I don't think Geno's gets much of the Prague cafe crowd demographic, for some reason ...

That quote from another thread got me thinking. It was about Geno's sandwich shop in Phily, and it's probably correct, after I commented that I sat in a cafe in Prague and watched one wait serving people in several diverse languages. Similarly, sitting in a resturant in Warsaw, I evesdropped on a conversation of several businessmen, one from Russia, one from Czech, one from Germany, and one from Poland, all discussing a deal they were trying to pull off. They were speaking in English, presumably because they all knew it. From time to time one of them would ask for clarification, and someone else would try to give him the matching work in his native tongue.

Elsewhere in the world, I can walk into a cafe and generally expect to be able to order a sandwich and a Coke or a capuchino, even though I only speak one language. The rest of the world has compensated for my lack of language skills by developing their own. In highly traveled cities like Prague, you can expect your wait or bartender or bell hop to speak at least two languages, but probably more. Even sidewalk hotdog stand proprietors in Prague generally speak, at a minimum, Czech, German and English, because that's what their market is.

The point, of course, is that everywhere except America, businesses cater to the needs of the market, rather than trying to change the market. In specific, of course, I'm talking about language barriers and how we deal with them.

It's not just language, either. It's everything. We want OUR culture, OUR language, and NOTHING else, ever, for any reason. And yet we also want to dictate to the world how things ought to be. How the UN should deal with everything. How different countries should manage their populations. How different regions should interact with one another.

Is it really reasonable that we insist on being the most culturally isolated and backward people in the industrialized world, and still expect everyone to hold us in high regard, and just accept that whatever we say just must be best?

Is that sane?

Good post.

It's just a reflection of the arrogance and laziness that is America. Learn another language? OOoooohhhh nooooooooooooo......that would require effort.

"YOU SPEAK ENGLISH OR GO BACK TO YOUR COUNTRAAAY!!!!":blas:

:sucks:

Most americans only speak english and that's make us naive as a superpower? I don't see what one has to do with the other?

Most americans only speak english and that's make us naive as a superpower? I don't see what one has to do with the other?

Most Americans speak only English, and have no idea what's going on in the world outside of their country, if even their side of town. THen we elect people who reflect our naive and narrow world view, for example George Bush, and expect them to be able to, by and large, rule the entire planet.

A good example of that is the attack on the Iraqis. Dick Cheney was specifically asked if Americans were ready for a long, drawn out guerilla resistance, and he said he was sure (as did Bush and Rumsfeld and the rest of them), that it wouldn't happen. If they weren't so completely clueless, they could have predicted this and planned for it, but they, reflecting so much of America, were too unaware (and seemingly proud of it) of how the culture in the Mideast would be affected by an invasion and occupation by America.

Bill Clinton didn't speak a foriegn language, but Bush mangles two.

bush wins.

People in foreign countries know English because they get a lot of English-speaking tourists with a lot of money, and speaking English makes it a lot easier to get their money. If the people in America who only speak Spanish had a lot of money, too, then American businesses would be more inclined to learn Spanish.

It has nothing to do with Dick Cheney.

It's sad for Americans because being bilingual has other advantages than just being able to communicate with other people who speak the languages you know.

That quote from another thread got me thinking. It was about Geno's sandwich shop in Phily, and it's probably correct, after I commented that I sat in a cafe in Prague and watched one wait serving people in several diverse languages. Similarly, sitting in a resturant in Warsaw, I evesdropped on a conversation of several businessmen, one from Russia, one from Czech, one from Germany, and one from Poland, all discussing a deal they were trying to pull off. They were speaking in English, presumably because they all knew it. From time to time one of them would ask for clarification, and someone else would try to give him the matching work in his native tongue.

Elsewhere in the world, I can walk into a cafe and generally expect to be able to order a sandwich and a Coke or a capuchino, even though I only speak one language. The rest of the world has compensated for my lack of language skills by developing their own. In highly traveled cities like Prague, you can expect your wait or bartender or bell hop to speak at least two languages, but probably more. Even sidewalk hotdog stand proprietors in Prague generally speak, at a minimum, Czech, German and English, because that's what their market is.

The point, of course, is that everywhere except America, businesses cater to the needs of the market, rather than trying to change the market. In specific, of course, I'm talking about language barriers and how we deal with them.

It's not just language, either. It's everything. We want OUR culture, OUR language, and NOTHING else, ever, for any reason. And yet we also want to dictate to the world how things ought to be. How the UN should deal with everything. How different countries should manage their populations. How different regions should interact with one another.

