I got a little bit of a paragraph done. Good for me
next up, MORE PARAGRAPH!
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Sorry, I swear in this. So sue me, FCC
So I decided, instead of writing the video script, to just start typing here. Problem is, it’ll look like I did nothing up to this point. EWveryone will have pages and pages of stuff that they took care of doing nothing with, and I will have accomplished nothing. I look to my left, and I see Juliet has outdone me immensely in her essentially bitching about her life. Something about her dance class, her boyfriend and Christmas….which, come to think about it, I should count my blessings that I’m single this holiday season…I mean, Christmas…..I mean, Jesus’ Birthday….that I’m single. I hate having to deal with gifts, and whenever I give a gift, it’s always way better than the gift I receive. I don’t particularly care for the fact that a simple necklace can cost upwards of a couple hundred bucks, when a next-gen video game console costs about the same, but that is just ridiculous, right? Pfft. I duno, maybe this whole dating needs to be dealt with some other time. I need to reorganize parts of my life first, which I have done. Maybe I’ve been so self-analytical because I have had so little interest in flirting, which is very much unlike myself. I just no longer have the desire to deal with the same shit with girls like I used to. But hell, what are you gonna do. I don’t like feeling like I can’t trust women but at this point in my life, I take everything a woman says to me with a grain of salt. And holy FUCK Jameela wrote like a page…SHEESH! That girl is insane. Then again, if I went on like that without doing the other things I was doingm, I could have managed that. Jameela Is an interesting name. what is that? I can’t place a nationality. DAMMIT I’m hungry.
His play is coming up TOMORROW and GODDAMMIT if Aleya doesn’t learn her fucking lines, I’m gonna throw shit on stage. For GOD’S sake she keeps fucking up her lines and she continues to just stop talking in the MIDDLE OF HER GODDAMN LINE!!! I cover for her at least 4 times throughout the show, she better get her shit together by…shit, today. Wher is Tyler? He’s gonna fail this class if he keeps missing class. Yeah, I ought to do my Chile project and do this research paper. I hate doing research papers. They’re the least creative, least interesting form of writing, and essentially state a point that people will have already agreed with, or naysayers will dismiss. Pointless as all bloody hell, but what can you do. Yeah, Juliet is just staring at my screen and wondering what’s wrong with me. I’m hungry. I’m REALLY hungry. I need more salami in my dorm. I need a massage. I need to go back to bed. This research paper is so FREAKIN’ pointless. I have to bullshit and bullshit just to make it 6-8 pages. It’s a paper I could argue for, at the MOST, 5-10 minutes orally. It’s fucking ridiculous.
There. Enough of this. I got shit to do.
His play is coming up TOMORROW and GODDAMMIT if Aleya doesn’t learn her fucking lines, I’m gonna throw shit on stage. For GOD’S sake she keeps fucking up her lines and she continues to just stop talking in the MIDDLE OF HER GODDAMN LINE!!! I cover for her at least 4 times throughout the show, she better get her shit together by…shit, today. Wher is Tyler? He’s gonna fail this class if he keeps missing class. Yeah, I ought to do my Chile project and do this research paper. I hate doing research papers. They’re the least creative, least interesting form of writing, and essentially state a point that people will have already agreed with, or naysayers will dismiss. Pointless as all bloody hell, but what can you do. Yeah, Juliet is just staring at my screen and wondering what’s wrong with me. I’m hungry. I’m REALLY hungry. I need more salami in my dorm. I need a massage. I need to go back to bed. This research paper is so FREAKIN’ pointless. I have to bullshit and bullshit just to make it 6-8 pages. It’s a paper I could argue for, at the MOST, 5-10 minutes orally. It’s fucking ridiculous.
There. Enough of this. I got shit to do.
Monday, November 26, 2007
What I got thus far
As the rate of immigrants, legal or not, continues to increase in America, we as nation do our part to help coddle the new wave of pseudo-citizens. We do so by including foreign languages on billboards, signs, and just about anything to ease the immigrants into our lifestyle. Then again, shouldn’t they attempt to learn our language? Or is this assistance a reminder to others that we are a nurturing nation? In this sense, would making English the official language of America push foreign cultures further away, or bring them closer to our own?
The removal of foreign languages from such places as road signs or other public areas seems unnecessary. William F. Buckley feels that “These signs don’t seriously inconvenience anybody,” since “there is always an English version within sight.” In doing this, America hopes to have English as its official language. But such attempts at language unification have not only occurred in the States, nor can it be merely considered a recent issue. In 1887, an attempt at a universal language was made. The language, Esperanto, was intended to be a simple to learn language, based mostly off of European languages. The language took heavy criticism, from political figures such as Adolf Hitler; who considered the language a manner of world domination, to Senator Joseph McCarthy; who considered the language sympathetic towards communism. As you can see, the language unification was by no means accepted, so it would seem that such unification would meet with heavy resistance. Endangering the multilingual balance that is currently set is more work than is deemed necessary.
In the past, we see that immigrants were thought of in the same negative light as they are today, and as is the case today, they too had to learn both our culture and our language, or else find themselves scraping at the bottom of our societal bucket to survive. In Dennis Baron’s English in a Multicultural America, He makes note of the increased interest in immigrants wanting to become part of our country through assimilation. They no longer want to be considered "hyphenated Americans," such as Italian-Americans or Irish-Americans. The early immigrants to America were considered to be a problem, but they proved themselves as important members of American society, taking low paying jobs due to their lack of formal American education. Over the years, their children grew more into the American “way.” In the early 20th century, “young Germans were adopting English and abandoning German at a rate that should have impressed the rest of the English-speaking population.” By the time World War 1 occurred, German was banned from school curriculums, and in some cases, all foreign languages were removed, and as ignorant a move this may have been, the immigrants pushed on and managed. This sort of push seems to cause reason for English to be learned. Then again, much of this anti-bilingualism early on was due to ignorant, biased points of view from authoritative figures, or a complete lack of true information. In the early-to-mid 20th century, it was thought that the teaching of a foreign language was not only unnecessary, but harmful to a child’s development, to the point where “one psychologist claimed in 1926 that the use of a foreign language in the home was a leading cause of mental retardation.” At the same time, the issue with Spanish-speaking immigrants began to take hold. Southern Hispanics who had their roots in former Mexican territories were looked down on merely for speaking in their native tongue. In 1902, there was a hearing for Spanish statehood in which many people admitted to language as it affected the region, stating, : ballots and political speeches were either bilingual or entirely in Spanish; that census takers conducted their surveys in Spanish; that justices of the peace kept records in Spanish; that the courts required translators so that judges and lawyers could understand the many Hispanic witnesses; that juries deliberated in Spanish as much as in English; and that children, who might or might not learn English in schools, as required by law, "relapsed" into Spanish on the playground, at home, and after graduation.” This caused difficulty in having the territory become a state, in this meeting Senator Jeremiah Beveridge felt that a territory could only be a state through assimilation, which includes language. If this is true, and assimilation is the only manner of becoming a “United States,” how can no official language be selected?
