The costs and wastes of official bilingualism

[cybercoma]

Exactly.Virtually all government business is also written down too. Almost anyone that a deaf person might meet for official business would also be able to write down what they were trying to communicate. Email, text, and other modes of electronic communication would also already cover it.

ASL is not English. The grammar and language is very different. It doesn't work for the type of correspondence you're talking about. There's a reason deaf people have a right to an interpreter when dealing with schools, hospitals, police, and any other government institution. Edited July 9, 2016 by cybercoma

[Machjo]

ASL is not Engkish. The grammar and language is very different. It doesn't work for the type of correspondence you're talking about. There's a reason deaf people have a right to an interpreter when dealing with schools, hospitals, police, and any other government institution.

Add to that that if Stats Can says about 49% of Canadians between 16 and 65 is functionally literate in neither official language, I'd imagine that the rate is even higher for the deaf, dyslexics, and especially deaf-dyslexics.

[WestCoastRunner]

Stats Can: about 17% can hold a conversation in both official languages Canada-wide. This does not count unofficial languages.

Furthermore, 49% of Canadians (and around 60% on reserves) between the ages of 16 and 65 is functionally literate in neither official language! I'd say functional literacy should be more of a national priority than official bilingualism.

I agree, and I suspect JT has a handle on this. That's a complete positive thinking on my part though!

[Bryan]

ASL is not Engkish. The grammar and language is very different.

So? I know quite a few deaf people, and they all can read and write english quite well. It's also the reason that closed caption TV/movies exist.

[WestCoastRunner]

So? I know quite a few deaf people, and they all can read and write english quite well. It's also the reason that closed caption TV/movies exist.

Bryan. You seem to know quite a few deaf people, quite a few people from the lgbt community who have been transformed. Are you a confidant from God?

[Machjo]

To those who think every Canadian should be bilingual by the end of high school, there would be an easy, efficient, and cost-effective way to achieve this. Each Provincial government passes the following law:

1. Each public school can teach the second language of its choice.

3. Each student can write the test for the second-language of his choice.

3. No student who is born more than one year after this law is adopted graduates from high school without acquiring a complete knowledge of a second language or obtaining a medical certificate indicating a disability that prevents him from doing so.

In such an environment, schools would exploit one of three strategies:

1. Exploit the local environment. For example, a school in Burnaby might offer Chinese immersion or one in an English suburb of Montreal English immersion.

2. Teach a similar language. Some English schools might teach Afrikaans immersion or another Germanic language that resembles English as much as possible. Some French schools might teach Spanish immersion or another Romance language as similar to French as possible.

3. Teach an easier language (meaning phonetic spelling, no silent letters, simple grammar, no exceptions, etc.). Some schools might offer core or at most intensive Esperanto (immersion would be overkill and a waste of time for such an easy language). This might apply in rural areas where a school can't find a qualified Afrikaans or Spanish teacher for example.

The problem though is that proponents of official bilingualism are more interested in creating jobs for English teachers in Quebec and French teachers outside of Québec than ensuring that the students learn their second language well, so they would not tolerate that such a pedagogically sound approach replace the ideological approach we have now.

[Machjo]

So? I know quite a few deaf people, and they all can read and write english quite well. It's also the reason that closed caption TV/movies exist.

I don't doubt it. I was just quoting statistics, not commenting on any particular person.

[The_Squid]

Bryan. You seem to know quite a few deaf people, quite a few people from the lgbt community who have been transformed. Are you a confidant from God?

I was thinking the same thing.... He has a lot of gay deaf friends.... Interesting circle of acquaintances....

[Machjo]

I was thinking the same thing.... He has a lot of gay deaf friends.... Interesting circle of acquaintances....

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

[Bryan]

Bryan. You seem to know quite a few deaf people, quite a few people from the lgbt community who have been transformed. Are you a confidant from God?

No, just someone who seems to know more people that you do. Try getting out of the house once in a while, and maybe you can meet people as well.

Edited July 9, 2016 by Bryan

[-TSS-]

Yes. If I lived there, Russian would the language I would think would be very valuable to know. Are you saying it doesn't give you any advantages to know Russian, or just that hardly anyone makes use of them?

It is something of a mystery why Russian is so little known in Finland as mastering it could almost certainly guarantee a good job in trade. However, perhaps the reason is that it is a very daunting and difficult language to learn. Then there are of course people who consider Russia as the enemy and won't even think about learning the language of the enemy.

