CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
You can share this debate in three different ways:
#1
#2
#3
Paste this URL into an email or IM:
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
What some consider as compassionate, others consider as racist.
For example, it is considered compassionate, by a lot of people, to have bilingual education. But I consider that racist. What the compassionate crowd is saying is that the poor minority students are too stupid to learn the English language through immersion (the way my sister and I learned it).
It is easy to see the racist aspect of it when you consider that there are no special education for the children of other migrant groups. Presumably they are language geniuses that do not require special education. But the children of Spanish speaking individuals are apparently not so bright and thus require special education.
Immersion, in case you are not aware, is how babies learn a language. You just talk to them in English, or Spanish, or whatever, until they pick it up. For example, Rosetta Stone (a popular language teaching software), uses immersion to teach a new language.
It's the sink or swim approach to language learning ;)
The bottom line is that I DON"T WANT TO PRESS ONE FOR ENGLISH!!!!! ;)
Joe now I know you're fucking around. You want to make life difficult on a very large group of people in our country so that you don't have to press one extra button?
Is that what you did with your kids (girls, right?)?
I recall an episode of I Love Lucy (surely you are familiar with it?) in which, shortly before Lucy gives birth, she decides that she wants the child to speak perfect English; that means that Ricky can't talk to him till he's 18.
It is extremely racist in Canada. English-Canadian students are forced to learn French; we have signs all over the English-speaking part of the country written in English and French. All foodstuffs by law must be listed in both French and English. However, the Quebecois do not need to be so thoughtful to the Anglophones. The Anglophones are the majority, we oughtn't need to bend-over-backward for the Francophone minority, especially if they needn't do it for us!
I see where you're coming from, Terminator. It is true that both sides are human beings and that both have rights to understand where they're going, what they're eating, et cetera. But without what you call "bend[ing]-over-backward for the Francophone minority", it's more of a handicap for them than for you since the majority of the country is Anglophone. Perhaps you could petition for signs to be both in English and French throughout Canada, including in the Francophone minority zones. Why not you be the translator?
You have to see things from their point of view as well. They don't want both languages to start amalgamating and the French they know to degenerate (as appears to be happening in Metropolitan France). English, on the other hand, has quite a sizeable proportion of loanwords already, many of them French. So it should be easier for the Anglophones, no?
A great portion of the world speaks English; it would be to their own benefit for them to learn it as well. Besides, they are the minority - the minority ought to learn the language of the majority rather than vice versa.
I know very few people who know English as well as I; I always managed to avoid French one way or another, but they didn't. Now, if you read their writing (their best writing), it looks as though it was written by a little kid. They don't know English as well as they ought to, and they know French better than they need to; they don't speak French with other people, yet all of their energies as kids went into learning French.
I myself have always loved languages, but principally the Germanic ones. It would be of far greater use to kids these days to learn Arabic in schools, or Chinese: these are the common languages used throughout the world in business, not French.
Another world language, albeit not too popular a language. It is used by, as per wikipedia, half a billion people. Teaching them Mandarin, Spanish, Hindi or Arabic would make them more accessible to other nationalities.
One more thing: you are what you speak. I quote the author of the Francoscopie series, Gérard Mermet: "each language carries with it a different perspective of the world". Ergo, language forms and shapes one's identity. So Terminator, are you, therefore, asking people to compromise their social/linguistic identity just so that they can survive?
On its own end, English has been much compromised already given the large number of loanwords in the language - and it's picking up more and more like nobody's business. It hasn't an identity of its own any more.
Are you, therefore, asking people to compromise their social/linguistic identity just so that they can survive?
YES!!!!
The whole point of having a society is to INTEGRATE NOT SEGREGATE. Segregation is racist. If you came to this country to live it is because you probably couldn't survive in your home country. Is it too much to ask to integrate into your host country who is allowing you to survive?