In an effort to protect their language rights, Hispanics during the 1960’s fought not only for tolerance of minority languages, but for bilingualism to be encouraged in public institutions. And so, as they pushed, they had their first steps in the right direction taken, through the 1968 Bilingual Education Act, which gave funds for the special educational needs of students who have limited English-speaking abilities, and come from homes whose dominant language is something other than English. Supporters of this bill saw it as a way of resisting assimilation and keeping minority cultures from losing their roots as they settled into America. It grew into something of a divide
The removal of foreign languages from such places as road signs or other public areas seems unnecessary. William F. Buckley feels that “These signs don’t seriously inconvenience anybody,” since “there is always an English version within sight.” In doing this, America hopes to have English as its official language. But such attempts at language unification have not only occurred in the States, nor can it be merely considered a recent issue. In 1887, an attempt at a universal language was made. The language, Esperanto, was intended to be a simple to learn language, based mostly off of European languages. The language took heavy criticism, from political figures such as Adolf Hitler; who considered the language a manner of world domination, to Senator Joseph McCarthy; who considered the language sympathetic towards communism. As you can see, the language unification was by no means accepted, so it would seem that such unification would meet with heavy resistance. Endangering the multilingual balance that is currently set is more work than is deemed necessary.
In the past, we see that immigrants were thought of in the same negative light as they are today, and as is the case today, they too had to learn both our culture and our language, or else find themselves scraping at the bottom of our societal bucket to survive. In Dennis Baron’s English in a Multicultural America, He makes note of the increased interest in immigrants wanting to become part of our country through assimilation. They no longer want to be considered "hyphenated Americans," such as Italian-Americans or Irish-Americans. The early immigrants to America were considered to be a problem, but they proved themselves as important members of American society, taking low paying jobs due to their lack of formal American education. Over the years, their children grew more into the American “way.” In the early 20th century, “young Germans were adopting English and abandoning German at a rate that should have impressed the rest of the English-speaking population.” By the time World War 1 occurred, German was banned from school curriculums, and in some cases, all foreign languages were removed, and as ignorant a move this may have been, the immigrants pushed on and managed. This sort of push seems to cause reason for English to be learned. Then again, much of this anti-bilingualism early on was due to ignorant, biased points of view from authoritative figures, or a complete lack of true information. In the early-to-mid 20th century, it was thought that the teaching of a foreign language was not only unnecessary, but harmful to a child’s development, to the point where “one psychologist claimed in 1926 that the use of a foreign language in the home was a leading cause of mental retardation.” At the same time, the issue with Spanish-speaking immigrants began to take hold. Southern Hispanics who had their roots in former Mexican territories were looked down on merely for speaking in their native tongue. In 1902, there was a hearing for Spanish statehood in which many people admitted to language as it affected the region, stating, : ballots and political speeches were either bilingual or entirely in Spanish; that census takers conducted their surveys in Spanish; that justices of the peace kept records in Spanish; that the courts required translators so that judges and lawyers could understand the many Hispanic witnesses; that juries deliberated in Spanish as much as in English; and that children, who might or might not learn English in schools, as required by law, "relapsed" into Spanish on the playground, at home, and after graduation.” This caused difficulty in having the territory become a state, in this meeting Senator Jeremiah Beveridge felt that a territory could only be a state through assimilation, which includes language. If this is true, and assimilation is the only manner of becoming a “United States,” how can no official language be selected?
In an effort to protect their language rights, Hispanics during the 1960’s fought not only for tolerance of minority languages, but for bilingualism to be encouraged in public institutions. And so, as they pushed, they had their first steps in the right direction taken, through the 1968 Bilingual Education Act, which gave funds for the special educational needs of students who have limited English-speaking abilities, and come from homes whose dominant language is something other than English. Supporters of this bill saw it as a way of resisting assimilation and keeping minority cultures from losing their roots as they settled into America. It grew into something of a divide
What am I gonna try to do?
I'm gonna try to milk each of these sources to make them a little more than I thought, and I guess I'm going to need more sources. God help me.
Phase 2
As the rate of immigrants, legal or not, continues to increase in America, we as nation do our part to help coddle the new wave of pseudo-citizens. We do so by including foreign languages on billboards, signs, and just about anything to ease the immigrants into our lifestyle. Then again, shouldn’t they attempt to learn our language? Or is this assistance a reminder to others that we are a nurturing nation? In this sense, would making English the official language of America push foreign cultures further away, or bring them closer to our own?
The removal of foreign languages from such places as road signs or other public areas seems unnecessary. William F. Buckley feels that “These signs don’t seriously inconvenience anybody,” since “there is always an English version within sight.” In doing this, America hopes to have English as its official language. But such attempts at language unification have not only occurred in the States, nor can it be merely considered a recent issue. In 1887, an attempt at a universal language was made. The language, Esperanto, was intended to be a simple to learn language, based mostly off of European languages. The language took heavy criticism, from political figures such as Adolf Hitler; who considered the language a manner of world domination, to Senator Joseph McCarthy; who considered the language sympathetic towards communism. As you can see, the language unification was by no means accepted, so it would seem that such unification would meet with heavy resistance.
