I am sorry it took me so long to respond Kirk, but I've been away from a computer alot this summer. I study IT, not Linguistics, so alot of my thinking is based on actual observed experience or what I have read over the years. I don't think that using terms like Hispanic or non-Hispanic makes sense in this discussion, because there are many 'Hispanic/Latino' US citizens that have no knowledge of the Spanish language and non-Hispanic/latino people, yourself included, who DO have fluency in Spanish and that use it daily or in travel. I will just use 'Spanish speaking' or 'Latino' even though terminology utilizing 'anglophone' and 'hispanophone' is more apt.
In Upper California or other territory that the United States now occupies from Mexico, Spanish (the language and culture) for some reason, is considered foreign. In Upper California English is the only official language, even though the state's original constitution was written both in English and Spanish. You stated that the occupied territory of the US southwest was Mexican for only 28 years. But it is important to note that it was Spanish for over 400 years. The Spanish left a cultural imprint in the US southwest that has not been erased despite 160 years of US revisionist history. The idea that English belongs in the US southwest and that it is more 'native' in California or Colorado is ridiculous. Spanish has NOT been a foreign language since the days of the first Spanish expeditions in Florida and the southwest that opened those areas up to the western world about 500 years ago.
When you speak about your US-Mexican classmates, you speak of a specific group. If most of the Spanish speaking population felt like the students at your university, then such mega TV networks like Univision, Telemundo, Azteca America, Galavision, would not exist in this country. Companies like Kraft, Head and Shoulders, Ford, GM, Sony, Wal-Mat, etc, would not bother to broadcast their ads in Spanish. You discuss your Mexican-US classmates, but many US residents born in this country with a Latin American background tend to speak to eachother in Spanish. It is something that they choose to do, but I have seen this mostly in NY, NJ and Georgia and Florida. They might speak English perfectly, but prefer to speak in Spanish amongst themselves because it is something that sets them apart, that they can be proud of. There is no stigma attached to speaking Spanish, like there is in California and Texas, which I know, I have travelled to LA and have family in the DFW metro area in Texas. It seems that the areas in the USA that were under direct Spanish colonization and civilization happens to be where speaking Spanish is frowned upon, where getting stared at by ignorant and yes, racist wider Anglo society. This of course would discourage someone who knows Spanish to speak it in public.
The US began as a string of 13 colonies clinging to the Atlantic Ocean. George Washington didn't kick the British out of San Diego. To the south and west was vast Spanish territory, where Spanish culture, forms, practice and LANGUAGE dominated. The European lingua franca in these territories was Castilian Spanish. If the US today was the same as it was in 1776 then this discussion would be moot. Today, in 2005, it is not revolutionary at all to state that English is the lingua franca in these United States, and indeed possibly the world. It is impossible to advance in this country without a firm grasp of English, this is known and not debatable. We should ask ourselves, why should it be so revolutionary to accomodate the historical linguistic minority that has spoken Spanish in this nation since its outset? Why not have a federal government that you can communicate with and stay informed in Spanish, rather than English? What is so wrong with having public universities that offer all of their instruction in Spanish? Why can't those states that occupy former Spanish territory, like Florida, Louisiana, Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, California, Nevada, Utah, Wyoming, etc. have laws that enable a citizen be able to communicate in Spanish on an equal basis with English? In business, the judiciary, in public health clinics, in schools, and in all facets of public life why are we limited to English? The clear lack of government activity has lead to the creation of a massive, large, and vast latino underclass. This has existed since the beginning of the occupation and continues up to this day. The total denial by the Anglo establishment of the Spanish southwest will let these problems continue to fester.
If one's family is Spanish speaking, do you think that one would switch to English, a foreign language, because they personally decide to? People of Latin American background have no choice but to have a firm grasp of English in this country. The WASP establishment in the USA marginalizes ALL people without fluency in English. There has been a Spanish presence in US territory since 1513 (Ponce de Leon in Florida) . If there were 400 Spanish speakers in a mission somewhere in the middle of Colorado and no one else for hundreds of miles, those Spanish speakers still counted, still had a culture, still existed, and were not any less significant for being in a small village, just because they were nothing compared to say Mexico City or Santa Fe. They were still very Mexican. You have to understand that unless all of Latin America adopts English as its language, the overwhelming presence of Hispanic language and culture in this country and hemisphere will not disapear. It is now and has always been possible to live in many parts of this country and live a significant life in Spanish. There are many businesses where I live now that have Spanish speaking staff, and most companies offer telephone assistance in both languages. An elementary school in my area (in overwhelmingly non-Hispanic Maine) offers basic instruction in Spanish, not to help those learning English, but to give Anglo(phone) parents the opportunity to teach their children the second national language of the United States.
In regard to English language instruction in Hong Kong, you are comparing apples to oranges here. Was Hong Kong or southern China historically a British territory? Were there British settlements in Fujian and Guangzhou in the 1500s? The British came to Hong Kong in 1860, which is a blip in time when you think of the millenia of Chinese civilization and history that have existed since time immemorial. We are discussing a part of the American continent that the Spanish colonized and explored and lived in at least a hundred years before any significant English presence in this (North American) part of the world. Did the British colonial administration recognize the amazing cultural wealth of the Cantonese? Did they decide to adopt their language as the lingua franca of society during the colonial occupation of Hong Kong? We all know the anwers to these questions.
In those 28 years of Mexican administration, which you claim are insignificant and have no historical value whatsoever, was there an English speaking segment or group of people in Spanish speaking Mexico, including the occupied northern half? If you look at North American history you will realize that the Spanish in the southwest, who yes spoke Spanish, were in the southwest since the 1500s, hundreds of years ago. The Quebecois in Canada were never overwhelmed by a consistent, sustained, and illlegal invasion of Anglophone people who ethnically cleansed them and then exposed them to propaganda about their historical presence in their own land.
English and Spanish should be the two official languages in the United States for political, historical, and yes, linguistic purposes. If you truly loved Spanish as you claim Kirk, you should review some of your statements. Why not take a North American history course in a Mexican university or college in Spanish, a language that you are fluent in? You will have a broader understanding of the history and culture in this American continent that we ALL live on.
|