Immigrants want to integrate. Special education delays that process. Talk to migrants. I do. Quite often. I know what they want and what they think because I ASK THEM!!! I don't assume, "Oh, poor little Spanish speaking child needs special attention." ;)
Is it too much to ask to integrate into your host country who is allowing you to survive?
Guess not, but you shouldn't lose yourself either. And if you can get a shortcut to your second language, why not?
((On another note, I guess our contexts are different. Where I'm living everyone's integrating very well and forgetting their identities - we're an immigrant society too - but it also entails losing links to cultural wisdom, and that we recognise.))
How do you lose yourself? How does one forget their identity? What the hell is cultural wisdom? I'm sorry but I'm an engineer. What are you talking about?
Never underestimate the role of society and culture in determining one's identity. Case in point: why do women in Muslim nations ask for rights to practise their religion - including the wearing of the veil? It's a part of tradition that's become part of their identity. Where I'm coming from, people are simply getting way too Westernised (or should I say Americanised?) for their own good - thinking that "me, me, me" should come first above all things. We're becoming too consumerist, and thus losing - slowly but steadily - that warmth that is a defining feature of the cultures we come from.
Cultural wisdom? Well many cultures have their own nuggets of wisdom that can only come from having been brought up in that particular culture. The collectives that that builds up into form cultural wisdom. Essentially, attitudes towards life - that are better and wiser than what we see coming out on pop culture every day.
We're losing these though - to my great regret. And I don't want anyone else to undergo that. Cultures mustn't be lost. They've been giving reference points to all societies ever since they came about. Some need recalibration, yes, but not everything must be lost.
You did not answer the question. What is this cultural wisdom you're talking about. Give me one example of cultural wisdom. What attitudes towards life are "better" and "wiser" than what we see coming out on pop culture every day? What exactly do we see coming out on pop culture every day? I mean, you speak in vague generalities. I'm an engineer. I need hard facts and figures not romantic, flowery language.
Respect for others, perhaps. That's very much advocated by my culture, in contrast to individualism (freedom of expression at all costs, getting what one wants at all costs) as pop culture advocates (general observation from having been in contact with it for many years). I mean, you can express yourself respectfully.
They tried that shit here for Polish and Nigerian children especially, I have no problem with the people its the system that annoys me, this stuff is a downwards spiral. I think if a family moves with their children to a country with a different language the responsibility is the parents to make sure their children know the language. It is unfair on the English speaking children that resources and time are being poured into these endeavors. (Our education system is falling apart, financially)
I don't consider this racist at all, there is no race being discriminated against. If I moved myself and my family to a country that speaks a different language I would not expect the schools to go out of their way to accommodate my children.
Isn't Irish an official language? Do you have to learn it as children in school? I can recite the Irish anthem by heart in Irish, I've long thought it a beautiful language, as is Welsh.
It is an official language and it is beautiful, it is steeped in folklore, poetry and myth, and it is unfortunately fading away. It is taught from the beginning in primary to the end of secondary which is like High School, but it is badly taught the emphasis is on drilling it in to the children's heads instead of getting them to enjoy and participate in it, conversationally at first then to study it as they grow older. Children from foreign families can be made exempt from it if they start school here after the age of seven or eight I think, not too sure on that one.
I've been working on French and German for the last few weeks (well, German on and off, but I put it on hold when I discovered CreateDebate). The language I plan on trying real hard is Icelandic (nobody in my city of half a million people speak it). But by early next year I'm going to concentrate on Irish. As I said, it is beautiful - Tolkien loved the Celtic languages, especially Welsh. It is just a very hard language to get the pronunciation right, which is necessary to fully savor it's beauty.
I am working on Japanese at the moment conversationally, if I can master that I will move on to reading and hopefully writing it. I spent two weeks in Tokyo and feel in love with the place, if I can convince the wife I'll move there when I get my degree. It is rumored that Tolkien based middle earth on the Burren in Co Clare, Ireland as he spent a lot of time over here, he lectured English I think in some colleges in the south.
