Composition: History & Theory: 2000 - 2009
The “English Only” Movement and U.S. College Composition
Description
In their article, “English Only And U.S. College Composition,” Bruce Horner and John Trimbur begin with the statement that even “though English is not the official language of the U.S., this is an English speaking nation,” so therefore, writing instruction in English just makes sense (594). The purpose of the article as a whole is to “examine the sense of inevitability that makes it so difficult to imagine writing instruction in any other language other than English” not that composition is usually taught in English (595). Historically, when teaching the classics, students had to know Greek or Latin because it was a “mental discipline.” However, the shift has been from bilingualism to “unidirectional monolingualism” (595). While both Horner and Trimbur do not support the oral exams that were given they seek to focus the audience’s attention of the triumph of the vernacular language. After this battle, “French, German, Spanish, and Italian took their place in the curriculum as reading courses to study national literatures and cultures, while English alone was assigned the task of writing instruction” (596). Horner and Trimbur discuss English as an exclusive club that gives nationality because it gives the speaker one language. Also, by using English in writing it forces the use of the “proper canon” instead of the shifting realities of language.
Language policy in the formation of the modern curriculum
Traditionally students had to take a test in both classical languages and English in order to enter into the university. While at the university, those that were considered “dull” were the ones that first began composing in English. Shortly afterward everyone followed this trend and most schools did away with separate degrees if a classical language was not learned and emphasized. Freshman composition came about “as part of the college curriculum as a stop-gap measure until the secondary schools improved their students’ preparation in writing” (598). The First Report, published in 1892, “attacks explicitly the long held theory that ‘the proper way to learn to write English is to translate orally Greek or Latin’” (599). The Second Report (1895) challenges the idea of translating classical languages and how it relates to the ability to compose in English. Finally, the Fourth Report (1897) states that translating the language into written English may be valuable.
- Learning the modern languages as living, spoken languages is held to be a nonintellectual, feminine activity: It was viewed as a sign of good breeding if a student was able to speak a Romance language fluently. However, there was also suspicion with this practice because it was also seen as an effeminate activity.
- The modern languages are represented not as living languages but as texts in an archive: E.H. Babbitt, a professor of modern languages at Columbia, states that the study of modern languages can be done “by emulating such elements of classical pedagogy as grammatical analysis, etymological identification, vocabulary development, and the appreciation of national cultures, literatures, and intellectual life” (604).
- The study of modern languages figure unidirectionally, not as an end in itself but as a means to mastering English: Edward J. Jones, professor of modern languages at University of South Carolina, states plainly, “It were better that our students should never know other languages than to use them to debauch their English” (605). Therefore, other languages should know their role as subversive and only assist in the teaching of English.
- English in the U.S. is represented in geographical isolation from other modern languages:
Horner and Trimbur state in this section that as a country we drew “linguistic borders around the continental U.S. and [separated] the nation’s English monolingualism from a polygot Europe” (606). This view has come about mainly because for most of those in the U.S. there is no country bordering ours that requires one to attain another language besides English. However, some argue that with immigration other languages are spoken but forced assimilation is a requirement to succeed in this country.
English Only, basic writing, and ESL: keeping the English in language instruction and policy
Much of the support for and English only movement has been fueled by xenophobia. Sometimes the term “immigrant” is used to describe native speakers “whose right to be there is suspect and whose presence is often seen as a threat to the culture, economy, and physical environment of the academy” (609). The call to action is to consider multilingual ideas without thought of material or cultural costs. [College Composition and Communication. 53.4 (June 2002). Other article titles in this issue: “Critical Pedagogy’s ‘Other’: Constructions of Whiteness in Education for Social Change,” “Race, Literacy, and the Value of Rights Rhetoric in Composition Studies,” “‘To Protect and Serve’: African American Female Literacies,” “Learning Disability, Pedagogies, and Public Discourse”]
Date of Upload
3/15/09