On March 1, President Donald Trump signed an executive order designating English as the official language of the United States, “to promote unity, cultivate a shared American culture for all citizens, ensure consistency in government operations, and create a pathway to civic engagement.” My first response was cynicism.
English is the most common language of the United States, but it is not the only one in America’s linguistic landscape, historically or presently. In spite of this reality, U.S. politicians have long maintained attitudes that non-anglophone citizens are somehow a threat to the social cohesion of a single common language. Forced assimilation of indigenous children via residential schools and language suppression of Louisiana French are only two of countless traumatizing examples of this phenomenon from U.S. history.
In practice, Trump’s designation of English as the sole official language of the U.S. only serves to further marginalize non-native English speakers in America by reducing their access to translation for essential services, defeating the stated purposes of the executive order itself.
My problem with English-only legislation is personal. When my mother put me in California public school for the first time, she noted that I listen to another language at home instead of growing up “English-only.” Accordingly, I took a test and was placed in English as a Second Language (ESL) for three years of elementary school. I was missing out on fundamental academic lessons to learn basic English while being stared at and subtly shamed by classmates.
ESL is meant to be a supplement for students to get more hours of exposure to English, but it privileges perfect standard English over the positives of connection to non-anglophone cultures. Over time, this leads to culturally coerced whitewashing as families realize the institutional hurdles they will run into for trying to keep another language alive in a society where the instructional language is English. It’s no coincidence that my parents marked “English-only” on my younger sister’s school paperwork and chose not to also send her to Vietnamese school after seeing how much I struggled socially with these protocols.
This is what I dealt with as someone who did speak English at home, just not English only. The tangible impact of this executive order is dramatically more damaging for Americans who truly cannot speak English, a reality for many but especially the recently displaced. A core aspect of this order is its rescission of a Clinton-established mandate for government agencies to provide accessible translations in other languages of relevant legal documents, including voting ballots. In the erasure of this mandate, vulnerable immigrants are alone navigating civic infrastructure without translation nor a meaningful bridge to becoming fluent other than a stern message that until they are, they are unwelcome in this country. This is deeply divisive and disturbing.
I love English; it is my major after all. But my love for English is part of a broader passion for language and the symbolic worlds each one opens as unique vessels for conveying perspectives and coloring reality. I don’t want this language I love to be used as a political tool to demean cultural identities people have in languages other than English or further discourage multilingualism in an era when foreign language enrollment is at an all-time low.
According to the United Nations University, linguistic diversity is an overwhelmingly positive force for societies and their citizens, both culturally and economically. Instead of punishing lack of fluency, we should embrace legislation such as dual language programming that celebrates rather than stigmatizes multilingual education, acknowledging stumbling blocks as an inevitable part of language development instead of a reason for English to reign sole or supreme.
Language shapes identity, which can be used to unify or divide. If the aim of the order is to promote unity, conferring status to English at the expense of other languages is not a sensible path towards this goal. In the pragmatic pursuit of American ideals, inclusivity is essential.
Editor-in-Chief: Jordan Premmer, Chief Copy Editor: Sophia McCrackin, Managing Editor: Jordan DelFiugo, Opinion Editor: Dakota Duran, Scene Editor: Elina Graham
