• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Learn english first

Linguistic imperialism is a terrible idea. By the 2nd generation most immigrant groups have willingly incorporated themselves into the English world without the need for social intervention. The Polish, Germans and Chinese immigration waves in the early 20th century are proof of this. "Requiring" people to learn a language for any reason is incredibly naive as it doesn't take into account the very human need to hold on to cultural traits and values that can only be passed down through language. That said, languages should be treated with a free market spirit. A person who speaks 2-3 languages should be more valuable than a monoglot. As that already is the case, I see no reason for any further intervention.
Agree, well stated, but, as an employment condition , in America, one MUST be able to communicate - somehow .
"Oriental" speaking ballplayers have an interpretor....I wonder who pays for this ??
Or should I say "Asiatic" rather than "Oriental" ....
 
Depends, what year are we in? Were they valuable in the 70s? If yes, then my comment stands. Historically and currently, more languages means more value.

200265-Epic_Facepalm_5452.png


Well, since I do not have a Tardis in my backyard, obviously I am talking about today, not 40 years ago.

And by the mid 1980's, those languages were becoming obsolete. By the mid 1990's, they were dead other then those working to migrate programs from one soon to be obsolete platform to another (like IBM 360 to C+). But that once again degenerated to worthless once Y2K was over with.

Needless to say, I do not mention on my resume or in interviews that I programmed in COBOL on 360 mainframes. It is a geek merit badge of sorts, and in actual use about as worthless as my still remembering G=C800:5. Critical to know if you worked on computers 20 years ago, worthless today.

The point is simple. Alabama does not live in a vacuum of its own. I'm sure even in "rural Alabama" you get products that can only be purchased, traded, or produced with the help of people who speak multiple languages. Actually, I can't think of a single thing in my household which could be produced, sold or purchased without there being a middleman who speaks multiple languages thus making the process simpler. The problem with globalization is that not everyone speaks the same language. So people who speak multiple languages (like myself) become a hot commodity. I honestly believe that in the future, there won't be a household where multiple languages aren't spoken. In my household alone we speak 4 different languages at any given time. Not out of necessity but simple pleasure. Once the rest of society in general transcends the fear of "losing" something culturally because of an added language, and sees value in them, knowing additional languages will be as common as eating a sandwich.

Actually, when we needed something made, we used Redneck Engineering most of the time.

If we needed things shipped in (like computer parts), we called our supplier in Atlanta, who called their headquarters in California if they needed more motherboards or cases.

Right now where I work, our lead designer is on the phone almost every other day to China, getting quotes and specs for future products. But he does not know any Chinese language, all conversations are in English. English is much more of an "international language" then any other. And when English is already your primary language, the common person does not have much need to learn another.
 
So.... i have a question. Should employers have the right to refuse employment because someone cant speak english?

Disclaimer: this is not about any specific "race" or language. Just about legal immigrants who cant speak english.

So, at work today i got really frustrated trying to communicate with someone who didnt speak very much english. Only a tiny bit. Not nearly enough to hold a conversation.
Im a leader in the workplace, so from time to time i have to ask someone to do something or for information. Its really hard to communicate with a person who cant speak english. I asked this person to not throw out the damaged products of the particular job we were doing because i have to keep count and record of them. This person didnt have a clue what i was asking and continued to throw out the damaged products.

Long story short, it made my job a lot harder and a thought hit my head; why are people who cant speak english even hired in the first place? How did this person make it through the process and interview with such little grasp on the language?

I think that employers should be allowed to deny employment to those who cant speak english. Im not saying they shouldnt be allowed to hire them, but i think they deserve a choice in this matter. What do you think?

There's no law saying one can't be denied employment based on their language skills. That's a failure within your company.
 
Well, since I do not have a Tardis in my backyard, obviously I am talking about today, not 40 years ago.

And by the mid 1980's, those languages were becoming obsolete. By the mid 1990's, they were dead other then those working to migrate programs from one soon to be obsolete platform to another (like IBM 360 to C+). But that once again degenerated to worthless once Y2K was over with.

Needless to say, I do not mention on my resume or in interviews that I programmed in COBOL on 360 mainframes. It is a geek merit badge of sorts, and in actual use about as worthless as my still remembering G=C800:5. Critical to know if you worked on computers 20 years ago, worthless today.

You're talking about having learned multiple languages in/from the 70s being valuable in the 70s and not valuable today. Okay, I get it. Yes, in the 70s, knowing multiple programming languages was valuable. Today some of those languages are not valuable. However, this doesn't invalidate my statements about how valuable multiple languages are anymore than saying "Latin isn't valuable today" is a counter argument to "multiple languages are a valuable asset".

