The American Spectator Trump’s executive order will have few practical impacts, but it will promote unity and a shared American culture.
"I hope Trump’s executive order will have few practical consequences on the multilingual richness of this country, but I couldn’t be happier that my nation is not embarrassed to acknowledge English as the means by which it “promotes unity” and “cultivates a shared American culture for all citizens.' ”
"As President Trump mentioned in Tuesday’s address to the joint session of Congress, he signed an executive order designating English as the nation’s official language on March 1. But should we care?
"Inasmuch as the intent of Trump’s order is to “promote unity” and “cultivate a shared American culture for all citizens,” the answer is yes. To the extent that there will be no real impact on current practices and procedures in use by the federal government and its affiliated agencies, the answer is no.
"Which, quite frankly, is as it should be. When you consider that Russia systematically repressed the Ukrainian language in the mid-17th and 18th centuries and Polish in the 19th and 20th, it’s been relatively smooth sailing for the United States. And yet, by not having had to care much about adopting an official language, our soon-to-be-250-year-old nation may not appreciate the cultural significance of having a common language in the way that Ukraine and Poland do.
"But that doesn’t mean the question of a national language has been without contention. The refusal of German immigrants to speak English in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania annoyed Benjamin Franklin. He had a bone to pick with them anyway since, among his many entrepreneurial pursuits, he unsuccessfully attempted to publish a German-language newspaper and was apparently embittered by the Germans’ pacifist lethargy toward fighting the Indians.
"The Continental Congress, convinced that the ideas of political liberty were universal and communicable in any language, had no problem publishing promotional material for the Revolution in English, German, and French. However, that did not prevent John Adams from advocating standards for English and supporting the erection of a language academy. Fortunately, the Continental Congress deemed such measures inappropriate for the federal government and a threat to individual liberties. In fact, it wasn’t until 1906 that the federal government felt it could no longer be so disinterested and finally designated English proficiency as a requirement for naturalization.
"A bit surprisingly for such a symbolic gesture, Trump’s executive order does not specify “American English” as the country’s official language. Perhaps it would be difficult to determine precisely what “American English” is, but it was not at all a moot point for dictionary author Noah Webster, who believed that “as an independent nation, our honor (sic!) requires us to have a system of our own, in language as well as government.”
"Therein lie the roots of American spelling, something I was asked to repress while working in the Vatican’s Secretariat of State, the reason for which I can only suspect had something to do with a perceived American imperialism (check out the latest papal encyclical if you don’t believe me)." . . .
Daniel B. Gallagher teaches literature and philosophy at Ralston College. After serving on the papal staffs of Benedict XVI and Francis, he taught at Cornell University, the University of Notre Dame, Aquinas College, and Saint Mary’s College.
