I must say at the onset that I found it difficult to ascertain the author's argument. It took a couple of readings to begin to understand it. At the beginning of the piece, he states that "supporters of bilingual education today imply that students like me miss a great deal by not being taught in their family's language." Is the author dismissing the importance of bilingual education? This can't be. So his point for writing the article must be something else.
Later on he states that being taught in his native language would have "delayed having to learn the language of public society" (English in this case). Is he saying that little children can't learn two languages at the same time? This can't be. What I've learned about language acquisition tells me that a child can accomplish just that - as long as the delivery is consistent and separate.
I guess the point of the piece is to show how one's home language (Spanish in this case) ceases to exist when one is forced to only speak English as a means to acculturate into the mainstream. The author's teachers asked his parents to speak only English at home to help expedite the process. In the end the author says that it's not a bad thing - what one loses at home, one gains in public confidence.
I think the author missed his home language. The relationship between parents and children grew more distant after insisting on speaking English only. That's a shame. I strongly believe that children should not be forced to speak one language or the other. Even without ESL instruction, children should be allowed to have their private language at home, and their public language (English) at school. This way they'll grow up to be bi- or multi-lingual.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
One thing that he also mentioned was when the nuns were in the living room and suggested that they speak English at home, the family did. Right or wrong that was a choice that they made for reasons we may never know. Perhaps it is Hispanic culture?
ReplyDeleteRodriguez additionally spent a lot of time discussing how speaking English at home altered the dynamics of his family life. He talked about how his father was basically silenced in public and how his mother took over speaking for the family. Rodriguez held back a little I think in how this role reversal clashed with the families cultural identity. In many ways the choice of the parents to encourage their children's assimilation into the public language (English) not only diminished biligualism but broke down important cultural traditions.
ReplyDeleteI agree that it was a shame for the family's relationships and closeness to have become so distant. The nuns coming to their house and asking them to speak English at home was an invasion of thier private lives. They should not have chosen to stop speaking their private language.
ReplyDeleteJoe,
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with your point that children should be allowed to speak their home language AND their school/public language. Research shows that the home language should be fostered so that children can develop vocabulary and sentence structure which they can then transfer to their school language (English).