It's kind of like my line of work. Sure, someone who knows how to use Photoshop is valuable but if the person also knows how to work After Effects, Flash and Maya, they become several times as valuable. Again, time does not change the rule of versatility. People with more skills, are far more valuable regardless of which time they live in. The skills in demand change, the languages in demand change but the rule of thumb still applies: There is more value and more demand for people who speak multiple languages.

Then again, someone who knows how to use Photoshop 5, Corel Draw was valuable when they first came out and today they're useless. But that doesn't negate the fact that today, as well as 15 years ago - knowing how to use different applications made you a more valuable graphic designer. You're speaking in terms of time, I'm speaking in terms of rules. As far as rules are concerned: linguistic versatility = more value regardless of the time.

Actually, when we needed something made, we used Redneck Engineering most of the time.

If we needed things shipped in (like computer parts), we called our supplier in Atlanta, who called their headquarters in California if they needed more motherboards or cases.

Right now where I work, our lead designer is on the phone almost every other day to China, getting quotes and specs for future products. But he does not know any Chinese language, all conversations are in English. English is much more of an "international language" then any other. And when English is already your primary language, the common person does not have much need to learn another.

So in China, somebody found it a necessity to learn English in order to do business, effectively adding a second language to their resume. When your company expands its market to South America, it will need people who speak both English and Spanish to sell its product. Adding a 3rd language to its resume. You're not doing much to disprove my statement that more languages are becoming the norm out of both economic and cultural necessity.
 
Last edited:
but they have the right to speak their mother language at home and teach it to their kids

Did I advocate that their rights be mandated? Or did I express concern? When I was corrected by someone with expertise, did I not graciously acknowledge that?

My brother is married to a Valencian. Their 3-year-old twins speak Spanish at home with Mum, English to Daddy and at playgroup. When they are with both parents they speak their own mixture of the two. Kids are amazing!

Yes. Apparently.

If it bothers you that much why don't you talk to them about it?

I'm sure that they will be glad to discuss this with you.

Why don't you read all the posts about the matter and try to refrain from unnecessary snarkiness? Your comment is on the (low, infantile) level of people who say "you can move to another country if you ddon't like something".

This is purportedly a discussion board. Nothing in my post was rude or disturbing or adamant. I expressed an opinion and backed off when an adult corrected my impression. So, how about you do the same since you have nothing to contribute?
 
So in China, somebody found it a necessity to learn English in order to do business, effectively adding a second language to their resume. When your company expands its market to South America, it will need people who speak both English and Spanish to sell its product. Adding a 3rd language to its resume. You're not doing much to disprove my statement that more languages are becoming the norm out of both economic and cultural necessity.

Trust me, my business will never expand to South America. We are only involved in Canada because another company is paying us to support their business. We have more then enough business in the US without even trying to go overseas.

China is simply a source of some of our supplies, nothing else.

And to most people, an additional language is rather useless in the US (unless they work in a ghettoized neighborhood). And even in those regions, English is commonly understood. I work in Chinatown, and have yet to meet somebody there that does not know English.
 
Why must they be more valuable? I see no reason for that to be the case, only that they can be more valuable, depending on the other language.

Latin is not of much use, unless you need to talk to priests as part of your employment. And if you live and work in rural Alabama, guess how much use knowing Hebrew would be?

An additional language is only as valuable as the need for the language is. It is not valuable in and of itself.
Because it's a skill, and having it makes you worth more as an employee.

You could translate, if necessary.
 
Because it's a skill, and having it makes you worth more as an employee.

You could translate, if necessary.

OK, I work as a computer tech, and I know Hebrew because I am Jewish.

Well, that will be just great, if somebody from Tel Aviv comes in with a broken computer and does not know English. Wanna guess how often that would happen?
 
So i mispelled the names of foreign countries. Im sure you can spell the name of every country on earth

Well, it would be a great idea before starting a thread entitled, 'Learn English first', that you did.

To answer your question, yes I can, spelling the names of countries isn't difficult.
 
Well, it would be a great idea before starting a thread entitled, 'Learn English first', that you did.

To answer your question, yes I can, spelling the names of countries isn't difficult.

I obviously know english well enough to communicate effectively.
 
Unfortunately you don't know it well enough to know that English requires a capital letter.
It's not THAT important.

You still knew what he meant.
 
Picking at my every mistake in typing is easier than debating valid points with logic.
Well then, perhaps whomever hired this person you could not communicate with effectively did not care about effective employee communications. Or perhaps other qualifications trumped that.
 
Maybe she was hired for the tax credits.
 
It's not THAT important.

You still knew what he meant.