[Machjo]

Native languages should be official languages and so should ASL and LSQ.

I could agree with multiple official languages, but then we would need to differentiate them somehow.

As an example, the UN has six official languages, but the 'working language' is English. Practicality requires a common language. It's all politics. At the UN, only the Chinese ambassador uses the Chinese interpreter. He knows English, but still addresses the Assembly in Chinese and will still put the headphones in his ears and at least pretend to listen to the Chinese interpreter. Why? Because it's his job to do so.

We want to avoid the same kind of problem in Canada. In fact we have it already with people suing Air Canada for a 7-Up in French.

What I could see would be the following modification to the Constitution:

1. Remove all rights pertaining specifically to English and French from everyone who is born more than one year after this new Act is passed.

2. Require all public schools to teach an international auxiliary language (maybe Esperanto) as a compulsory second language.

3. The Government if Canada must produce a curriculum for students at least up to the age of fifteen in each of Canada's indigenous languages.

4. The local indigenous language shall be the default language of instruction until the age of fifteen. For example, the Government would have to send an unidentified orphan who speaks no other language to a school that teaches in the local indigenous language.

5. Each parent can send his child to school in a language of his choice, maybe through a voucher programme for example.

6. Each government within which boundaries the local indigenous language is the same everywhere shall require all new hirees to be bilingual, with preference, in order of preference, all other qualifications being equal and knowing Canada's international auxiliary language, going to:

a. The one who knows the local indigenous sign language.

b. The one who knows an international auxiliary sign language (maybe International Sign).

c. The one who knows the oral and written local indigenous language.

D. Any other language.

This might apply to local governments for example.

7. Every government within which boundaries more than one local indigenous language is spoken shall require all knew hirees to be bilingual, preference, all other qualifications being equal, first to the one who knows International Sign, and then to any other language.

This would ensure a common language while also promoting the local indigenous language in an efficient manner.

[Machjo]

ASL road signs would be interesting.

Video signs?

[Machjo]

There are levels of bilingualism. Those at the lowest level do not speak the other language perfectly. This is important to the employee when their non-bilingual manager is trying to communicate important things to them.

Why hire an illiterate in the working language?

[Machjo]

Vous voulez un emploi , alors vous apprendre le français.

Grammatical correction without stylistic improvements:

Si vous voulez un emploi, alors vous apprendrez le français.

I'm sure the English-ASL, English-Algonquin, and English-Chinese bilinguals in Ottawa will appreciate being told:

Thanks for your taxes, but the government is an Anglo-French club. You don't belong here because you don't speak the right two languages.

[Machjo]

Only because you're not French and don't recognize the fact that they have legal rights as the original settlers of this country.

French is my mother tongue, I read in French and English every day, I speak Chinese every day, and am presently working on a book project in Esperanto, yet I reject my right to French and English in the Constitution.

Why? There are a few reasons.

1. Why should the government guarantee me a right to service in the languages of members of the world's two mist advantaged language communities instead of a sign language or the local indigenous language?

2. Instead of guaranteeing me a right to English or French monolingualism, why not impose on me the obligation to learn an international auxiliary language like Esperanto? That way, dyslexic indigenous, Chinese, and other Canadians would need to learn the same IAL instead of the far more difficult English and French. In other words, we'd all meet each other part way in the communicative process. Why should I have a right to unilingualism by virtue of my mother tongue?

3. After having read Book I of the Report of the Report of the Royal Commisdion on Bilingualism and Biculturalism, I'd come to realise how racist an ideology official bilingualism is. If you don't have time to read the Report, then read at least the Wikipedia Article on official bilingualism in Canada which includes quotes from the Report. Though official bilingualism was about promoting equality between English and French Canadians, it was also explicitly about excluding others.

Any progressive-minded person would reject official bilingualism for these reasons. It's a reactionary policy of the 1960's.

Edited July 9, 2016 by Machjo

[Machjo]

Uh...the first settlers followed the receding glaciers over 15,000 years ago. Nordic settlers predated froggy by quite a bit. By your standard, our official second language should be Inuktitut.

Where I live, that would be Ojibwe, of which I've learnt at least a few words and phrases. Aanii.

[Machjo]

So you are going out and learning Mandarin then? Of course don't expect to sell a plug nickel worth of stuff to the European market.

I'm a French Canadian who knows Chinese and use it daily in the NCC.

You see, one just never knows what language he'll need in life, and that's why the Government should promote official monolingualism as much as possible.

