Official Languages

[Forsher]

Should they exist? Should there be multiple?

I say yes to both. Although this article illustrates that there are problems with a trilingual state...

[NERVUN]

Nope. Don't believe in official languages (In governments at least), all they do is put a big "We don't like people who don't speak our lingo here" sign on things.

[Worzel]

Nope. Don't believe in official languages (In governments at least), all they do is put a big "We don't like people who don't speak our lingo here" sign on things.

What's wrong with that? Surely a country needs a language to function smoothly.

[Tubbsalot]

They can be useful in heavily multilingual countries, as a list of which languages the government can cater to on signs and such.

Otherwise, it's perfectly sufficient to have a de facto official language, as in Australia or America. As NERV said, de jure official languages without any real need for it just suggests a dislike of foreigners.

[Mackistan]

Should they exist? Should there be multiple?

I say yes to both. Although this article illustrates that there are problems with a trilingual state...

Personally, I feel that an official language makes things more simple and effective for the function of the state. I also feel that an official language helps strengthen the national identity of a state, bettering the functionality. I also feel that multiple languages can be a good thing as well, as the other official language should be that of the entire world community, so the citizens of my nation are members of the international community.

[Kaeshar]

I congratulate you New Zealanders on the first disabled hard of hearing politician in NZ.

Honestly, we need more of those in our government, I don't mean just those in wheelchairs, I mean the blind and hearing impaired* as well.

*I don't mean just those who have had hearing loss due to age.

For the acommodations, well, you're just going to have to put up with it because I'm hard of hearing myself and I completely understand the problems. Yes there will be an adjustment period, but just go with the flow. Also that Lockwood Smith sounds like an asshole.

Back on topic, the debate about official languages has come up from time to time here in the US and manuals and stuff are routinely printed in both English and Spanish. For all the talk of making english the official language, I don't see a problem with making both English and Spanish official languages, we've been dealing with both for a very long time now.

[Farnhamia]

Nope. Don't believe in official languages (In governments at least), all they do is put a big "We don't like people who don't speak our lingo here" sign on things.

What's wrong with that? Surely a country needs a language to function smoothly.

Absolutely, and the more the better.

[NERVUN]

Nope. Don't believe in official languages (In governments at least), all they do is put a big "We don't like people who don't speak our lingo here" sign on things.

What's wrong with that? Surely a country needs a language to function smoothly.

Oddly enough, a number of countries DON'T have one and seem to do just fine.

Here's my beef with "official" languages.

1. They're pretty much a backdoor anti-immigrant act.
2. No, they don't encourage immigrants to either learn the lingo or integrate any faster. Immigrants (usually) have brains enough to know they need to learn at least enough of the majority language to be able to survive. Furthermore, no immigrant group, to my knowledge, has escaped the three generation rule in terms of language or integration (The rule notes that within three generations, immigrants will lose their language and most, if not all, of their originating culture unless efforts are expended to maintain them, these efforts are less likely after the second generation. Or to put it another way, the first generation speaks the old language and continues the old traditions. The second generation will be effectively bi-cultural and bi-lingual, the third will speak only the new language and will mostly observe the new traditions).
3. They do however make it tougher on immigrants of the first generation by denying them access to government services or help by making sure everything is within the 'official' language (And such documents are, of course, not written for language learners in mind).
4. They don't particularly save money as language translation isn't that big of a budget issue.
5. Instead of promoting integration, it actually prevents it because you have a group of people getting the government to say "We won't even talk to you unless you can speak how we want you to speak."

Like I said, it's mainly a backdoor "Stay out" attempt that doesn't do what is claimed.

[Farnhamia]

What's wrong with that? Surely a country needs a language to function smoothly.

Oddly enough, a number of countries DON'T have one and seem to do just fine.

Here's my beef with "official" languages.

1. They're pretty much a backdoor anti-immigrant act.
2. No, they don't encourage immigrants to either learn the lingo or integrate any faster. Immigrants (usually) have brains enough to know they need to learn at least enough of the majority language to be able to survive. Furthermore, no immigrant group, to my knowledge, has escaped the three generation rule in terms of language or integration (The rule notes that within three generations, immigrants will lose their language and most, if not all, of their originating culture unless efforts are expended to maintain them, these efforts are less likely after the second generation. Or to put it another way, the first generation speaks the old language and continues the old traditions. The second generation will be effectively bi-cultural and bi-lingual, the third will speak only the new language and will mostly observe the new traditions).
3. They do however make it tougher on immigrants of the first generation by denying them access to government services or help by making sure everything is within the 'official' language (And such documents are, of course, not written for language learners in mind).
4. They don't particularly save money as language translation isn't that big of a budget issue.
5. Instead of promoting integration, it actually prevents it because you have a group of people getting the government to say "We won't even talk to you unless you can speak how we want you to speak."