However, can we really allow foreign cultures take over our own? In Dennis Baron’s English in a Multicultural America, He makes note of the increased interest in immigrants wanting to become part of our country through assimilation. They no longer want to be considered "hyphenated Americans," such as Italian-Americans or Irish-Americans. The early immigrants to America were considered to be a problem, but they proved themselves as important members of American society, taking low paying jobs due to their lack of formal American education. Over the years, their children grew more into the American “way.” In the early 20th century, “young Germans were adopting English and abandoning German at a rate that should have impressed the rest of the English-speaking population.” By the time World War 1 occurred, German was banned from school curriculums, and in some cases, all foreign languages were removed, and as ignorant a move this may have been, the immigrants pushed on and managed.
The removal of foreign languages from such places as road signs or other public areas seems unnecessary. William F. Buckley feels that “These signs don’t seriously inconvenience anybody,” since “there is always an English version within sight.” In doing this, America hopes to have English as its official language. But such attempts at language unification have not only occurred in the States, nor can it be merely considered a recent issue. In 1887, an attempt at a universal language was made. The language, Esperanto, was intended to be a simple to learn language, based mostly off of European languages. The language took heavy criticism, from political figures such as Adolf Hitler; who considered the language a manner of world domination, to Senator Joseph McCarthy; who considered the language sympathetic towards communism. As you can see, the language unification was by no means accepted, so it would seem that such unification would meet with heavy resistance.
However, can we really allow foreign cultures take over our own? In Dennis Baron’s English in a Multicultural America, He makes note of the increased interest in immigrants wanting to become part of our country through assimilation. They no longer want to be considered "hyphenated Americans," such as Italian-Americans or Irish-Americans. The early immigrants to America were considered to be a problem, but they proved themselves as important members of American society, taking low paying jobs due to their lack of formal American education. Over the years, their children grew more into the American “way.” In the early 20th century, “young Germans were adopting English and abandoning German at a rate that should have impressed the rest of the English-speaking population.” By the time World War 1 occurred, German was banned from school curriculums, and in some cases, all foreign languages were removed, and as ignorant a move this may have been, the immigrants pushed on and managed.
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
Starting out
As the rate of immigrants, legal or not, continues to increase in America, we as nation do our part to help coddle the new wave of pseudo-citizens. We do so by including foreign languages on billboards, signs, and just about anything to ease the immigrants into our lifestyle. Then again, shouldn’t they attempt to learn our language? Or is this assistance a reminder to others that we are a nurturing nation? In this sense, would making English the official language of America push foreign cultures further away, or bring them closer to our own?
The removal of foreign languages from such places as road signs or other public areas seems unnecessary. William F. Buckley feels that “These signs don’t seriously inconvenience anybody,” since “there is always an English version within sight.” In doing this, America hopes to have English as its official language. But such attempts at language unification have not only occurred in the States, nor can it be merely considered a recent issue. In 1887, an attempt at a universal language was made. The language, Esperanto, was intended to be a simple to learn language, based mostly off of European languages. The language took heavy criticism, from political figures such as Adolf Hitler; who considered the language a manner of world domination, to Senator Joseph McCarthy; who considered the language sympathetic towards communism. As you can see, the language unification was by no means accepted, so it would seem that such unification would meet with heavy resistance.
The removal of foreign languages from such places as road signs or other public areas seems unnecessary. William F. Buckley feels that “These signs don’t seriously inconvenience anybody,” since “there is always an English version within sight.” In doing this, America hopes to have English as its official language. But such attempts at language unification have not only occurred in the States, nor can it be merely considered a recent issue. In 1887, an attempt at a universal language was made. The language, Esperanto, was intended to be a simple to learn language, based mostly off of European languages. The language took heavy criticism, from political figures such as Adolf Hitler; who considered the language a manner of world domination, to Senator Joseph McCarthy; who considered the language sympathetic towards communism. As you can see, the language unification was by no means accepted, so it would seem that such unification would meet with heavy resistance.
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
Let's get crack-a-lackin'
I definitely need to beef up my bibliography. I tend to keep my stuff concise, which causes me to leave stuff out. I should also combine my stuff to make it one good paragraph, instead of merely bullet points. And perhaps I should throw a little more in there about how credible the source is.
Monday, November 12, 2007
Start it up!
Looking at America’s ancestry; we see that the country was founded on Protestant beliefs, fear of England, and the one thing that our founding fathers had in common: the English language. Now, clearly, since our country was based on the language, it goes without saying that our official language is English. However, as America grew older, it wasn’t merely the Protestants that inhabited the nation. Our country invited and harbored many new cultures (whether or not they received a warm reception will be left to the historians), and along with these new cultures came new languages. We told the outside world to give us their tired, their poor, their huddled masses yearning to breathe free. America has strived to attain a “melting pot” culture, mixing between nationalities that span the globe. With that; shouldn’t we encompass all of their languages to accommodate them? Definitely a great question of modern times
Friday, November 2, 2007
Annoted blahblah-ography
BUCKLEY JR., WILLIAM F. (10/22/2007). Speak Up in English.
National Review, Vol. 59 Issue 19, p62-63, 2p
http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=4&hid=115&sid=e0c3a938-41c1-4bc6-b7a8-ad9d40a0bfc8%40sessionmgr107
In this, Buckley describes a constant struggle with making English the official language of the US. It talks of a pat time when an attempt at a universal language was made. It was called Esperanto, with a different grammatical scheme, but sadly, the idea was shot down.
This article gives quite a bit of random information, be it useful or not, on this topic.
I’ll do what I can to avoid using too much opinion of this in the essay
State Legislatures (February 2007)ENGLISH--IT'S OFFICIAL.
Vol. 33 Issue 2, p7-7, 1/4p
http://proxy.elmhurst.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=23954969&site=ehost-live
This is sadly nothing more than a graphic, however, it is a good basis to give a clear view of, apparently, where exactly English is the official language in the nation. Apparently certain states have English as the official language already, over half the nation.
With this, I’ll be able to make note of the regions that do and do not have English as the official language.
The information will have to be inferred, but it can be noted that there are three distinct regions without English as the official language, which more can be written about.
Baron, Dennis (Spring 1991) English in a Multicultural America.