It's no coincidence that some of the world's most multilingual states (e.g. Indonesia) are officially unilingual.

[Bryan]

We want to avoid the same kind of problem in Canada. In fact we have it already with people suing Air Canada for a 7-Up in French.

See, that is the real problem with codifying official languages in law. People start seeing it as their right to get service in the language they CHOOSE, even if they speak the one offered. If there is any change that is needed to official language laws, it has to be a change in wording that removes the idea of anyone having a RIGHT to a specific language.

As policy, of course governments should do their best to facilitate communication with people who don't understand what they are being told. And they already do in many ways. Government offices will seek out people to help when they have someone for whom the dominant modes of communication won't work -- including having someone translate Newfoundlander to Prairie English. I'm not kidding about that last part, I know of several instances where that really did happen at govt offices in Manitoba.

[?Impact]

As an example, the UN has six official languages, but the 'working language' is English.

A very nice claim, but 100% false. The UN has six official languages - period. There might be some UN subcommittees that use different working languages, but they are not English in all cases. The General Assembly, and Security Council use all 6 languages as official and working languages. When the UN was established in 1946 it was five official languages (Chinese, French, English, Russian and Spanish) and two working languages (English and French), but over time the other languages became working languages as well, culminating in 1973 when Arabic was added as both an official and working language.

[-TSS-]

The appointment of the UN general-secretary needs the approval of all the permanent security- council members and the French will never accept anyone who doesnt speak French.

[cybercoma]

So? I know quite a few deaf people, and they all can read and write english quite well. It's also the reason that closed caption TV/movies exist.

That's nice. I can guarantee you that I know a hell of a lot more Deaf people than you do and many of them have had piss poor educations due to residential schools that were oppressive and abusive. I also know that even the ones who do read English, it's their second language. When you're dealing with doctors, lawyers, teachers, etc., do you want to write back and forth in your second language or would it be better to have it interpreted into your first language? Particularly where people's lives are on the line or there's legal issues, the last thing you want is for someone to seem to understand something but they've made a mistake because they're working in their second language.

[Machjo]

A very nice claim, but 100% false. The UN has six official languages - period. There might be some UN subcommittees that use different working languages, but they are not English in all cases. The General Assembly, and Security Council use all 6 languages as official and working languages. When the UN was established in 1946 it was five official languages (Chinese, French, English, Russian and Spanish) and two working languages (English and French), but over time the other languages became working languages as well, culminating in 1973 when Arabic was added as both an official and working language.

At a conference in Beijing in 2004, I'd met someone who worked in the UN building in New York who said outside the Assembly Room, in the hallways, etc. informally they all switched to English. They use the other languages only in formal contexts for show.

[cybercoma]

French is my mother tongue, I read in French and English every day, I speak Chinese every day, and am presently working on a book project in Esperanto, yet I reject my right to French and English in the Constitution.

Why? There are a few reasons.

1. Why should the government guarantee me a right to service in the languages of members of the world's two mist advantaged language communities instead of a sign language or the local indigenous language?

2. Instead of guaranteeing me a right to English or French monolingualism, why not impose on me the obligation to learn an international auxiliary language like Esperanto? That way, dyslexic indigenous, Chinese, and other Canadians would need to learn the same IAL instead of the far more difficult English and French. In other words, we'd all meet each other part way in the communicative process. Why should I have a right to unilingualism by virtue of my mother tongue?

3. After having read Book I of the Report of the Report of the Royal Commisdion on Bilingualism and Biculturalism, I'd come to realise how racist an ideology official bilingualism is. If you don't have time to read the Report, then read at least the Wikipedia Article on official bilingualism in Canada which includes quotes from the Report. Though official bilingualism was about promoting equality between English and French Canadians, it was also explicitly about excluding others.

Any progressive-minded person would reject official bilingualism for these reasons. It's a reactionary policy of the 1960's.

The purpose of bilingualism is to protect the language and culture from dying out. The French (and also the Inuit and First Nations) have a right to retain their language and culture. It's easy to get overwhelmed by English since it's the dominant language on the continent. As a society, we value the preservation of culture so it has been codified in a way that prevents it from dying out. It's as simple as that.

(In the 1700s, it was more about preventing rebellions and frankly today the threat of secession is dead but not gone.)

Edited July 9, 2016 by cybercoma

[cybercoma]

See, that is the real problem with codifying official languages in law. People start seeing it as their right to get service in the language they CHOOSE

When did you CHOOSE to get service in English?