The pronunciation of the Celtic languages can be a bit of a bollox it can sound like you are clearing your throat especially Welsh.
I've read a fair amount of biographical work on Tolkien. The Irish was my initial belief, but later I read that Middle Earth was based on pre-industrial central England (midlands, as I recall). He grew up whilst the beautiful quintessential land was becoming a dark, grisly industrial center. I can relate perfectly to that, just as I see it in the film. The Hobbits come from the Shire (pre-industrial), and Mt. Doom and the area around it looks like a factory. Eventually, as Sam I think it was foresees, the Shire becomes dark and grisly like that, too. It was analogous to how industry, and the greed which accompanies it, takes over the peaceful and tranquil villages with pollution and smokestacks. The people in the Shire were fun-loving and nature-loving.
English as a second language classes are neither compassionate nor racist. They're education. You self-taught; good for you. Some people can teach themselves law and pass the bar exam without ever going to law school. Most prefer structured learning. Your entire argument is specious and poorly framed; perhaps your English skills are inadequate for making a sensible argument?
You only think that my argument is flawed because you believe that most Spanish speaking children are too stupid to learn the easiest language on the planet (English) without special education for ALL OF THEM. ;)
The ease of language depends on the original language. Spanish to English and vice versa is a simpler transition than say Cantonese to English. It depends on the original language how simple something is to learn.
That said, just because you had an easy time learning it, does not make it the easiest. I realize you have trouble with the concept that other people are not you, but I assure you, they are not.
Most actually argue English is one of the harder (not hardest) to learn if one is not exposed to it early specifically for the reason you mentioned earlier in another argument, we say a lot in few words. This is confusing to many who do not assume meaning within a sentence.
Your self-centered world view aside, you are actually correct that any child in the US should be forced to learn English in order for them to be successful later. It is not fair to create a permanent lower class by allowing them to pass through our education system without learning English.
Actually..., my third grade logic tells me that Mandarin Chinese and Spanish are language spoken mostly by their native speakers. English, on the other hand, is spoken by many more non-English native speakers..... because it is easy to learn.... that and because we won the war ;)
Why is it so hard to understand that if you have a larger majority of people speaking a specific non-native language (English) that that language must be easier to learn than the other non-native languages people chose to speak (Spanish, French, Chinese).
So, I guess I win again with the logic argument ;)
Whoa there, don't get me wrong. I don't believe Hispanophone children are too stupid to learn English via immersion. Nor do I believe that English is the easiest language on earth. So your suggestion somewhere in this thread that you should identify those who are having trouble and give them the special lessons is valid. However, might I add a modertaing remark: for those who can handle English at the higher levels, give it to them straightaway, but give them their native tongue as well - both at a level that can engage them. Gives them an edge, no?
Also, your saying that "Do you think I got A's in English because they have lowered the standard so much?" is just flawed, seriously. Nobody's demeaning you. Stop your ad hominem attacks please.
An ad hominem (Latin: "to the man"), also known as argumentum ad hominem, is an attempt to link the validity of a premise to a characteristic or belief of the person advocating the premise.[1] The ad hominem is a classic logical fallacy.[2] The ad hominem is not always fallacious, for in some instances questions of personal conduct, character, motives, etc., are legitimate and relevant to the issue.[3]
It doesn't seem like you know what the meaning of ad hominem is.
Joe, you need to take into account that linguistic geniuses - ergo, those who are able to take up new languages quickly wherever they go - are few and far between. The rest fall into the large group of people tagged as "normal", and studies conducted with these people have shown that one's language acquisition abilities degenerate as one ages. In addition, learning a new language from a different language family from one's first language (L1), OR learning a language from the same family BUT not the same subfamily of one's L1, is more difficult than just learning another language from the same family as one's L1.
So bilingual education is not racist in any way, and no "poor minority student" is "stupid" - they just face the difficulties of diminishing ability and of learning a language unrelated to their L1. This is precisely the gap that bilingual education seeks to bridge.
