Subject: english only

in a recent posting , sxren harder ( sharder @ ling . hum . aau . dk ) brings up an interesting point ( quoting from steinberg ( 1993 ) " an introduction to psycholinguistics " ) : > the law reflected the widespread belief that the german language was the > embodiment of all that was evil in german culture and that to teach such > a language to young americans would be immoral and corrupting . > . . . lawyers for the state of nebraska took essentially the position > . . . [ that ] a language by its very nature represents the spirit and > national character of a people . if this were true , then by teaching them > the grammar , structure and vocabulary of the german language , meyer could > indeed have been harming american children by making them into german > militarists right there on the plains of nebraska . - interesting , because in several recent postings against the english - only movement , an argument was given that teaching foreign _ languages _ was good because it exposed students to other _ cultures _ . that is precisely the reason the teaching of the german language was banned , according to the above quote . i think most of us would agree that the state of nebraska was wrong ; teaching another language does not serve to any great extent to pass on the culture . but if you believe that , are n't you being hypocritical to believe that teaching foreign languages is good because it exposes students to other cultures ? fwiw , i have a personal opinion : if you want to expose students to other cultures , it would be much better to teach ethnography than language . ( better yet , send the students to non-tourist areas of other countries . but i doubt whether the us educational system is prepared for that ! )
