― dave q, Thursday, 1 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)
― katie, Friday, 2 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)
― dave q, Friday, 2 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)
― Will, Friday, 2 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)
)I do think this is stretching the definition of colonialism too far -- not that there is a good stable definition of it, but it usually involves political control between states. once you get the word colonialism out of there you have to find some other emotive word to make it sound really bad. fascism, say?
― Alan Trewartha, Friday, 2 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)
― Kodanshi, Friday, 2 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)
yes, it sounds terrible to say that they must be *forced* to do so, but if you come to another country, you can't depend on their social welfare system, you must get a job, for which the English language is required. you need to be able to pay your own way, not be a burden to your host country and surely its the host government's prerogative to give you the means to do so.
there are places in new york, like hispanic areas, where people don't speak english - or at the very least, pretend not to. but surely, to be able to speak the native tongue will ease the culture shock of life in an alien country, without necessarily having to sever your ties with your own identity.
― nickie, Friday, 2 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)
― m jemmeson, Friday, 2 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)
― toraneko, Friday, 2 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)
If UK is going to institute citizenship tests, then it should have a written constitution: otherwise it becomes the following:
Blunkett: "As long as you don't break the rules, you are a citizen" Eager applicant: "But how will I know when I am breaking the rules?" B: "You'll know when you've broken them cuz you'll be riding out of town on a rail…" EA: ?!?!
― mark s, Friday, 2 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)
Oh dear toraneko, you were doing so well..
― Nick, Friday, 2 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)
Native tongue everywhere = microsoft spellcheck
― Geoff, Friday, 2 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)
― I R Fatnick, Friday, 2 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)
― Ellie (from Leeds), Friday, 2 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)
― chris, Friday, 2 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)
― Ellie, Friday, 2 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)
― Mr Noodles, Friday, 2 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)
― alix, Monday, 5 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)
Of course immigrants should learn the language of the country to which they immigrate, if only for their own benefit (i.e., so they know how to buy things). But mandating that they learn English? That's another thing altogether. I merely note, with irony, how the ones over here who scream loudest for "English First" (namely, certain Republicans) also claim to want to "get government off the backs of the people," yet if making people learn English doesn't fly against such libertarian rhetoric then I don't know what does.
Over here, "English First" is pretty much code for "let's stick it to the Spics." That sort of thing has died down a bit since we now have someone in the White House who is a fluent Spanish-speaker (more irony -- one of the funniest things this past year was watching the Texas Chimp go to Spain and mangle the Spanish language, but lying and mangling language are both second-nature to the Bush Clan). I also note, with yet more irony, how some of the loudest "English First" boosters are themselves children of immigrants whose parents or grandparents, quite possibly, lived in ethnic enclaves where English was certainly not the everyday language.
― Tadeusz Suchodolski, Monday, 5 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)