Like I said, it's mainly a backdoor "Stay out" attempt that doesn't do what is claimed.

申し訳ありませんが、何かを言いましたか？私はあなたを理解することはできません。(Google translate, so be gentle.)

[Communal Ecotopia]

Nope. Don't believe in official languages (In governments at least), all they do is put a big "We don't like people who don't speak our lingo here" sign on things.

I think this is largely true, certainly in the United States, although I vacillate between wanting no official language and wanting many (a la Switzerland), since I think the latter may better foster multi-lingualism and cultural cross-understanding.

[Kaeshar]

Yeah, even though the discussion has come up once in a while, it never really gets any momentum into legislation.

@Farnhamia: The part about languages being lost can be true of the US, but culture and tradition has persisted, in part from continuing influx of immigrants from the same cultural communities.

[Forsher]

What's wrong with that? Surely a country needs a language to function smoothly.

Oddly enough, a number of countries DON'T have one and seem to do just fine.

Here's my beef with "official" languages.

1. They're pretty much a backdoor anti-immigrant act.
2. No, they don't encourage immigrants to either learn the lingo or integrate any faster. Immigrants (usually) have brains enough to know they need to learn at least enough of the majority language to be able to survive. Furthermore, no immigrant group, to my knowledge, has escaped the three generation rule in terms of language or integration (The rule notes that within three generations, immigrants will lose their language and most, if not all, of their originating culture unless efforts are expended to maintain them, these efforts are less likely after the second generation. Or to put it another way, the first generation speaks the old language and continues the old traditions. The second generation will be effectively bi-cultural and bi-lingual, the third will speak only the new language and will mostly observe the new traditions).
3. They do however make it tougher on immigrants of the first generation by denying them access to government services or help by making sure everything is within the 'official' language (And such documents are, of course, not written for language learners in mind).
4. They don't particularly save money as language translation isn't that big of a budget issue.
5. Instead of promoting integration, it actually prevents it because you have a group of people getting the government to say "We won't even talk to you unless you can speak how we want you to speak."

Like I said, it's mainly a backdoor "Stay out" attempt that doesn't do what is claimed.

I like the idea of official languages. I can see where NERVUN is coming from.

I consider NZ to have quite progressive immigration policies (although we need to make it easier for Islanders to come, a bit like the Aussie deal). This is especially seen twith the voting abilities of residents, not citizens, residents.

Now, point number four. On my last holiday I noticed that those who cannnot speak English have to fill in forms in the language the speak. A translator won't do.

[NERVUN]

Oddly enough, a number of countries DON'T have one and seem to do just fine.

Here's my beef with "official" languages.

1. They're pretty much a backdoor anti-immigrant act.
2. No, they don't encourage immigrants to either learn the lingo or integrate any faster. Immigrants (usually) have brains enough to know they need to learn at least enough of the majority language to be able to survive. Furthermore, no immigrant group, to my knowledge, has escaped the three generation rule in terms of language or integration (The rule notes that within three generations, immigrants will lose their language and most, if not all, of their originating culture unless efforts are expended to maintain them, these efforts are less likely after the second generation. Or to put it another way, the first generation speaks the old language and continues the old traditions. The second generation will be effectively bi-cultural and bi-lingual, the third will speak only the new language and will mostly observe the new traditions).
3. They do however make it tougher on immigrants of the first generation by denying them access to government services or help by making sure everything is within the 'official' language (And such documents are, of course, not written for language learners in mind).
4. They don't particularly save money as language translation isn't that big of a budget issue.
5. Instead of promoting integration, it actually prevents it because you have a group of people getting the government to say "We won't even talk to you unless you can speak how we want you to speak."

Like I said, it's mainly a backdoor "Stay out" attempt that doesn't do what is claimed.

申し訳ありませんが、何かを言いましたか？私はあなたを理解することはできません。(Google translate, so be gentle.)

日本は公用語がありません。　でも僕の市はいろいろな外国語パンフレットがあります。

[NERVUN]

Oddly enough, a number of countries DON'T have one and seem to do just fine.

