twentieth century, I believe in the early 1970s. Doesn’t mean they never had any English language services before then, but they still had some of their services in German for over 100 years.

Heck the Lutheran Church’s Missouri Synod established a series of schools largely in order to ensure the native-born generation learned German. The Augustana Synod tried something similar with Swedes, but they never had as much success.

The same arguments about making learn English made now were made then. The republic stood without any asinine ordinace like the Carpentsville one. It will continue to stand.

One key difference: a German-American farmer in 1915 Schaumburg was far more isolated than a Spanish-speaker in 2007 Anywhere in America.

Comment by Some Guy Wednesday, May 16, 07 @ 3:21 pm
the Other Anonymous - Wednesday, May 16, 07 @ 11:10 am:
The point of C’ville passes an English only ordinance is the same as the Quebecois passing Loi 101 in Québec, to force out those they don’t like. The Quebecois have gotten better since the 1970’s as they have now embraced immigration and many other languages are spoken even in the business place and the French only mandate is not as harshly enforced as it was during the hay day of the PLQ.

Comment by Xolotl_del_mictlan Wednesday, May 16, 07 @ 3:46 pm
Depending on how they plan to enforce it, the ordinance may violate the First Amendment.

Comment by yinn Wednesday, May 16, 07 @ 3:50 pm
My advice to bilingual, Spanish speaking, and Hispanic residents of Carpentersville: boycott the grocery stores, gas stations, and other businesses in Carpentersville for a week or a month, and shop across the municipal lines instead.

Perhaps when the numb-skulls on the City Council see their tax receipts going down, and when the business community sees their income going down, they’ll rethink their ridiculous ordinance.

Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Wednesday, May 16, 07 @ 4:40 pm
Ron_N said “Whose asking anyone to learn another language?”

Let me see - Have you ever heard of ballots in an other language or grade school teachers having to teach remedial education in a language other than english?

I am saying that if somebody is coming to the US on a permanent basis - they should learn english in order to communicate.

About 27 years ago, I spent 3 months in Brazil. I didn’t speak any Portuguese. I was fortunate to be living with my future in-laws who spoke the language fluently. I did pick up a few words, just enough to keep me out of trouble, but I depended on my future wife to communicate when ever we were in public. It would have been arrogant of my to demand that the Brazilians learn to speak english to because I was there. Instead, the burden was on me to try to communicate in the local language. Not the other way around.

Comment by Huh? Wednesday, May 16, 07 @ 6:33 pm
how is english as an only language racist. Language is not race or skin color. how much does the state pay to have interpetors in court rooms or to translate documents into other languages. larning a second or third language is a great idea and real marketable skill.English as a common language should bring the country together not be divisive. English should be the language that all goverment affairs are cinducted in and if you need a translation to another language you should bear the cost not the goverment.

Comment by fed up Wednesday, May 16, 07 @ 8:56 pm
I think this law is stupid. However, I have mixed feelings about our multi-lingual (or rather, bilingual) situation. On the one hand, everything is translated into spanish and most of the other languages are ignored. So, it seems like we expect that people speaking other languages will get along somehow. On the other hand, the most common non-english tongue is spanish so it is more efficient to concentrate on providing translations into that language to help the most people get the information they need. I’d say we should study the rate of learning english in the various language groups — those that don’t usually have translations available and those that do (spanish) to see if there is any difference. Are we hindering the rate of acquiring english by making it too easy to get along without it? This is based on the assumption that this is a de-fact english speaking country and people — first, second or third generation? — will eventually be speaking english and be assimilated as has happened throughout our history.

Comment by NoGiftsPlease Wednesday, May 16, 07 @ 9:04 pm
Press 1 for English.

Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, May 16, 07 @ 9:21 pm
I don’t feel it’s fair that generally, only Spanish speakers are afforded bilingual services; if everyone doesn’t get it, no one should!

That being said, it is unfair to both English speaking Americans and immigrants themselves that we are heading toward a veritable “Balkanization” of our country by catering to the languages of immigrants, rather than their learning the native language here (please, no Native American comments!). Americans are increasingly being faced with a career situation in which they are denied jobs in favor of immigrants (often non-citizens) because they cannot speak the language of a foreign country in their own community.

I like the above commentor’s point on the French Canadien situation. You are creating two separate “nations” within our nation, and with the rate of immigration, we may lose control of our own country within our own lifetimes, or certainly within the lifetimes of our children.

300 years later, Spain may have the final laugh over England after all!

Comment by Snidely Whiplash Wednesday, May 16, 07 @ 10:56 pm
I didn’t expect people in Germany and Switzerland to speak English. I did my best to use my transltion book and took lessons. All you have to do is leave the house and you can see, as a previous post mentions, we might have already lost the battle. Store signs, labeling, etc. are already bilingual. I’d like to see English declared the official language nationally. Books to translate are sold evrywhere you come into the country, legally.

Comment by traveled in Europe Thursday, May 17, 07 @ 12:36 pm
Huh? — What’s your point?

Yes, ballots are in multiple languages. You can get a Chinese ballot if you want. So?

Welcome to America, melting pot of the world.

What you’re implying is that people who speak English only are being forced to learn Spanish. You have no evidence of that. None.

What is happening (and what is apparently appalling to certain Carpentersvillers) is that some folks are producing material in two languages (Spanish and English) in order to sell products to people who speak one, the other or both languages. Some stores and the local first responders are also hiring bilingual employees in order to better serve the community.

–

Snidely Whiplash, in your zeal to echo only those with whom you agree as opposed to considering all the facts you missed the follow-up post describing how the English-French laws in Canada are actually serving to better unite Canada as a whole given that the Quebecois separatists are quieting down after years of tumultuousness. Essentially, you ignored the fact-based rebuttal in favor of perpetuating your opinion.

The fact you reference only the original post (an opinion on how horrible Canadian French is) as opposed to referencing the subsequent fact-based post about how the laws are uniting that country is what’s known as “cherry-picking the intelligence”. Conservatives for some reason seem to have a fetish for doing that lately.

Comment by Rob_N Thursday, May 17, 07 @ 4:21 pm