Date: Sun, 26 May 2002 15:07:41 -0700 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: Martin Karlsson <martin.karlsson@visit.se> Cc: Greg 'groggy' Lehey <grog@FreeBSD.ORG>, Brad Knowles <brad.knowles@skynet.be>, Rahul Siddharthan <rsidd@online.fr>, Annelise Anderson <andrsn@ANDRSN.STANFORD.EDU>, Jamie Bowden <ragnar@sysabend.org>, Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@regency.nsu.ru>, chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Dual language (was: cvs commit: src/sys/alpha/alpha clock.c) Message-ID: <3CF15CAD.C05C6BEE@mindspring.com> References: <3CEAE187.FC1CC966@mindspring.com> <p0511171eb910959a28f6@[10.0.1.4]> <20020522050350.GA266@lpt.ens.fr> <20020523124604.Z45715@wantadilla.lemis.com> <20020523061551.GA237@lpt.ens.fr> <20020523155541.H230@wantadilla.lemis.com> <20020523063222.GA470@lpt.ens.fr> <p0511170eb9127dabc846@[10.0.1.8]> <20020525075741.GC630@foo31-146.visit.se> <20020525175337.F84264@wantadilla.lemis.com> <20020526094106.GA345@foo31-146.visit.se>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Martin Karlsson wrote: > But sometimes there's (for historical reasons) a certain amount of > animosity between the speakers of the two languages, and when the > minority language really _is_ spoken by a minority (say 5% of the > population), this, quite naturally causes "linguistic friction". > > There are studies that show that a speaker of a minority language > tends to be sentenced to harsher punishments, for instance. Maybe in countries where the people speaking the languages hold grudges for forever; but in the U.S., studies have shown that non-Spanish speakers don't get sentenced to harsher sentences in counties in Southern California and Miami, where Spanish is now the majority language. > If one writes to some kind of authority, asking for a permit or > whatnot, chances are that the request will simply be ignored, either > because the receiver doesn't understand the writers language, or > because he/she doesn't _want_ to understand I think that most U.S. citizens will take this as evidence that the government you are speaking of is corrupt. Using language or ethnicity (when it's even discernible) as a controlling factor in public policy administration is generally viewed as corruption, by definition, by U.S. citizens. Many parts of India, the former Russia, and Eastern European countries and the middle East have this problem. The former Russian Republics make this really obvious, now that in many of them the "dominant language" situation has become inverted. There are plenty of news reports having to deal with commerce that discuss, for example, how long it takes to get a business license in various provinces in India, if you are unwilling or unable to bribe someone. The time is measured in months or even years. It's also the general impression in the U.S. -- among the educated who have access to news sources other than television -- that most of the former Russia is under the control of the Russian Mafia, and that the rule of law is practically suspended. In the worst areas of the U.S., the amount of time is three weeks (that's the same three weeks for everyone: it's bureaucracy). In Singapore, you can turn around the same application in a single day, and be in business in your shop in the mall the next day -- regardless of the language you speak. You can blame this on language conflicts, or the ethnic conflicts that are at the root of differences in language... a common example held up in this regard is Cypress, with the division of the Island between two opposed political forces, Turkish and Greek. But the real answer is non-uniform enforcement of the rule of law. Frankly, most people in the U.S. simply can't understand the ethnic based conflicts in various parts of the world. From the general population's point of view, it's impossible to tell an ethnic Serb from an ethnic Croat, unless one of them stands up at a podium and yells "_I_ am an _ethnic Serb_!". > I don't think minority languages will survive all by themelves. If > one wants to speak a minority language, one will have to fight for > the right to do so. > > example: There are three indigenous ethnic groups in Sweden: Swedes, > Lapps and Finns, but only one official language, Swedish. I think > this will remain like it is, simply because it would be too > expensive (for the government) to provide services in Finnish or > Lapp. Thinking of this makes me feel ashamed of my country. Counter-example: There are many ethnic groups in the United States, and there is no officially recognized language, despite the best efforts of people who want to pin it at English, so as to avoid the measurably ineffective bilingual education which occurs any place there are large immigrant populations. Eating the expense, which makes you ashamed because your country won't eat the same expense, is costing the U.S. billions upon billions of dollars in lost productivity, and is in fact entrenching the ghettoization of the people taught that way. For U.S. residents: name one professor with tenure at a U.S. University who has taught a class in which you were enrolled, and who did not speak English. Despite the benefits of adopting a single official language, in terms of transportability of a primary education to a University setting: a benefit for the students, the U.S. continues to deny that a language divide is a problem. Second counter-example: many of the former Russian republics have official languages, the best overall description of which is really "anything but Russian". Kazhakstan is probably the best known to people in the U.S. (and most likely that's as much because of the fact that it ends in "stan" like "Afghanistan", as for the brush-fire conflict that flares up periodically between it and Russia). -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3CF15CAD.C05C6BEE>