Social Policy; Vol. 21 Issue 4, p5-14, 10p, 6bw
http://proxy.elmhurst.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=9109232770&site=ehost-live
This article looks at English being the language of choice in America, and how people react to challenges to this theory. It makes note that the language issue has been around for centuries, as new immigrants attempt (or don’t attempt) to assimilate to American culture, along with the English language. This includes Germans, Asians, as well as the Hispanics of today.
With the use of this article, looking at this issue from a historical standpoint will definitely give it more heft, as both a topic of great concern and as a means of noticing past behavior with this “assimilation.”
Any historical information is of great use, because what better way to back up your facts of today’s issues than with information of similar issues that occurred in the past?
Citrin, Jack (Spring 1990) Language politics and American identity.
Public Interest; Issue 99, p96-109, 14p
http://proxy.elmhurst.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=9607254896&site=ehost-live
This looks at immigrants learning English as it progress over the generations. It shows that immigrants tend to learn English when they realize it was their best way to get anywhere in this nation. It also gives more historical facts on the issue of English as the “unofficial official” language or America.
There is plenty to use here, so long as I’m able to sift through anything excessive and keep on topic.
I’ll be able to use this as more historical data, as it mentions frequently different points in the past that affect language in the present
Chen, S. Andrew (January1987) Why Do We Oppose the Designation of English as the U.S. Official Language - An Asian Perspective.
Chinese American Forum; Vol. 2 Issue 4, p10-11, 2p
http://proxy.elmhurst.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=21118918&site=ehost-live
This article shows that immigrants are willing to learn English, and in response, we should be willing to help them out through government funding of English education.
I found it interesting that the article comes from an immigrant, giving it a perspective that is appropriate for the topic
National Review, Vol. 59 Issue 19, p62-63, 2p
http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=4&hid=115&sid=e0c3a938-41c1-4bc6-b7a8-ad9d40a0bfc8%40sessionmgr107
In this, Buckley describes a constant struggle with making English the official language of the US. It talks of a pat time when an attempt at a universal language was made. It was called Esperanto, with a different grammatical scheme, but sadly, the idea was shot down.
This article gives quite a bit of random information, be it useful or not, on this topic.
I’ll do what I can to avoid using too much opinion of this in the essay
State Legislatures (February 2007)ENGLISH--IT'S OFFICIAL.
Vol. 33 Issue 2, p7-7, 1/4p
http://proxy.elmhurst.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=23954969&site=ehost-live
This is sadly nothing more than a graphic, however, it is a good basis to give a clear view of, apparently, where exactly English is the official language in the nation. Apparently certain states have English as the official language already, over half the nation.
With this, I’ll be able to make note of the regions that do and do not have English as the official language.
The information will have to be inferred, but it can be noted that there are three distinct regions without English as the official language, which more can be written about.
Baron, Dennis (Spring 1991) English in a Multicultural America.
Social Policy; Vol. 21 Issue 4, p5-14, 10p, 6bw
http://proxy.elmhurst.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=9109232770&site=ehost-live
This article looks at English being the language of choice in America, and how people react to challenges to this theory. It makes note that the language issue has been around for centuries, as new immigrants attempt (or don’t attempt) to assimilate to American culture, along with the English language. This includes Germans, Asians, as well as the Hispanics of today.
With the use of this article, looking at this issue from a historical standpoint will definitely give it more heft, as both a topic of great concern and as a means of noticing past behavior with this “assimilation.”
Any historical information is of great use, because what better way to back up your facts of today’s issues than with information of similar issues that occurred in the past?
Citrin, Jack (Spring 1990) Language politics and American identity.
Public Interest; Issue 99, p96-109, 14p
http://proxy.elmhurst.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=9607254896&site=ehost-live
This looks at immigrants learning English as it progress over the generations. It shows that immigrants tend to learn English when they realize it was their best way to get anywhere in this nation. It also gives more historical facts on the issue of English as the “unofficial official” language or America.
There is plenty to use here, so long as I’m able to sift through anything excessive and keep on topic.
I’ll be able to use this as more historical data, as it mentions frequently different points in the past that affect language in the present
Chen, S. Andrew (January1987) Why Do We Oppose the Designation of English as the U.S. Official Language - An Asian Perspective.
Chinese American Forum; Vol. 2 Issue 4, p10-11, 2p
http://proxy.elmhurst.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=21118918&site=ehost-live
This article shows that immigrants are willing to learn English, and in response, we should be willing to help them out through government funding of English education.
I found it interesting that the article comes from an immigrant, giving it a perspective that is appropriate for the topic
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
Monday, October 29, 2007
MOOO
I can use my spanish teacehr as a primary, because she is of Spanish descent. i can also use scholarly websites for more specific statistc
Friday, October 26, 2007
This is what we do
I am more or less the reviewer of controversy, as this would affect the nation in its entirety, as well as being the advocate in a controversy.
MEEHHH!!!
I could really use more info on statistics, and the long-reaching effects of officializing English as a language in America.
It's hard to sift the good and bad information though, you know?
-Anthony-
It's hard to sift the good and bad information though, you know?
-Anthony-
Thursday, October 25, 2007
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
Just so you know, I'm Bi...lingual
For this, I would like to interview someone who has had to struggle with bilingualism, perhaps even a Spanish professor.
I also believe that using google scholar to look up immigration statistics as well as its affect on the nation's culture and language. I could use google scholar as well as wikipedia. I would also like to see more on what people think on a personal level, and how in depth the officialization of english would be.
I also believe that using google scholar to look up immigration statistics as well as its affect on the nation's culture and language. I could use google scholar as well as wikipedia. I would also like to see more on what people think on a personal level, and how in depth the officialization of english would be.
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
This is Why I'm Hot
Part I: Exploration
1. Identify the issue or problem that you plan to focus on in your research project.
Should English be declared the official language of the United States?
2. What is your personal connection to and interest in this topic?
Obviously everyone in the country that speaks will find this topic important because their language is at stake
3. What opinions do you already hold about this topic?
We were founded by English rebels; the common language in the government in English….Yes, the U.S.’s official language should be English.
4. What knowledge do you already have about this topic. What are your main questions about this topic? What are you most curious about?
I know how prevalent English is in the U.S., but not to what extent. I also would like to know any negative effects if English is declared the official language.
