Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't think it's dumb in the least. When I went to Portugal as a tourist I made sure not to act in a manner where I intersected with the Court system. Why can't I go to other countries and compel them to provide me services in English if I commit a crime there?
You can be a witnessed, falsely accused, a real estate proceeding, estate, business, etc, there are many reasons to engage in court/legal proceedings aside from committing a crime.
And yes, all but the third world ghetto countries will provide an interpreter for you.
I don't think it's dumb in the least. When I went to Portugal as a tourist I made sure not to act in a manner where I intersected with the Court system. Why can't I go to other countries and compel them to provide me services in English if I commit a crime there?
Actually there are native Americans who do not speak English as their first language. Puerto Ricans come immediately to mind. And they often actually speak an English/Spanish hybrid. They do have basic English capabilities but are not higly proficient.
My brother spent many years as a Spanish speaking lawyer in a midwest American City. He was a Spanish expert before he went to Law school. He found that the Puerto Ricans were very badly translated in the courts there. The problem was the use of bilingual Cubans as Spanish interpreters. Their spanish was good but their Puerto Rican stunk to the degree of threatening the integrity of the courts. He had, on several occasions, to get the judge to remove an interpreters.
He was however very unusual. Few lawyers or judges are Spanish linguists. So even if they get you an interpreter it may not work well.
So even if they get you an interpreter it may not work well.
I hate to side with you on much of anything but I have to. A few years back one of my colleagues took a Chinese principal of a company to a creditors' meeting. When asked where certain receivables went one of them said, in a thick Chinese accent "to Cah-nah-dah." When they were deposed under oath (a proceeding occasioned by this linguistic gaff) I insisted on an interpreter. So even though I inveigh against the costs there is a good point being made. I just think that the litigants, not society, should pay.
Freedom of speech. Please speak what you understand.
People are free to speak whatever language they please, but they can't expect society to change to accommodate them. This has always been the downfall of the left - the lack of understanding that the flip side of freedom is that we aren't free from the consequences of our choices.
We're going to end up as a Tower of Babel where half of us cannot understand the other half. It's already that way in some places, as you drive through, there may be one English radio station and 15 in Spanish.
Or...you know...being protected by the laws of this country shouldn't be limited to only English speakers. This may be the dumbest thread I've read on City Data and its got some tough competition.
is there no limit to the number of languages you'd be willing to accommodate, at great expense?
I hate to side with you on much of anything but I have to. A few years back one of my colleagues took a Chinese principal of a company to a creditors' meeting. When asked where certain receivables went one of them said, in a thick Chinese accent "to Cah-nah-dah." When they were deposed under oath (a proceeding occasioned by this linguistic gaff) I insisted on an interpreter. So even though I inveigh against the costs there is a good point being made. I just think that the litigants, not society, should pay.
So, in addition to "people who haven't attended night school yet," the second category of persons who should be functionally denied access to legal redress is "poor people who don't have the financial wherewithal to hire an interpreter for $200 an hour plus a $500 appearance fee."
People are free to speak whatever language they please, but they can't expect society to change to accommodate them. This has always been the downfall of the left - the lack of understanding that the flip side of freedom is that we aren't free from the consequences of our choices.
We're going to end up as a Tower of Babel where half of us cannot understand the other half. It's already that way in some places, as you drive through, there may be one English radio station and 15 in Spanish.
It is actually likely to be the exact opposite case. Culturally adjacent languages historically always bleed into each other and blend together. The internet/instant global communication has effectively made all languages culturally adjacent. Therefore, over the course of the next few hundred years we should expect to see many languages begin merging into fewer and fewer hybrid languages. The likely end result would likely be a single dominant worldwide language, with pockets of varying locationally specific dialects.
One can see the process on a micro level by watching say, a Korean TV show or some other culture that would have been primarily isolated from English until fairly recently - out of the noise you will occasionally pick up English words that have been adopted from the dialogue. Take the same process incorporating all the worlds major languages and then multiply it over 1000s of years instead of decades. In the past, only cultures that bordered each other had the opportunity to make these kinds of merges - but now everybody can talk to everybody.
Its actually the opposite. Culturally adjacent languages historically always bleed into each other and blend together. The internet has effectively made all languages culturally adjacent. Therefore, over the course of the next few hundred years we should expect to see many languages begin merging into fewer and fewer hybrid languages.
Link? That is actually not true at all. The various neighboring languages in close proximity in places like Europe and Asia do not bleed into each other much at all. A speaker of French who has never studied German cannot understand the latter. A speaker of Korean cannot understand Chinese.
A nation-state should have one language that is universally used and those that have been balkanized such as, well the former Yugoslavia or the former Austro-Hungarian Empire always had massive internal strife.
I understand you wishing that your views be true, but they are not.
You have hit a raw point here. Our ancestors to speak English when they first came. They worked during the day and went to night school in order to learn the English language. These night schools were provided by groups such as the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society (which now services other ethnic and religious groups) and other entities. Why can't Hispanic or Chinese people, certainly groups with a critical mass, organize and fund similar night education?
I have zero idea whether your ancestors did or did not. STATISTICALLY I find it funny that many chest thumping the loudest had ancestors that did not speak English worth a darn.
Take a look at the 1910, 1920, 1930 and 1940 census.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