His thread title is "Learn English first". If you are going to attack people for having an inferior grasp of the language than you think is acceptable, you are going to leave yourself open to criticism when it appears that your grasp of it isn't all that great either. Claiming that your mistakes are irrelevant or, disingenuously, that your mistakes are merely typing errors, then you are displaying a degree of hypocrisy.

I suspect that these colleagues he speaks of do have some grasp of English, otherwise how would they get a job in the first place? I would guess that they speak it with thick accents and poor grammar and syntax i.e. not up to a standard that Mr. Osophy finds acceptable. It would appear that he lacks a complete grasp of the language too, even though it is probably much greater than theirs, but no, I did not know what he meant when he first talked of 'samolians' and 'napalians'; it took a while to work out he meant Somali and Nepali. Those aren't typing errors, since he repeated them.

People in glass houses are advised not to play with catapults and slingshots.
 
Sounds as if taking a course in conversational or workplace Spanish will be very helpful to you.

Why? Did I miss a memo requiring me to know someone else's language as opposed the individual learning the usual and customary language of the United States.
 
Admittedly they should learn English first, but that would require at least 2 more years of work on top of the already months, even years it takes to get in here in the first place. Are you really going to deny a person the right to even make money because they can hold a conversation with you?
Also as a leader in a work place with people who speak other language, didn't you have to take a class or something? I know my dad did when he got a managerial spot.

If they are using the legal process to come here and it takes an extended time, one would think during that time they would find a way to learn the language. Certainly, they may not be fluent; however, it shows a genuine wish to assimilate.
 
It's quite possible that the OP's employer is aware of the language "issue" and is perfectly fine with it.
 
When you are in a new country, you do not force them to conform to you. You have to conform to them.

I never went anywhere -- even for a week -- without learning at least some basics. Enough to deal with service people. That takes literally a couple days, if you're serious about it. Anywhere I went for longer, I tried to get my skills up more. Often not quite conversational, but passable enough. And these weren't even places I was living. I was just passing through.

When I moved to NZ, I went over all of the spelling and grammatical differences and changed my resume and cover letters to match THEIR conventions of English. I got it down well enough that I could write in their conventions without thinking about it. When I moved back to the US, I changed it back to US English.

It is only polite. I would have been embarrassed of myself showing up in a country not knowing a single word of the native language, and I certainly would be too ashamed to ask anyone to hire me for anything. I wouldn't even submit my resume in the wrong dialect, let alone the wrong language all together.

It isn't a nationalism thing. It isn't an immigrant-hating thing. It's just courtesy.
 
So.... i have a question. Should employers have the right to refuse employment because someone cant speak english?

Disclaimer: this is not about any specific "race" or language. Just about legal immigrants who cant speak english.

So, at work today i got really frustrated trying to communicate with someone who didnt speak very much english. Only a tiny bit. Not nearly enough to hold a conversation.
Im a leader in the workplace, so from time to time i have to ask someone to do something or for information. Its really hard to communicate with a person who cant speak english. I asked this person to not throw out the damaged products of the particular job we were doing because i have to keep count and record of them. This person didnt have a clue what i was asking and continued to throw out the damaged products.

Long story short, it made my job a lot harder and a thought hit my head; why are people who cant speak english even hired in the first place? How did this person make it through the process and interview with such little grasp on the language?

I think that employers should be allowed to deny employment to those who cant speak english. Im not saying they shouldnt be allowed to hire them, but i think they deserve a choice in this matter. What do you think?

YES, they absolutely should be able to refuse employment. Not being able to communicate with your employees is a HUGE issue. If you're going to move to another country, you need to put in an effort to learn the language. I moved to Germany and I had to go through a lot of tests and certifications to prove that I spoke the language so that I could go to college there and get hired for a job.

People who are too lazy to make a serious attempt at learning their host nation's language don't deserve any pity.

Sounds as if taking a course in conversational or workplace Spanish will be very helpful to you.

Yes, that's the solution. Let's not require immigrants to learn the host nation's language, let's force everyone else to learn every language in the world. You're passing the buck and making excuse for nothing short of god damn laziness.

Really? I'm a native speaker of English and I've no idea what you're talking about. What's napalian or samolian? If you mean Nepali or Somali you should say so. Those are English words; learn them.

It's important to note that you learned your host nation's language, as I did mine. There's a difference between respectable immigrants and lazy ones.
 
Last edited:
It's important to note that you learned your host nation's language, as I did mine. There's a difference between respectable immigrants and lazy ones.