6. Within what scholarly discipline (such as history, biology, psychology) do you expect to do most of your research? How does this discipline approach or study this topic?
I’ll take a stab at it and guess English and Sociology. This will show correlation of region and language.
7. How could you research this topic outside the library (for example, through interviews and/or observations)?
Talk to people who struggle with Engligh.
1. Identify the issue or problem that you plan to focus on in your research project.
Should English be declared the official language of the United States?
2. What is your personal connection to and interest in this topic?
Obviously everyone in the country that speaks will find this topic important because their language is at stake
3. What opinions do you already hold about this topic?
We were founded by English rebels; the common language in the government in English….Yes, the U.S.’s official language should be English.
4. What knowledge do you already have about this topic. What are your main questions about this topic? What are you most curious about?
I know how prevalent English is in the U.S., but not to what extent. I also would like to know any negative effects if English is declared the official language.
6. Within what scholarly discipline (such as history, biology, psychology) do you expect to do most of your research? How does this discipline approach or study this topic?
I’ll take a stab at it and guess English and Sociology. This will show correlation of region and language.
7. How could you research this topic outside the library (for example, through interviews and/or observations)?
Talk to people who struggle with Engligh.
Monday, October 15, 2007
My goodness, whatever shall be research?
What place should "creationism" have in the public education system? (It should be included as another concept to the beginnings of the Earth, along with evolution and many others...I've always felt shortchanged on this. There are so many possible ways to explain the beginning of time, and only a few have been properly explained) {this affects every student and teacher, kind of a big deal}
Are American Indians being treated fairly in the 1990s? (Lord no. If anyone deserves reperations for mistreatment in the past, it's the American Indians...wait, Native Americans. That's something that bugs me. They aren't Indians. That spawned from Columbus' time when he thought America was India, and called the natives Indians. Centuries later, we STILL call them Indians! How freakin' ignorant are we?) {The Native Americans might like this, eh?}
Should English be declared the official language of the United States? (Yes. Our ancestors were English speakers, our government is based on English, it is the most widely spoken language in the U.S. So yes, to say another language is a possible official language would be like me going to some foreign country and forcing them to speak English.) {I'll get a lot of non-English speakers really mad...if they can read the essay}
To what extent should bilingual education be offered in public schools? (I like the concept, but for God's sakes, if you're gonna teach it, teach it early on in a child's life! It's so hard to retain lingual information at this age, had I been taught Spanish starting at age 8 or 9, I might have been decent at the language.) {more teaching stuff. Students and teachers would be interested}
Should pornography be restricted by law? (No, no it shouldn't.) {I think this demographic goes without saying}
Are American Indians being treated fairly in the 1990s? (Lord no. If anyone deserves reperations for mistreatment in the past, it's the American Indians...wait, Native Americans. That's something that bugs me. They aren't Indians. That spawned from Columbus' time when he thought America was India, and called the natives Indians. Centuries later, we STILL call them Indians! How freakin' ignorant are we?) {The Native Americans might like this, eh?}
Should English be declared the official language of the United States? (Yes. Our ancestors were English speakers, our government is based on English, it is the most widely spoken language in the U.S. So yes, to say another language is a possible official language would be like me going to some foreign country and forcing them to speak English.) {I'll get a lot of non-English speakers really mad...if they can read the essay}
To what extent should bilingual education be offered in public schools? (I like the concept, but for God's sakes, if you're gonna teach it, teach it early on in a child's life! It's so hard to retain lingual information at this age, had I been taught Spanish starting at age 8 or 9, I might have been decent at the language.) {more teaching stuff. Students and teachers would be interested}
Should pornography be restricted by law? (No, no it shouldn't.) {I think this demographic goes without saying}
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
Wednesday, October 3, 2007
bibliography
Fausto-Sterling, Anne. Sexing the Body: Gender Politics and the Construction of Sexuality. Basic Books, 2000. 3 Oct. 2007 .
easybib.com
easybib.com
Tuesday, October 2, 2007
Sexual Summary
In Anne Fausto-Sterling's "Sexing the Body: Gender Politics and the Construction of Sexuality," She points out views on homosexuality, heterosexuality, and what truly defines a gender. In the beggining, she makes note of Hermaphrodites and how they are looked at in society. She also points out that it isn't so much genetics that can determine the sexual orientation of a certain being, but more so their upbringing. It should also be noticed that she feels that the two-sex system that we have grown up on is a little too black-and-white, and believes it should be replaced by a 5-sex system, by differing levels of masculinity and feminity. We also should consider the differing mental status of women and men, that they differ greatly, due to their differing ancestry.
Monday, October 1, 2007
Sunday, September 30, 2007
Metacommentary: Does anyone honestly care?
I don't use too much metacommentary. I primarily stated the opinion of Stoll and Ohman, without too much of my own stuff to say. I suppose I could state that I disagree with what they have to say to some extent, though I find their arguments valid. Perhaps in order to revise it, I could mention more so that I find Stoll's and Ohman's points intriguing, yet I think they see the problem too much in a black-and-white sense.
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
Revision
When taking into consideration the fact that computers are inevitably a very essential part of each and every one of our lives, we can't lie to ourselves by saying that computers won't be making even larger advanements, thereby causing us to gain more of a dependence for them. However, in Stoll's article, he protests that computers should not and cannot replace good, old-fashioned books and an inspiring teacher. Ohman agrees that these computers are a bit of an issue ass well, but seems to look at it in a different light.
Stoll tells us that these computers discourage us with ADD-inducing flashing lights and pretty pictures that do nothing more than dull the senses and tune out original thought. Stoll feels outraged that librarians are becoming more and more obsolete, and libraries themselves are slowly being ripped apart from the inside out, due to the addition of computer modules in the libraries. With these additions, students who find themselves in need of research material stray away from convential book searching and jump straight to Google for all the answers to their difficulties. this avoidance of books causes a decrease in interest in reading. And what puzzles Stoll is that people would rather invest in 2 dozen computers then, say, a thousand books, or a new librarian for a year, when they all cost the same. Stoll thinks that the books would outlast the computers, and essentially causes a waste of funds. Ohman agrees that mass spending of funds on computers may be a bit of a waste, and does not see the benefit of such a trivial waste of money on a product that ultimately distracts the user, as well as gives the user a very simplistic tool for
plagiarism. However, he does mention that certain schools did manage to figure out a fairly decent medium by allowing teachers to have "kill switches" to turn off computers that are straying from the task at hand.