Here's my beef with "official" languages.

1. They're pretty much a backdoor anti-immigrant act.
2. No, they don't encourage immigrants to either learn the lingo or integrate any faster. Immigrants (usually) have brains enough to know they need to learn at least enough of the majority language to be able to survive. Furthermore, no immigrant group, to my knowledge, has escaped the three generation rule in terms of language or integration (The rule notes that within three generations, immigrants will lose their language and most, if not all, of their originating culture unless efforts are expended to maintain them, these efforts are less likely after the second generation. Or to put it another way, the first generation speaks the old language and continues the old traditions. The second generation will be effectively bi-cultural and bi-lingual, the third will speak only the new language and will mostly observe the new traditions).
3. They do however make it tougher on immigrants of the first generation by denying them access to government services or help by making sure everything is within the 'official' language (And such documents are, of course, not written for language learners in mind).
4. They don't particularly save money as language translation isn't that big of a budget issue.
5. Instead of promoting integration, it actually prevents it because you have a group of people getting the government to say "We won't even talk to you unless you can speak how we want you to speak."

Like I said, it's mainly a backdoor "Stay out" attempt that doesn't do what is claimed.

I like the idea of official languages. I can see where NERVUN is coming from.

I consider NZ to have quite progressive immigration policies (although we need to make it easier for Islanders to come, a bit like the Aussie deal). This is especially seen twith the voting abilities of residents, not citizens, residents.

Now, point number four. On my last holiday I noticed that those who cannnot speak English have to fill in forms in the language the speak. A translator won't do.

I mean having certain forms printed in multiple languages. For example, when I have to hoof it up to Nagano City to see the immigration office, I can get forms for anything I need to do in Japanese, Chinese, Portuguese, Tagalog, and English.

[Farnhamia]

申し訳ありませんが、何かを言いましたか？私はあなたを理解することはできません。(Google translate, so be gentle.)

日本は公用語がありません。　でも僕の市はいろいろな外国語パンフレットがあります。

I admit I didn't check. The Japanese are known to be just a little xenophobic, though perhaps that's less justified than we in the West think.

[NERVUN]

Yeah, even though the discussion has come up once in a while, it never really gets any momentum into legislation.

@Farnhamia: The part about languages being lost can be true of the US, but culture and tradition has persisted, in part from continuing influx of immigrants from the same cultural communities.

I think you meant me, and not within individual families. Immigrant communities can maintain them, assuming they are large enough and maintain influx of immigrants (If you look at a lot of the various 'towns' that have lost that, they are dying. Japan Town in San Francisco is pretty much a shopping mall and Little Italy is just a tourist spot in New York). Families however, don't. They very quickly move out of those communities in the second generation.

[NERVUN]

日本は公用語がありません。　でも僕の市はいろいろな外国語パンフレットがあります。

I admit I didn't check. The Japanese are known to be just a little xenophobic, though perhaps that's less justified than we in the West think.

They are, at times, but they also understand that not everyone speaks Japanese, or can read kanji. Roadsigns in Japan, along with many train and bus signs are printed in both Japanese AND in roman characters making it possible to navigate here.

[Great Malema]

Official languages are useful in countries like South Africa, where we have eleven official languages. Even though English and Afrikaans (to a lesser extent) act as a lingua franca, there still needs to be recognition of the other nine languages by the government.

[1000 Cats]

So long as states exist, I advocate an official language. People do need to communicate in order to function properly, and language is also a very important element in culture. If one refuses to learn a language, one may also have troubles with other customs, even laws, of the particular nation that they have emigrated to.

Having official languages also helps prevent a melting pot, in my opinion, since it allows one's native culture to continue to keep their native culture without trying to somehow fit it into the local culture - ie we speak English when we're out and about, but at home we speak Arabic; the culture associated with our Arabic is not being associated with the culture associated with English. It seems a little ironic, but this is what I have noticed.

Countries that are officially bilingual or polyglot are sensible only if there are very distinct groups within that country. I think India goes a little overboard, as groups there from what I know are not as distinct as, say, English-speaking Canada and Quebecois. It's important to recognize these distinct groups, which usually come under the same country due to conquest. For this reason I am dismayed at the loss of Celtic, especially Gaelic languages in the United Kingdom, Sami languages in Scandinavia, native languages in the Americas, and potentially worst of all the aboriginal languages of Australia. These are distinct groups, and their language should be encouraged for the sake of the preservation of their culture.

