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
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)