Honestly, so long as we're smart with how much we allow our students to do, I think computers could very well be a marvelous tool, as it opens up an infinite streaming of important information, as wel as a method of easily accessing important news and notes from class. While I do see, and agree with, Stoll's points as well as Ohman's, we shouln't fear technology without better understanding it first. Younger people find these new technologies far more comforting, and I believe if adults can better aquaint themselves, perhaps they too can appreciate its value.
Stoll tells us that these computers discourage us with ADD-inducing flashing lights and pretty pictures that do nothing more than dull the senses and tune out original thought. Stoll feels outraged that librarians are becoming more and more obsolete, and libraries themselves are slowly being ripped apart from the inside out, due to the addition of computer modules in the libraries. With these additions, students who find themselves in need of research material stray away from convential book searching and jump straight to Google for all the answers to their difficulties. this avoidance of books causes a decrease in interest in reading. And what puzzles Stoll is that people would rather invest in 2 dozen computers then, say, a thousand books, or a new librarian for a year, when they all cost the same. Stoll thinks that the books would outlast the computers, and essentially causes a waste of funds. Ohman agrees that mass spending of funds on computers may be a bit of a waste, and does not see the benefit of such a trivial waste of money on a product that ultimately distracts the user, as well as gives the user a very simplistic tool for
plagiarism. However, he does mention that certain schools did manage to figure out a fairly decent medium by allowing teachers to have "kill switches" to turn off computers that are straying from the task at hand.
Honestly, so long as we're smart with how much we allow our students to do, I think computers could very well be a marvelous tool, as it opens up an infinite streaming of important information, as wel as a method of easily accessing important news and notes from class. While I do see, and agree with, Stoll's points as well as Ohman's, we shouln't fear technology without better understanding it first. Younger people find these new technologies far more comforting, and I believe if adults can better aquaint themselves, perhaps they too can appreciate its value.
Monday, September 24, 2007
Synthesis
When taking into consideration the fact that computers are inevitably a very essential part of each and every one of our lives, we can't lie to ourselves by saying that computers won't be making even larger advanements, thereby causing us to gain more of a dependence for them. However, in Stoll's article, he protests that computers should not and cannot replace good, old-fashioned books and an inspiring teacher. Ohman agrees that these computers are a bit of an issue ass well, but seems to look at it in a different light.
Stoll tells us that these computers discourage us with ADD-inducing flashing lights and pretty pictures that do nothing more than dull the senses and tune out original thought. Stoll feels outraged that librarians are becoming more and more obsolete, and libraries themselves are slowly being ripped apart from the inside out, due
to the addition of computer modules in the libraries. With these additions, students who find themselves in need of research material stray away from convential book searching and jump straight to Google for all the answers to their difficulties. And what puzzles Stoll is that people would rather invest in 2 dozen computers
then, say, a thousand books, or a new librarian for a year, when they all cost the same. Stoll thinks that
the books would outlast the computers. Ohman agrees that mass spending of funds on computers may be a bit of a waste, and does not see the benefit of such a trivial waste of money
on a product that ultimately distracts the user, as well as gives the user a very simplistic tool for
plagiarism. However, he does mention that certain schools did manage to figure out a fairly decent medium by allowing teachers to have "kill switches" to turn off computers that are straying from the task at hand.
Honestly, so long as we're smart with how much we allow our students to do, I think computers could very well be a marvelous tool, as it opens up an infinite streaming of important information, as wel as a method of easily accessing important news and notes from class. While I do see, and agree with, Stoll's points as well as Ohman's, we shouln't fear technology without better understanding it first.
Stoll tells us that these computers discourage us with ADD-inducing flashing lights and pretty pictures that do nothing more than dull the senses and tune out original thought. Stoll feels outraged that librarians are becoming more and more obsolete, and libraries themselves are slowly being ripped apart from the inside out, due
to the addition of computer modules in the libraries. With these additions, students who find themselves in need of research material stray away from convential book searching and jump straight to Google for all the answers to their difficulties. And what puzzles Stoll is that people would rather invest in 2 dozen computers
then, say, a thousand books, or a new librarian for a year, when they all cost the same. Stoll thinks that
the books would outlast the computers. Ohman agrees that mass spending of funds on computers may be a bit of a waste, and does not see the benefit of such a trivial waste of money
on a product that ultimately distracts the user, as well as gives the user a very simplistic tool for
plagiarism. However, he does mention that certain schools did manage to figure out a fairly decent medium by allowing teachers to have "kill switches" to turn off computers that are straying from the task at hand.
Honestly, so long as we're smart with how much we allow our students to do, I think computers could very well be a marvelous tool, as it opens up an infinite streaming of important information, as wel as a method of easily accessing important news and notes from class. While I do see, and agree with, Stoll's points as well as Ohman's, we shouln't fear technology without better understanding it first.
Friday, September 21, 2007
In both Stoll's and Ohmann's article, The author's believe that computers cannot, and will not, replace teachers int he education world.
Outline:
Good side:
-Comps allow unlimited access to information
-They offer exciting ways to learn
Bad Side:
-Very easy to plagiarize
-Easy to get distracted
Thesis: With certain restrictions, the education system can definitely benefit from computer's involvement.
The two articles touch on the same ideas, but Ohmann's article tends to mention the business aspect of the computer shift more so, while Stoll is more looking at the future of this shift as far as how it will affect the classroom.
The two of them seem to say that the computer age in education is upon us, and we should be able to handle it.
Outline:
Good side:
-Comps allow unlimited access to information
-They offer exciting ways to learn
Bad Side:
-Very easy to plagiarize
-Easy to get distracted
Thesis: With certain restrictions, the education system can definitely benefit from computer's involvement.
The two articles touch on the same ideas, but Ohmann's article tends to mention the business aspect of the computer shift more so, while Stoll is more looking at the future of this shift as far as how it will affect the classroom.
