Editor for this issue: <>
In response to Elise M-G's question about restrictive legislation and Penn. German, the story is kind of interesting and somewhat complex. First point that is relevant is that the Penn. Germans, both sectarians (Old Order Amish, Mennonites) and non-sectarians (everybody else) alike, a) have not considered themselves German-Americans as other groups have, e.g. Ger-Ams such as the groups Herb Stahlke refers to in the Midwest, in particular urban Ger-Americans; b) have not been regarded by other Ger-Americans as really Ger-American. This is ude in large part to the fact that the Penn. Germans came over so much earlier (1683-1775) than other sizable groups (mainly 19th c), among whom there was a greater number of middle class and educated people. Penn Germans of both type (sectarian and non-sectarian) who have maintained the dialect are almost without exception rurally based and with limited formal education; those who historically moved to cities and towns and pursued higher levels of education and became middle class generally have given up the dialect in favor of English. The PG dialect has always had the stigma of country-bumpkin speech, even by its own speakers (mainly non-sectarian) who will readily agree with their outside critics that it is 'not a real language' bec. it is effectively (for most speakers) a non-literate lg. and bec. it differs from Std. German. It is no accident that the term Pennsylvania Dutch is almost unversally preferred by speakers over Penn. German since they'll say they're 'not really German, but a mixture of German and American, Dutch'. In the early 1830's, a school law was passed in Pa. allowing lgs. other than English to be used as media of instruction, but ironically it was intere[redte (typo, sorry) widely interpreted as mandating English only; in any case, the low prestige of PG was reinforced by the fact that English remained the exclusive medium of instruction for dialect-speaking children. Many of these children suffered serious discrimination at the hands of teachers, who were by and large not dialect speakers, and although there was never any specific legislation targeting use of PG, kids felt the impact of their mother tongue being stigmatized. Some observers have included Penn Germans in the list of Ger-Amer groups persecuted during WWI (and WWII), but as Kloss has pointed out, this is incorrect. Bec. of the view of Penn 'Dutch' as not being really German, they were largely unaffected by anti-German sentiment felt in other places like here in Texas (during WWI it was illegal to speak/teach German in the state and our dept. was closed down). The accelerated decline of PG among non-sectarians in this century is thus not due to anti-German feelings, but rather the decreasing social and geographic isolation of the speakers (characterized of course by increasing educational achievement and major population shifts); the decline of French and Spanish in Lousiana can be attributed to similar circumstances. The maintenance situation among PG-speaking sectarians is of course just the opposite since the dialect, along with distinctive dress and transportation, is an important marker of in-group status. But when people leave the Old Order groups and become more socially assimilated, PG is generally given up quickly. In some families who leave, they literally go from speaking PG at home to English from one day to the next. Best, Mark LoudenMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
(1) African languages survived quite well in parts of Brazil. (2) It is my impression that in India various communities maintain their native languages for generations, and that the whole idea that we should expect immigrant communities to assimilate linguistically to their environment is a feature of American (and European?) culture, not a cultural universal.Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
With reference to the Miami instance, readers may be interested in a series of articles in the Philadelphia Inquirer last week describing the problem encountered by Spanish-speaking mushroom harvesters in Chester Cty near Philadelphia. It appears that virtually no one on the police force speaks Spanish, and interpreters are amateur and sometimes entirely lacking for every stage of a court case, starting with the arrest and going through sentencing. This results in situations like someone named Angel Jose Lopez getting arrested for something Antonio Juan Lopez actually did--and going to jail for it. The articles are informative and shocking. Elise Morse-GagneMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
The comment about bilingual jurors and 'translation problems' reminds me of the situation for Deaf jurors also. A Deaf friend of mine was called to jury duty and at that time the judge told the interpreter he must "sign exactly what I say WORD for WORD." [End Linguist List, Vol. 2, No. 0267]Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue