Saturday, September 12, 2015
Cultures and Free Speech
I believe Anzaldua did a better job proving her claim than McWhorter because in my opinion, living in America as a Hispanic gives better proof on how Spanish speakers feel about being ridiculed in to blending your culture with another. I believe and agree that denying a group's language is against the first amendment because it restricts a citizen's way of life and how they want to talk. Foreigners who move to America shouldn't feel that they have to change their culture or language, if they did they might start to feel unhappy and homesick. Anzaldua explains that having certain food, smells, and hearing familiar sounds make her more comfortable and at home. If everyone spoke English yes, it could be a lot more convenient for the world to communicate to each other but, it would erase the beauty of other cultures around the world. McWhorter says that when people grow up with indigenous languages and migrate to a place with a more globally dominant language they tend to not speak their indigenous language any more which leads to language death. People should be welcomed to live the way they want to live. If people feel that they need to change the way they talk then people's cultural identities diminish. Anzaldua lived through people telling her that she can't speak the way she wants to, such as her experiences in school but she stood up what she believed in and showed that you should be proud of where you are from and recognize who you are.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree with what you have said, “Anzaladua did a better job proving her claim that McWhorter…” Because of how you put that living in America as a Hispanic would generally make it harder for a migrant to feel at home. Also, the freedom of language is an absolutely beautiful thing and should not be limited because of where you find yourself living. Yes, denying a culture’s language is against the first amendment, although that is true, individuals still find themselves being ridiculed for speaking their authentic language. I agree this is in dubiously wrong and would absolutely make a foreigner feel “unhappy and homesick” and this is unfair. Anzaudula did a much better job because she explained through a personal connection, which can be very effective in helping your voice be heard. Culture absolutely needs to be celebrated freely for individuals because what is America if it isn’t the “land of the free?”
ReplyDeleteI agree, McWorter shows that the Chinese children have problems in school with speaking English. By taking away so many languages in the world, it destroys how diverse the world will be in the future. With only 600 languages left, the world would be a place dominated by the few big languages. This would take away the first amendment right to speak some ones’ own language. McWorter explains how the Chinese kids feel like the minority, not because of who they are, but because of their problem with speaking English. That is wrong and should not be allowed anywhere. Just because somebody was born with a different language doesn’t mean that we all are the same people and we communicate the same way. All there is that is different is the language that we use to communicate what we want to say. It is wrong for immigrants to have to learn a language of a country just to fit in.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your statement of Anzaladua making a better claim than McWorter. Anzaladua was correct with her argument of the Spanish language butchered and not learned or carried correctly through generations. The way Anzaladua wrote of Chicanas and the Spanish and English language was an eye opener to how the language of Spanish is spoken incorrectly, and I myself have learned the language wrong and improper. It is making me realize it is not ok for language to change the way it has because it is becoming improper and disrespectful to cultures, like the Spanish.
ReplyDelete