EDIT: @ Terminator - thanks, you just supported my point.
I'm one of those people who pick up languages easy. My knowledge of German, Spanish, and Latin was quite good for a time. There were a few times that I'd read a vocabulary list over once or twice and know it off by heart.
However, I know people in schools: they're (in Canada) French is terrible, after nearly a decade of studying it. I learnt better Spanish in three weeks then, when comparing it with them, they learnt of French in many years. They spend 45 minutes every day, I'd spend maybe five minutes a day.
However, most people are not like me. Most people have trouble with English, much less another language on top of it.
English is the easiest language to learn to speak. Writing it, especially spelling, is another matter, but speaking it is a breeze. I'm fluent in Spanish and English and I know a little German.
Ease of learning to speak any language is dependent on the environmental factor. So unless you have a study to link to, I'm not convinced. Granted, I grew up in an English-speaking household myself, so I'd personally be inclined towards your view, but to keep things objective, I need evidence. After all, a Chinese-speaking home or a French-speaking home might produce children that think the language they speak at home is the easiest to pick up aurally, too.
I take it you only know one language, right? If you knew two or more you would start to see that the sentence structure of English is not complicated at all when compared to other languages. In English, you can express a large amount of information with fewer words. This is one of the reasons why English is the international language for pilots and air traffic controllers. Well...., that plus.... we won the war ;)
An ad hominem (Latin: "to the man"), also known as argumentum ad hominem, is an attempt to link the validity of a premise to a characteristic or belief of the person advocating the premise.[1] The ad hominem is a classic logical fallacy.[2] The ad hominem is not always fallacious, for in some instances questions of personal conduct, character, motives, etc., are legitimate and relevant to the issue.[3]
I did not question your personal conduct, character, motives, etc.. I merely wanted to know if you spoke more than one language because if you did not, then I wouldn't be able to make my point.
As far as your examples, they are merely anecdotes, not proof. I can come up with anecdotes that show the opposite. The point I'm trying to make is that on the whole, "In English, you can express a large amount of information with fewer words."
"As far as your examples, they are merely anecdotes, not proof. I can come up with anecdotes that show the opposite. The point I'm trying to make is that on the whole, "In English, you can express a large amount of information with fewer words.""
... yes well... please prove it, Joe, because I honestly can't quite see that; restating something over and over doesn't make it true.
OK, if you go to www.wolframalpha and type in English,Spanish,French and scroll down to where it says Typical Translation Length, you will see that to say something in French, or Spanish, it is 1.1 longer than if you said it in English.
Now if you were to type in English, Chinese and scroll down to where it says Typical Translation Length, you will see that to say something in Chinese, it is .53 shorter than if you said it in English.
So Chinese wins hands down. Which is why I left it out of the first part of my argument ;)
I never would have guesses that you could say something in Chinese faster than in English because every time I watch Chinese movies that have been dubbed in English, the English speaking translator is usually done but the Chinese actor's lips are still moving ;)
This is good because if Chinese is easier to learn, then it will make it easier on us once they take over ;)
Anyway, well played. I can't prove it. But I can restated again if you like ;)
OK, so the children from every other migrant group are language geniuses and only the Spanish speaking children need special education. Hmmmm. I don't know. It still sounds racist to me ;)
Just a disclaimer: I'm NOT saying that linguistic geniuses come from any particular race/minority group. They're just rare across the board. They come from across the board. And those who need help also come from across the board (of minority grouops, as it were). So bilingualism would be an attempt to help to raise standards across the board, no?
No, you don't assume across the board that they need special instruction. You assume across the board that they are gifted individuals and identify those that are not gifted and you help them. Bilingual education slows the learning process of those capable of picking it up much faster if forced to learn.
The schools in this country suck because they have decided to teach at the lowest common denominator so that "No child gets left behind." That's asinine because the majority of students suffer from this policy.