[Forsher]

I like the idea of official languages. I can see where NERVUN is coming from.

I consider NZ to have quite progressive immigration policies (although we need to make it easier for Islanders to come, a bit like the Aussie deal). This is especially seen twith the voting abilities of residents, not citizens, residents.

Now, point number four. On my last holiday I noticed that those who cannnot speak English have to fill in forms in the language the speak. A translator won't do.

I mean having certain forms printed in multiple languages. For example, when I have to hoof it up to Nagano City to see the immigration office, I can get forms for anything I need to do in Japanese, Chinese, Portuguese, Tagalog, and English.

Portugeuse I wonder why...

An offical language does not undo all that. It does however mean you sometimes need to work to fins such things. (Obviously not too hard.)

[1000 Cats]

What's wrong with that? Surely a country needs a language to function smoothly.

Oddly enough, a number of countries DON'T have one and seem to do just fine.

Here's my beef with "official" languages.

1. They're pretty much a backdoor anti-immigrant act.

They are, but that isn't necessarily a bad thing. However non-PC it is to say it, immigration does need to be controlled in order to prevent certain individuals from entering. We can't know everyone, but an assumption can be made that if someone is willing to learn the official language, they will probably be more willing to integrate and less likely to take too much advantage of the systems in place.

2. No, they don't encourage immigrants to either learn the lingo or integrate any faster. Immigrants (usually) have brains enough to know they need to learn at least enough of the majority language to be able to survive. Furthermore, no immigrant group, to my knowledge, has escaped the three generation rule in terms of language or integration (The rule notes that within three generations, immigrants will lose their language and most, if not all, of their originating culture unless efforts are expended to maintain them, these efforts are less likely after the second generation. Or to put it another way, the first generation speaks the old language and continues the old traditions. The second generation will be effectively bi-cultural and bi-lingual, the third will speak only the new language and will mostly observe the new traditions).

The three-generation rule works, but that is sixty years. The first generation, in my experience, will often not learn the language of majority if they do not have to. You'd think they would, that they would get the hint that it's going to be very difficult to live here if you hardly know how to communicate, but they find ways around that - and the ways aren't always kosher.

3. They do however make it tougher on immigrants of the first generation by denying them access to government services or help by making sure everything is within the 'official' language (And such documents are, of course, not written for language learners in mind).

The idea is that they cannot be immigrants if they do not have a grasp on the language enough that they can take proper advantage of services. They can generally be temporary residents, during which they can take classes, and by the time they have lived in the nation long enough, unless they have used their time very poorly, they will understand the language well enough to pass the examination.

5. Instead of promoting integration, it actually prevents it because you have a group of people getting the government to say "We won't even talk to you unless you can speak how we want you to speak."

No, we don't have those people at all. The idea of an official language is that if you don't speak it, you are not a citizen.

[NERVUN]

So long as states exist, I advocate an official language. People do need to communicate in order to function properly, and language is also a very important element in culture. If one refuses to learn a language, one may also have troubles with other customs, even laws, of the particular nation that they have emigrated to.

*sighs* Really, you think that immigrants don't try to learn a language? You really think that countries without an official language somehow cannot communicate at all?

Baloney. Americans might be talking past each other, but they still communicate.

Having official languages also helps prevent a melting pot, in my opinion, since it allows one's native culture to continue to keep their native culture without trying to somehow fit it into the local culture - ie we speak English when we're out and about, but at home we speak Arabic; the culture associated with our Arabic is not being associated with the culture associated with English. It seems a little ironic, but this is what I have noticed.

The heck... this doesn't make sense, or jive with immigrant experience.

[NERVUN]

I mean having certain forms printed in multiple languages. For example, when I have to hoof it up to Nagano City to see the immigration office, I can get forms for anything I need to do in Japanese, Chinese, Portuguese, Tagalog, and English.

Portugeuse I wonder why...

Japan has a large Brazilian population due to inviting descendents of Japanese migration back to Japan during the bubble economy.

An offical language does not undo all that. It does however mean you sometimes need to work to fins such things. (Obviously not too hard.)

Actually, it does. At least as far as how such things are presented in the US, all government business MUST be conducted in English, period, meaning that the printing of anything in other language would be forbidden.

[NERVUN]

Oddly enough, a number of countries DON'T have one and seem to do just fine.

Here's my beef with "official" languages.