The two of them seem to say that the computer age in education is upon us, and we should be able to handle it.
Thursday, September 20, 2007
Comps....Good or bad?
As it is stated in "Computers and Technology," computers may be an important new tool for education at all levels. However, can these computers fully replace human teachers? This article believes that regardless of the new technology, a living, breathing person will still be a necessity. Computers are looked at in a positive light, in that they are able to present information in a manner that is more interesting to the average student than black and white textbooks. However, Computers do offer a bit of a distraction, as well as a simplistic tool for plagiarism. We must also consider the aspect of big business. Though computer companies will be brimming with joy at such a shift, companies involved with traditional school supplies such as books, pens and notebooks will note enjoy the loss of business.
I cannot say I would not love to replace all forms of reading and writing with this beautiful little device I'm typing on right now, but I will honestly admit that I will be OH SO tempted to have my attention stray from the subject at hand and right into my e-mail. I would say that it is definitely a feasible possibility, so long as certain restrictions are placed,
to keep the crafty people like me from gazing off into internet games or other complete wastes of
time.
I cannot say I would not love to replace all forms of reading and writing with this beautiful little device I'm typing on right now, but I will honestly admit that I will be OH SO tempted to have my attention stray from the subject at hand and right into my e-mail. I would say that it is definitely a feasible possibility, so long as certain restrictions are placed,
to keep the crafty people like me from gazing off into internet games or other complete wastes of
time.
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
Hidden Intellectualism Summary
In Gerald Graff's Hidden Intellectualism, Graff attests that intellect does not only exist in the scholarly form of thinking. Graff insists that knowledge can also take the form of "street smarts."
Graff uses his own experiences in his childhood to help form his argument. Graff tells about his disinterest in traditional academic subjects, and further elaborates on his love of sports. Growing up in Chicago, Graff suggests academic knowledge is a hindrance in social life, as anti-intellectualism ran rampant during his childhood, as it does today. Graff describes a saddening story of growing up torn "between the need to prove I was smart and the fear of a beating if I proved it too well." An intolerance of superiority amongst the youth caused a sort of internal conflict of brain versus brawn. As Graff aged, the "brawn" side of this heated debate was victorious. Little did he know, conversation with his friends helped develop analysis, arguments, generalizations, summaries and "other intellectualizing operations."
Due to the conversations involving his friends, Graff believes that "street smarts" overpower "book smarts"
Graff uses his own experiences in his childhood to help form his argument. Graff tells about his disinterest in traditional academic subjects, and further elaborates on his love of sports. Growing up in Chicago, Graff suggests academic knowledge is a hindrance in social life, as anti-intellectualism ran rampant during his childhood, as it does today. Graff describes a saddening story of growing up torn "between the need to prove I was smart and the fear of a beating if I proved it too well." An intolerance of superiority amongst the youth caused a sort of internal conflict of brain versus brawn. As Graff aged, the "brawn" side of this heated debate was victorious. Little did he know, conversation with his friends helped develop analysis, arguments, generalizations, summaries and "other intellectualizing operations."
Due to the conversations involving his friends, Graff believes that "street smarts" overpower "book smarts"
Sunday, September 9, 2007
Chomp on This
Ahh yes, another jewel we can proudly place on the crown we call American culture.
Obesity in children.
In David Zinczenko's "Don't Blame the Eater," David believes that, as ridiculous as it is that the obese in America are suing corporations for their plus-sized problem, we shouldn't entirely blame these people, as it is far more difficult to find a healthy alternative than to take the easy route and grab something from somewhere quick (and unhealthy).
Children nowadays have to make it through a bit of a fast food jungle out there, what with all those lovely plastic toys coming in their favorite McCholestorol's meal. However, it's not like America has grown totally unaware of this "growing" epidemic (which I say lightly, since it's nothing all too new). As obesity inflicts its sinful pleasure on our unsuspecting youth, so does
the ever-so-stealthy means of defeating those love handles. I speak, of course, of diet food. It's everywhere you go, even big food chains have caught on, for fear of being considered the cause
of the problem.
Even beyond that, there are PLENTY of ways for the modern-day kid to avoid a consistent intake of unhealthy foods. I am obviously addressing the parents when I say this, because it is up to them to teach their child good eating habits. They have to be able to teach children that salads are not necessarrily the end of the world. Even beyond that, you can always go the retro route and buy groceries and make your own healthy
meals. What with there being so many ways to access
new recipes through magazines,
cookbooks and the internet, it can't be that difficult to,
every once in a while, attempt to treat
your kid to something that won't kill him off 30 years down the road. It may not serve the
convenience that a Taco Bell meal may have, but you can rest assured that, unless your cooking
is lethal, you've done something to help keep your kid from becoming a statistic.
Now, if I may play devil's advocate (since I was instructed to do so), I'm going to throw the children, and yes, even the parents, a bone. I cannot totally blame them for everything. Times have changed, and that means that the world has quickened its pace. No time for casual walks,
no time to talk, no time to sit under a tree and read....no, no, no....there are soccer games to go to, homework to catch up on, musical rehearsal that started 10 minutes ago. There isn't any
time to preheat an oven, prepare the meat, unthaw the vegetables, and so forth. So when the only meal option from home to the little one's football game is the Wendy's down the street, what choice do we have? Nutrition takes far too long.
HOWEVER, when "Junior" has had one too many Frosty's, and realizes that it's a little more difficult than usual to make it to the 30 yard line than it used to be, he ultimately pays the price. Sometimes, parents see the easy solution to this complex epidemic and decide to go after the big, evil corporations for making gluttony so easily accessible through a drive-thru window.
My response is: What!?
How will punishing these companies bring justice to your plus-size offspring? How do you intend to spend not-so-hard earned money? It's common knowledge that fast food joints aren't intended to give the daily dose of vitamins and minerals, merely a quick fix to a rumbling tummy. Again, these parents should be wise enough to keep those "quick fixes" to a minimum, and let the child understand that it isn't smart to make a habit out of it.
Please, parents of America, hear my plea; be cautious of your diet, or else your "small fry" will become a "large fry"
before you realize.
-Anthony-
Obesity in children.