This is true. When you move to a country you should learn their language, but isn't there a bit of confusion in parts of the States where you'd need to learn two languages: English and Spanish? That's a tall order for a lot of people, and will take time. In the meantime, should those people be excluded from the workforce? Also, whilst you should learn the host language, you'll never learn it well enough for some people's taste. That's why I tend to get annoyed at apparently semi-literate types on DP attempting to criticise others' use of English when their own can hardly be a source of pride.

The whole 'Grammar Nazi' thing shows up a cultural difference, not between nationalities, but between mindsets. I, and many friends, family and acquaintances, would not agree with the view that you only need to speak or write English well enough for someone else to understand your meaning. While that is fine for speakers of English as a second language, for native speakers I'd hold them to a higher requirement. If you believe that a language is something more than merely a means of communicating basic information, that it encompasses art and conveys character and nuance and permits the expression of imagination and the metaphysical, then the phrase, 'y'know what I mean?' should not be required.
 
This is true. When you move to a country you should learn their language, but isn't there a bit of confusion in parts of the States where you'd need to learn two languages: English and Spanish? That's a tall order for a lot of people, and will take time. In the meantime, should those people be excluded from the workforce? Also, whilst you should learn the host language, you'll never learn it well enough for some people's taste. That's why I tend to get annoyed at apparently semi-literate types on DP attempting to criticise others' use of English when their own can hardly be a source of pride.

The whole 'Grammar Nazi' thing shows up a cultural difference, not between nationalities, but between mindsets. I, and many friends, family and acquaintances, would not agree with the view that you only need to speak or write English well enough for someone else to understand your meaning. While that is fine for speakers of English as a second language, for native speakers I'd hold them to a higher requirement. If you believe that a language is something more than merely a means of communicating basic information, that it encompasses art and conveys character and nuance and permits the expression of imagination and the metaphysical, then the phrase, 'y'know what I mean?' should not be required.

Languages are always useful. And the better you know them, the more effective and fun they are. I only do three languages and Latin with any proficiency. So I look like a dunce compared with my wife. We would want to be able to communicate in the language of the land, but if everyone you interact with speaks English, German or French?

On the other hand, I do not know that I would want the government to interfere in the upbringing. If Chinatown speaks Chinese? That never really seemed a problem. On the other side of the story it does not make much sense to have large parts of a population that cannot communicate with one another. If a third of the population does not speak the language of the others it could be or become difficult.
Just thinking about the potential dangers surrounding working with heavy machinery or in the military make that quite obvious.
 
So.... i have a question. Should employers have the right to refuse employment because someone cant speak english?

Disclaimer: this is not about any specific "race" or language. Just about legal immigrants who cant speak english.

So, at work today i got really frustrated trying to communicate with someone who didnt speak very much english. Only a tiny bit. Not nearly enough to hold a conversation.
Im a leader in the workplace, so from time to time i have to ask someone to do something or for information. Its really hard to communicate with a person who cant speak english. I asked this person to not throw out the damaged products of the particular job we were doing because i have to keep count and record of them. This person didnt have a clue what i was asking and continued to throw out the damaged products.

Long story short, it made my job a lot harder and a thought hit my head; why are people who cant speak english even hired in the first place? How did this person make it through the process and interview with such little grasp on the language?

I think that employers should be allowed to deny employment to those who cant speak english. Im not saying they shouldnt be allowed to hire them, but i think they deserve a choice in this matter. What do you think?

I know a lady in San Diego who CAN'T get a job at a major retailer because she doesn't speak SPANISH.
 
I do believe that English is the language of our nation and it annoys me that my neighbors, who are good folks, speak Spanish to their little kids.

Also, being bi-lingual adds value to the employee because, well, so many people come here and don't bother learning English and we have accommodated this to the point of absurdity. Now in some jobs, I suppose it doesn't matter but I would not likely hire a non-english speaking employee. But all it takes is one good amnesty and Spanish will become our primary language. I suppose this is continent appropriate but I still dread the day.

For English press 4.

English is not our official language constitutionally. From what I was made to understand, the founding fathers almost put it in the constitution but decided against it because there were Pennsylvania Dutch who did not speak English and wanted to be inclusive of all.

I think the best we can do is work with the Mexican government to start Americanizing Mexico for the benefit of better trade. This should ideally include teaching their kids American civics and fluency in English by the time they graduate. An inadvertent benefit would be immigrants from Mexico would already know American civics and speak English.

I don't think America will ever be a primarily Spanish speaking. English is the benchmark language of the world. Our immigrants want to learn English, it just takes a while. The number 1 advertisers on Spanish language TV in America are English language educational products. Previous generations of immigrants had similar challenges, some never becoming fully fluent despite trying. Its their kids who spoke English from childhood.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom