Skip to main content

Protecting English in an Anglophone Age

  • Chapter

Part of the book series: Springer International Handbooks of Education ((SIHE,volume 15))

Abstract

The official English movement in the United States is unique in the world in that the discourse of protection is directed towards English, because of multilingualism, and not against English, in defense of minority languages. This chapter discusses the exceptional character of the official English movement, devoting particular attention to the 104th Congress (1995–1996) when, under the first Republican Party (GOP) majority for 40 years, the status of English in the United States achieved its much hoped for floor action resulting in a successful vote on 1 August 1996. The Bill Emerson Language Empowerment Act (1996) subsequently lapsed, but the official English movement remains, powerful and determined, pursuing energetically its controversial aim of inscribing English into the nation’s legal register. That official English is a movement in the United States, with its global economic dominance and cultural influence, invites curiosity as to its aims, origins, politics, and ideologies. The chapter discusses bilingual education as a key site of struggle in language policy in the US. The chapter concludes with a critique of language policy and planning theory in relation to official English.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   429.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   549.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   549.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Adams, J. (1780/1992). Proposal for an American Language Academy. In J. Crawford, J. (Ed.). (1992) Language loyalties: A source book on the official English controversy. (pp. 31–33). Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, K., & de Kanter, A. (1981). The effectiveness of bilingual education programs. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baron, D. (1990). The English-only question, an official language for Americans? New Haven and London: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baron, D. (1992). Federal English. In J. Crawford (Ed.), Language loyalties: A source book on the official English controversy. (pp. 36–40). Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baugh, J. (2000). Beyond Ebonics, Linguistic pride and racial prejudice. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, R. (1994). Dictatorship of virtue: Multiculturalism and the battle for America’s future. New York: Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birkales, G. (1986). About this book [Foreword]. In A. P. Blaustein & D. Blaustein-Epstein, Resolving language conflicts: A study of the world’s constitutions. Washington, D.C.: U.S. English.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and symbolic power. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chavez, L. (1991). Out of the barrio: Towards a new politics of Hispanic assimilation. Basic Books. New York: Harper Collins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christian, D., Montone, C. L., Lindhohn, K. J., & Carranza, I. (1997). Profiles in two-way immersion education. Washington, D.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics and Delta Systems.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, J. (1999). The Ebonics controversy in context: Literacies, subjectivities, and language ideologies in the United States. In Blommaert, J. (Ed.), Language ideological debates (pp. 201–235). The Hague: Mouton de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Combs, M. C. (1999). Public perceptions of official English/English only: Framing the debate in Arizona. In T. Huebner & K. A. Davis (Eds.). Socio-political perspectives on language policy and planning in the USA. (pp. 131–155). Amsterdam: Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Congressional Record, 1967, p. 34703. Washington, D.C.: United States Congress.

    Google Scholar 

  • Congressional Record 15024–30, 11 October, 1990. Washington, D.C.: United States Congress.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crawford, J. (Ed.). (1992). Language loyalties: A source book on the official English controversy. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crawford, J. (2000). At war with diversity: US language policy in an age of anxiety. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crawford, J. (2002). Making sense of Census 2000. University of Arizona, Language Policy Research Unit.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crystal, D. (1997). English as a global language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cummins, J. (1992). Bilingual education and immersion education: The Ramirez Report in theoretical perspective. Bilingual Research Journal. 16, 91–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cummins, J. (2000). Language, power and pedagogy: Bilingual children in the crossfire. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donahue, T. S. (1995). American language policy and compensatory opinion. In Tollefson, J. W. (Ed.) Power and inequality in language education (pp. 112–142). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Draper, J. B., & Jiminez, M. (1990/1992). A chronology of the official English movement. In Crawford, J. (Ed.) Language loyalties: A source book on the official English controversy. (pp. 89–94). Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ewen, D. T., Wrigley, H. S., & Chisman, F. P. (1993). ESL and the American dream: A report on an investigation of ESL service for adults. Washington, D.C.: The Southport Institute of Policy Analysis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson, C. A. (1979/96). National attitudes to language planning. In Huebner, T. (Ed.) Sociolinguistic perspectives: Papers on language in society, 1959–1994. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fishman, J. A. (1988). ‘English Only’: Its ghosts, myths and dangers. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 74, 125–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gingrich, N. (1995). To renew America. New York: Harper Collins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graddol, D. (1997). The future of English? London: British Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayakawa, S. I. (1985). (The English Language Amendment) One nation... indivisible? Washington, D.C.: Institute for Values in Public Policy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hinton, L. (1994). Flutes of fire: Essays on Californian Indian languages. Berkeley, CA: Heyday Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirsch, E. D. (1988). Cultural literacy: What every American needs to know. New York: Vintage Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Honey, J. (1997). Language is power: The story of Standard English and its enemies. London: Faber and Faber.

    Google Scholar 

  • House of Representatives Report 107-219 on the Intelligence Authorization Act of 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huebner, T., & Davis, K. A. (1999). (Eds.). Sociopolitical perspectives on language policy and planning in the USA. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jernudd, B. H. (1992). Culture planning in language planning, what do we know about culture loss, survival and gain in relation to language loss, survival and gain? In G. Jones & C. Ozog (Eds.) Bilingualism and national development (Vol. 2) (pp. 491–531). Universiti Brunei Darussalam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kachru, B. B. (Ed). (1992). The other tongue: English across cultures (2nd ed.). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kagan, R. A. (1991). Adversarial legalism and American government. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 10(3), 369–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kloss, H. (1971). Language rights of immigrant groups. International Migration Review, 5, 250–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kloss, H. (1998). The American bilingual tradition (2nd ed.). Washington DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knowles, G. (1997). A cultural history of the English language. London: Arnold.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kobayashi, S. (August 3, 1999). English can save Japan, p. 16. The Japan Times.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krashen, S. D. (1999). Under attack: The case against bilingual education. Culver City, CA: Language Education Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krauss, M. (1992). The world’s languages in crisis. Language, 68, 6–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krauss, M. (1998). The condition of native North American languages. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 132, 9–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lambert, R. D. (1992). Foreign language planning in the United States (Occasional Paper). Washington, D.C.: National Foreign Language Center, Johns Hopkins University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leith, D, (1997). A social history of English. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lo Bianco, J. (1999). The language of policy: What sort of policy making is the officialization of English in the United States? In Huebner, T. & K. A. Davis (Eds.), Sociopolitical perspectives on language policy and planning in the USA. (pp. 39–65). Amsterdam: Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lo Bianco, J. (2001). Language policies: State texts for silencing and giving voice. In P. Freebody, S. Muspratt, S. Devlin, B. Devlin, & B. Difference (Eds.), Silence and textual practice: Studies in critical literacy (pp. 31–71). Cleveland, University of New Hampshire: Hampton Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lo Bianco, J. (2002) Uncle Sam and Mister Unz. Australian Language Matters, 4, 1 & 3–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macias, R. F. (2000). The flowering of America: Linguistic diversity in the United States. In S. L. McKay & S. C. Wong (Eds.), New immigrants in the United States (pp. 11–58). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCormick, W. J. (1923/1992). “American” as official language. In J. Crawford (Ed.) Language loyalties: A source book on the official English controversy. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mencken, H. L. (1936). The American language. New York: A. Kopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miner, S. (1998). Legal implications of the official English declaration. In T. Ricento, & B. Burnaby (Eds), Language and politics in the United States and Canada: Myths and realities. (pp. 171–185). New Jersey and London: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, M. (1999). US language planning and policies for social dialect speakers. In T. Huebner, & K. A. Davis (Eds.), Sociopolitical perspectives on language policy and planning in the USA. (pp. 173–193). Amsterdam: Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nunberg, G. (1992). Afterword: The official language movement: Reimagining America. In J. Crawford, (Ed.) Language loyalties: A source book on the official English controversy. (pp. 479–495). Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parakrama, A. (1995). De-hegemonizing language standard: Learning from (post)colonial Englishes about “English”. Basingstoke and New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, R. (1995). Forked tongue: The politics of bilingual education. New Brunswick: Transaction Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pennycook, A. (1994). The cultural politics of English as an international language. New York and London: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perkins, J. (Chair). (1979). US President’s commission of foreign languages and international studies, strength through wisdom, A critique of US capability (Final Report). Washington, D.C.: Government Publications Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillipson, R. (1992). Linguistic imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillipson, R., & Skutnabb-Kangas, T. (1996). English-only worldwide or language ecology? TESOL Quarterly 30, 429–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piatt, B. (1990). Only English? Law and language policy in the United States. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramirez, J., Yuen, S., Ramey, D., & Pasta, D. (1991). Final report: Longitudinal study of structured English immersion strategy, early exit and late-exit bilingual education programs for language minority children (Vol. 1) (US Department of Education). San Mateo, CA: Aguirre International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ricento, T. (1998). National language policy in the United States. In T. Ricento, & B. Burnaby (Eds.), Language and politics in the United States and Canada: Myths and realities. (pp. 85–103). New Jersey and London: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roca, A. (1999). Foreign language policy and planning in higher education: The case of the State of Florida. (pp. 297–313). In T. Huebner, & K. A. Davis (Eds.), Sociopolitical perspectives on language policy and planning in the USA. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rossell, C., & Baker, K., (1996). The educational effectiveness of bilingual education. Research in the Teaching of English, 30(1), 7–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rossiter, C. (Ed.). (1961). Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay. The federalist papers. New York and Scarborough: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, J. (1978/1979). The approach to language planning within the United States. Language Planning Newsletter (East-West Center, Honolulu), 4(4), 1 & 3–6 and “Continued” 5(1), 1 & 3–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, S. G. (1976). Revolution, reaction or reform: The 1974 bilingual education act. New York: L.A. Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shannon, S. M. (1999). The debate on bilingual education in the US: Language ideology as reflected in the practices of bilingual teachers. In J. Blommaert (Ed.), Language ideological debates (pp. 171–201). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, P. (1981/1992). The tongue-tied American, Confronting the foreign language crisis. New York: Continuum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skutnabb-Kangas, T. (Ed) (1995). Multilingualism for all. Swets and Zeitlinger B.V.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skutnabb-Kangas, T., Phillipson, R., & Rannut, M., (Eds.). (1994). Linguistic human rights: Overcoming linguistic discrimination. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sonntag, S. K. (1995). Elite competition and official language movements. In J. W. Tollefson (Ed.) Power and inequality in language education (pp. 91–112). Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, G. (1994). Immigration, emigration, language acquisition, and the English language proficiency of immigrants in the U.S. In B. Edmonston & J. S. Passel (Eds.), Immigration and ethnicity: The integration of America’s newest arrivals (pp. 163–181). Washington, D.C: The Urban Institute Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tarver, H. (1989). Language and politics in the 1980s: The story of US English. Politics and Society 17(2), 220–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • United States Census Bureau. (1993, April 28). Number of non-English language speaking Americans up sharply in 1980s, Census Bureau says [Press Release]. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Census Bureau.