1. They're pretty much a backdoor anti-immigrant act.

They are, but that isn't necessarily a bad thing. However non-PC it is to say it, immigration does need to be controlled in order to prevent certain individuals from entering. We can't know everyone, but an assumption can be made that if someone is willing to learn the official language, they will probably be more willing to integrate and less likely to take too much advantage of the systems in place.

1. So... it's ok to have laws requiring Indian schools just so we can know which Indian would be willing to be more like us, right?
2. That's a very silly and stupid statement to make as most immigrants do learn enough of the majority language to at least get by AND, again, within 3 generations they will be absorbed.

2. No, they don't encourage immigrants to either learn the lingo or integrate any faster. Immigrants (usually) have brains enough to know they need to learn at least enough of the majority language to be able to survive. Furthermore, no immigrant group, to my knowledge, has escaped the three generation rule in terms of language or integration (The rule notes that within three generations, immigrants will lose their language and most, if not all, of their originating culture unless efforts are expended to maintain them, these efforts are less likely after the second generation. Or to put it another way, the first generation speaks the old language and continues the old traditions. The second generation will be effectively bi-cultural and bi-lingual, the third will speak only the new language and will mostly observe the new traditions).

The three-generation rule works, but that is sixty years. The first generation, in my experience, will often not learn the language of majority if they do not have to. You'd think they would, that they would get the hint that it's going to be very difficult to live here if you hardly know how to communicate, but they find ways around that - and the ways aren't always kosher.

How many languages do you speak? Most first generation immigrants will pick up a "working" knowledge, enough to communicate for daily life. I've picked up such for my Japanese. Doesn't mean that I can visit a government office and register my house without help however. And again, having an 'official' does not encourage language learning either. In fact, it would be more likely to drive immigrants underground as now they know that the government isn't interested in helping them at all and unless they speak flawlessly, it's pointless to even go.

3. They do however make it tougher on immigrants of the first generation by denying them access to government services or help by making sure everything is within the 'official' language (And such documents are, of course, not written for language learners in mind).

The idea is that they cannot be immigrants if they do not have a grasp on the language enough that they can take proper advantage of services. They can generally be temporary residents, during which they can take classes, and by the time they have lived in the nation long enough, unless they have used their time very poorly, they will understand the language well enough to pass the examination.

Again, how many languages do you speak? Are you certain you can understand another language well enough to conduct government business in them?

And I'm sorry, proper advantages? I MUST be able to pass the JLPT2 to call the fire department?

5. Instead of promoting integration, it actually prevents it because you have a group of people getting the government to say "We won't even talk to you unless you can speak how we want you to speak."

No, we don't have those people at all. The idea of an official language is that if you don't speak it, you are not a citizen.

Hate to tell you this, it's quite possible to be living in another nation and not be a citizen, it's also quite possible to live and die in another nation without ever becoming one either. I've lived in Japan for 7 years, I am not a Japanese citizen and (Baring a massive change in Japan's laws) I am quite unlikely to ever try to become one.

I am however a permanent resident. And while I am studying Japanese and it is slowly improving, it is still at a pre-int level. I still can communicate and function in most things over here however.

[1000 Cats]

So long as states exist, I advocate an official language. People do need to communicate in order to function properly, and language is also a very important element in culture. If one refuses to learn a language, one may also have troubles with other customs, even laws, of the particular nation that they have emigrated to.

*sighs* Really, you think that immigrants don't try to learn a language? You really think that countries without an official language somehow cannot communicate at all?

Baloney. Americans might be talking past each other, but they still communicate.

In countries with no official language, including the US, or countries that only recently ruled for an official language, like Sweden, it is not at all hard to find people who simply cannot communicate with the majority. So yes, from personal experience, a notable fraction of immigrants do not try to learn the majority language if they are not legally required to.

Having official languages also helps prevent a melting pot, in my opinion, since it allows one's native culture to continue to keep their native culture without trying to somehow fit it into the local culture - ie we speak English when we're out and about, but at home we speak Arabic; the culture associated with our Arabic is not being associated with the culture associated with English. It seems a little ironic, but this is what I have noticed.

The heck... this doesn't make sense, or jive with immigrant experience.

It jives with mine, and with my experience in officially multicultural states. In countries without an official language, a large influx of immigrants to an area can compete with, transform, and potentially even overthrow the local culture. An official language can go a long way towards preventing this merging. It does not, however, prevent people from keeping their own culture or language at home, which many do.