In David Zinczenko's "Don't Blame the Eater," David believes that, as ridiculous as it is that the obese in America are suing corporations for their plus-sized problem, we shouldn't entirely blame these people, as it is far more difficult to find a healthy alternative than to take the easy route and grab something from somewhere quick (and unhealthy).
Children nowadays have to make it through a bit of a fast food jungle out there, what with all those lovely plastic toys coming in their favorite McCholestorol's meal. However, it's not like America has grown totally unaware of this "growing" epidemic (which I say lightly, since it's nothing all too new). As obesity inflicts its sinful pleasure on our unsuspecting youth, so does
the ever-so-stealthy means of defeating those love handles. I speak, of course, of diet food. It's everywhere you go, even big food chains have caught on, for fear of being considered the cause
of the problem.
Even beyond that, there are PLENTY of ways for the modern-day kid to avoid a consistent intake of unhealthy foods. I am obviously addressing the parents when I say this, because it is up to them to teach their child good eating habits. They have to be able to teach children that salads are not necessarrily the end of the world. Even beyond that, you can always go the retro route and buy groceries and make your own healthy
meals. What with there being so many ways to access
new recipes through magazines,
cookbooks and the internet, it can't be that difficult to,
every once in a while, attempt to treat
your kid to something that won't kill him off 30 years down the road. It may not serve the
convenience that a Taco Bell meal may have, but you can rest assured that, unless your cooking
is lethal, you've done something to help keep your kid from becoming a statistic.
Now, if I may play devil's advocate (since I was instructed to do so), I'm going to throw the children, and yes, even the parents, a bone. I cannot totally blame them for everything. Times have changed, and that means that the world has quickened its pace. No time for casual walks,
no time to talk, no time to sit under a tree and read....no, no, no....there are soccer games to go to, homework to catch up on, musical rehearsal that started 10 minutes ago. There isn't any
time to preheat an oven, prepare the meat, unthaw the vegetables, and so forth. So when the only meal option from home to the little one's football game is the Wendy's down the street, what choice do we have? Nutrition takes far too long.
HOWEVER, when "Junior" has had one too many Frosty's, and realizes that it's a little more difficult than usual to make it to the 30 yard line than it used to be, he ultimately pays the price. Sometimes, parents see the easy solution to this complex epidemic and decide to go after the big, evil corporations for making gluttony so easily accessible through a drive-thru window.
My response is: What!?
How will punishing these companies bring justice to your plus-size offspring? How do you intend to spend not-so-hard earned money? It's common knowledge that fast food joints aren't intended to give the daily dose of vitamins and minerals, merely a quick fix to a rumbling tummy. Again, these parents should be wise enough to keep those "quick fixes" to a minimum, and let the child understand that it isn't smart to make a habit out of it.
Please, parents of America, hear my plea; be cautious of your diet, or else your "small fry" will become a "large fry"
before you realize.
-Anthony-
Wednesday, September 5, 2007
Is a Video Game to Blame?
Dr. Phil Blames Video Games for Virginia Tech Shooting
First and foremost, I think it's important you know that I have believed, for quite some time now, that Dr. Phil is a schmuck.
As much as I do what I can to give everyone a break, I couldn't help but roll my eyes so far back in my head that it strained my optic nerves. Yet again, the media is taking a horrible situation and twisted it to further their own agenda. Dr. Phil believed that it was the V-Tech shooter's video game play that was the catalyst in this massacre. He believes that "if these kids are playing video games, where they’re on a mass killing spree in a video game, it’s glamorized on the big screen, it’s become part of the fiber of our society." He is associating the act of a single kid, who obviously had a few bolts in his head not quite screwed in tight enough, with the video gaming youth.
In response to this mind-numbing droll, blogger aniki21 replied with a very similar response as the one I declared. "Of course, rather than trying to address the problems of why they’re a sociopath or trying to help others with similar mental illnesses, it’s [e]asier to just pin the blame on the entertainment." Hey goes on to say that it wasn't video games that were truly the problem, it was the fact that the youth in question was, and I quote, "a f**king psychopath."
Come on, America. We're a little brighter than that. Yes, I'll admit violent people are prone to violent video games. However, pacifists can be attracted to them for completely opposite reasons. Video games offer the opportunity to release tension and strong emotion in a safe, controlled environment.
And hey, why didn't Dr. Phil mention anything about gun control? Gee whiz, even if it truly was video game's fault, he still was able to purchase a gun with which to kill these innocent people, correct? Hmmm... a bit selective with where we point the finger, aren't we Dr. Phil?
Trust me, America, there will be plenty more of this culture for me to rip on.
-Anthony-
First and foremost, I think it's important you know that I have believed, for quite some time now, that Dr. Phil is a schmuck.
As much as I do what I can to give everyone a break, I couldn't help but roll my eyes so far back in my head that it strained my optic nerves. Yet again, the media is taking a horrible situation and twisted it to further their own agenda. Dr. Phil believed that it was the V-Tech shooter's video game play that was the catalyst in this massacre. He believes that "if these kids are playing video games, where they’re on a mass killing spree in a video game, it’s glamorized on the big screen, it’s become part of the fiber of our society." He is associating the act of a single kid, who obviously had a few bolts in his head not quite screwed in tight enough, with the video gaming youth.
In response to this mind-numbing droll, blogger aniki21 replied with a very similar response as the one I declared. "Of course, rather than trying to address the problems of why they’re a sociopath or trying to help others with similar mental illnesses, it’s [e]asier to just pin the blame on the entertainment." Hey goes on to say that it wasn't video games that were truly the problem, it was the fact that the youth in question was, and I quote, "a f**king psychopath."
Come on, America. We're a little brighter than that. Yes, I'll admit violent people are prone to violent video games. However, pacifists can be attracted to them for completely opposite reasons. Video games offer the opportunity to release tension and strong emotion in a safe, controlled environment.
And hey, why didn't Dr. Phil mention anything about gun control? Gee whiz, even if it truly was video game's fault, he still was able to purchase a gun with which to kill these innocent people, correct? Hmmm... a bit selective with where we point the finger, aren't we Dr. Phil?
Trust me, America, there will be plenty more of this culture for me to rip on.
-Anthony-
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)