    Google Scholar 

  • United States Department of Commerce. (1993, Nov.). We the American... Hispanics. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census.

    Google Scholar 

  • United States Census Bureau. (1994). 1990 Census of Population (CP-2-1A). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veltman, C. (1983). Language shift in the United States. Berlin: Mouton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veltman, C. (1998). Quebec, Canada, and the United States: Social reality and language rights. In T. Ricento, & B. Burnaby (Eds.), Language and politics in the United States and Canada: Myths and realities, (pp. 310–317). New Jersey and London: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiley, T. G. (1999). Comparative historical analysis of U.S. language policy and language planning: Extending the foundations. In T. Huebner, & K. A. Davis (Eds.), Sociopolitical perspectives on language policy and planning in the USA. (pp. 17–39). Amsterdam: Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Willig, A. (1985). A meta-analysis of selected studies on the effectiveness of bilingual education. Review of Educational Research, 55, 269–317.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilgoren, J. (2002, July 19). Divided by a call for a common language. New York Times, p. 13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woolard, K. A. (1998). Introduction: Language ideology as a field of inquiry. In B. B. Schieffelin, K. A. Woolard, & P. V. Kroskrity (Eds.), Language ideologies: Practice and theory (pp. 3–47). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zelasko, N. F. (1991). The bilingual double standard: Mainstream Americans’ attitudes toward bilingualism. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Georgetown University, Washington DC: University Microfilm International; Dissertation Information Service, Ann Arbor Michigan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zinn, H. (1995). A people’s history of the United States. New York: The New Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2007 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Lo Bianco, J. (2007). Protecting English in an Anglophone Age. In: Cummins, J., Davison, C. (eds) International Handbook of English Language Teaching. Springer International Handbooks of Education, vol 15. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-46301-8_13

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics