Hacker News Reader

Comment by cogman10 | Hacker News Reader

> I'm for having English be the national language of America

I guess it depends on what that means. I'm for all services being in English at a minimum, that makes sense. I'm really not for removing obligations to translate or interpret.

Non-english speaking US citizens exist and interact with the government. For example, someone that's deaf. Or for reading, someone that's blind. Having access in those cases is important.

But further, there's a humanity aspect as well. Any asylum seeker can get railroaded. Or heck, a visitor from another country. If these people are accused of crimes they should have the right to understand why the government is punishing them if for no other reason than to give their side of the story.

Treat others as they would like to be treated.

View on HN

> I guess it depends on what that means.

A quick Google suggests that about 22% of Americans are multi-lingual, and roughly 8% of Americans do not have English as their dominant language (though I suspect that entirely non-English speaking Americans are at least one order of magnitude less).

I think only about 2% of countries in the world don't have an official language (America among them), and yet about 50% of the world is multi-lingual, so having an official language doesn't seem like an obstacle for other governments when it comes to support.

I suspect that the lack of of national language has more to do with the power struggle between the federal government and state governments then any issue, which is why I find this latest executive order quite baffling (for a party that is in the process of dismantling federal government, this is very much a federal power grab).

With all of that being said, I see it both as a recognition of the status quo, and a commitment to what is one of the greatest strengths of the United States (a single-language, single-currency market). Our largest economic rival (China) also has an enormous single-language, single-currency market, but that strength is largely focused inwards, since the use of a non-romanised language makes it very difficult for the non-Chinese reading population to adop sub-parts of the Chinese language.

Census Bureau in 2019, for people over the age of 5:

    - Can't speak English at all: 1.3% (~3.9 million people)
    - Speak English "not well": 2.9% (~9 million people)

>Treat others as they would like to be treated.

I have never expected a foreign government to provide English-language materials (especially non-tourism related materials) on any of my travels to other countries. Why should that be an expectation?

And yet they do [1]. I'm not saying that the expectation be there for all interactions in the country, I'm saying the expectation should be there if you are about to be charged with a crime in that country.

Why should that be an expectation? Because if you or I am being held against our will, wouldn't it be nice if you had an interpreter who could translate what the officer, lawyer, and judge are telling you? IE, if they tell you "you have to do this to not be locked up for 10 years" wouldn't it be nice to know how to comply with a ruling against you? Wouldn't it be nice if when they asked you questions you could actually answer them?

[1] https://eucrim.eu/articles/directive-201064eu-on-translation...

Nice? Sure. Do I expect it? No. I’ll go to the consulate before leaving my country to ensure I understand the laws of the country in which I’m going to be a guest, and obey those laws. In cases where I’ve needed translations, I’ve obtained them at my expense. I certainly don’t expect them to be provided freely.

What will you do if you are arrested by mistake?

Innocent people are arrested all the time. You can't just "obey all the laws" and assume you won't have a run in.

Without the legal protection to get a translator, you are assuming after being arrested you can simply call a translation service. Yet, you should know that most countries and most cops will take your cell phone.

It's a humanitarian principle that before being prosecuted you should at a minimum know why you are being prosecuted.

> I certainly don’t expect them to be provided freely.

I never said they had to (though I think they should). What's more important is that you have access to translation services.

Generally if you are a tourist, on a tourist visa, doing touristy things in a place where lots of tourists go, there will be multilingual (probably at least English) support. If you're going deep off the beaten path into China or Mexico or Russia or some other part of the world where tourists are rare and the local language is all most people know, then you should be think about how you are going to function in both ordinary and exceptional circumstances, including "what if I get arrested?"

I'm not talking about going off the beaten path. You can be arrested anywhere for any reason. Just being in a "touristy" location doesn't make you safe.

Even so, having translation support regardless of how far off the beaten path you are is something that should be consider a human right.

Sorry no, I do not consider it a human right.

You're also focusing on the low hanging fruit (a tourist getting falsely accused). What about voting materials or passport applications?

I do not expect other countries to make citizen-specific materials available to me in my language. I am also totally against making US-citizen-specific materials available in non-english language.

E.g. I do not want someone who doesn't speak English voting in local elections.

> You're also focusing on the low hanging fruit

Right, because that's the strongest position for why we should have, at a minimum, translation services for someone facing imprisonment.

Why instead of addressing this case are you pivoting to an argument I did not and am not making? You are straw manning me.

> What about voting materials or passport applications?

Nice to have, not a need to have. With perhaps the exception accommodations made for someone that's blind. But that can literally just be a poll worker that helps someone fill out a ballot. No need to print out braille ballots.

I'm looking at another use-case further down the spectrum. I don't believe you're making an argument for/against those things. On the contrary, I am expanding the argument to what I believe is a more reasonable scenario to analyze this new fed gov policy.

Unfortunately our government does not engage in nuance well, so if I have to sacrifice translation services for criminal defendants in order to secure against ballots, passports, and other citizen-specific materials in foreign languages I am willing to make that tradeoff.

> Unfortunately our government does not engage in nuance well

It certainly does and it's certainly not hard to put in exclusive language. There's no slippery slope here. A simple bill of "Anyone being prosecuted has the right to access translation services" would do (and we already have provisions like that in the criminal code). It can be amended right into our criminal justice legal code.

You are now creating a false dichotomy.

I agree. If I travel to another country as a tourist, much less live there, I have zero expectation that the people there will speak to me in English. It's nice if they do, but I see it as my obligation as the outsider to bend to their ways, not the other way around. I think that similarly, if someone lives here they should be expected to learn English. They don't have to give up their native language and culture, but the onus is on them to learn our ways, not the other way around.

I hope you never have to call an emergency ambulance in a foreign country where you don’t speak the language.

Thank you, same! I certainly include that as a risk calculation when making travel plans.

And yet many of them do. Because it makes life easier for everybody.

The underlying contention is that it does not make life easier for everyone. Specifically, that the lack of cohesive American identity actually makes it harder for the people who matter most in the United State of America: Americans.

How does providing government paperwork in Spanish or Korean make life harder for an English-speaking American? And the contention that Americans only speak English is just wrong. Most do, but there are massive numbers of residents and citizens who have something else as a primary/first language.

What ever happened to being a melting pot. And taking on the poor, huddled masses? Growing up in Virginia, we were always taught our variety was one of biggest strengths, not a weakness.

In Spain all (national) government forms, documents, and services are Spanish only. Even in autonomous regions such as Catalonia that has a co-official language (Catalan,) if I want to interact with the national government, it’s Spanish only, even on immigration/residency forms.

In France, same thing. In Korea, also the same. Also China. And Mexico. Canada mandates French and English.

I see nothing wrong with a country having an official language. That doesn’t preclude people from speaking their own languages, but of you want to live in country Y, then learning that language should be a prerequisite.

While that's true, one of the reasons why Spain mandates Castellano in the federal level is a legacy of Franco's push to annihilate the other languages spoken in the country. In a way, forcing a single language and culture is a textbook example of what authoritarian governments do.

I agree. Unfortunately, almost entire developed world has this aspect of authoritarian government. Including most of Europe.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com