Is it really reasonable that we insist on being the most culturally isolated and backward people in the industrialized world, and still expect everyone to hold us in high regard, and just accept that whatever we say just must be best?

Is that sane?


Your implication that the proliferation of English is due to American arrogance is itself arrogant.



Ironic.

Most Americans speak only English, and have no idea what's going on in the world outside of their country, if even their side of town. THen we elect people who reflect our naive and narrow world view, for example George Bush, and expect them to be able to, by and large, rule the entire planet.

A good example of that is the attack on the Iraqis. Dick Cheney was specifically asked if Americans were ready for a long, drawn out guerilla resistance, and he said he was sure (as did Bush and Rumsfeld and the rest of them), that it wouldn't happen. If they weren't so completely clueless, they could have predicted this and planned for it, but they, reflecting so much of America, were too unaware (and seemingly proud of it) of how the culture in the Mideast would be affected by an invasion and occupation by America.Well now, isn't that special. Just because a non-american can speak more than one language doesn't mean they're any smarter than anyone else or are any less naive or have a wider world view. I think you're just creating excuses to bitch about Bush, again. Have fun, but don't expect many to pay attention to you.

I think the point the OP was trying to make has been illustrated perfectly. The general American attitude of "I'm special and I don't have to listen to you" prevails even here.
Thanks to the once mighty British empire, and the fact that the US has been a rich country lately....these are the primary reasons English is spoken all over the world. It has been the language of commerce for some time now.
The current American attitude, which is one of extreme hubris, troubles me though. A lot of what our country has achieved has been possible because many countries in the world either actively helped us, or at least chose to not hurt us. If the rest of the world becomes convinced we are worthless and arrogant, the days of the US as a superpower are over. Part of how the US became a superpower was by consent of the lesser powers.

A lot of what our country has achieved has been possible because many countries in the world either actively helped us, or at least chose to not hurt us. If the rest of the world becomes convinced we are worthless and arrogant, the days of the US as a superpower are over. Part of how the US became a superpower was by consent of the lesser powers.

Don't expect anyone to hear that. I've tried to explain that before. They don't want to hear it.


By the way, I should have pointed out that Americans aren't the only ones with this attitude that's been exemplafied by Genos. The French have the exact same cultural outlook. Try to walk into a resturant in Paris and order in English (or any other language than the local one), and you're likely to get a similar reaction. So it's not just Genos and it's supporters. There's also the French.

(Though they at least learn other languages, they just refuse to speak them).

A person who speaks more than one language may not necessarily have an advantage understanding cultural differences but it's hard to credit a person with only one language arguing that-it's like a person blind from birth discussing painting.

A person who speaks more than one language may not necessarily have an advantage understanding cultural differences but it's hard to credit a person with only one language arguing that-it's like a person blind from birth discussing painting.

Outside of that, what do you think of the question posed: Does the cultural ignorance of the American people hamper our ability to effectively predict the likely result of the policy that we force onto other peoples?

Outside of that, what do you think of the question posed: Does the cultural ignorance of the American people hamper our ability to effectively predict the likely result of the policy that we force onto other peoples?

Certainly it does...

Your assertion that American peoples have no clue what's going on in other countries is bogus. It simply isn't true. If I was inclined to learn someting about a foriegn country I could, or if I wanted to keep up in their current events I could. I would hear about it/read about it in English but that doesn't make me a fool.

America has people who speak other languages like everyone else. I don't want to waste time and monoey on learning a language I don't need to know just to accomidate a few foriegners.

What are you suggesting as a solution to your non-existant problem? Should we force high schoolers to learn two forign languages? Should we force the illegal Mexicans to learn Engliah and Russian?

It hasnt been a problem up to now,but America is developing a multilingual culture

Your assertion that American peoples have no clue what's going on in other countries is bogus. It simply isn't true. If I was inclined to learn someting about a foriegn country I could, or if I wanted to keep up in their current events I could. I would hear about it/read about it in English but that doesn't make me a fool.

America has people who speak other languages like everyone else. I don't want to waste time and monoey on learning a language I don't need to know just to accomidate a few foriegners.

What are you suggesting as a solution to your non-existant problem? Should we force high schoolers to learn two forign languages? Should we force the illegal Mexicans to learn Engliah and Russian?

Learning additional languages have benefits aside from the "accomodating foreigners" aspect.
For one thing, having useful knowledge won't kill anybody.
Additionally, in the event of brain damage to the primary language center of the brain, such as with a stroke, it might still be possible to communicate in a second language. In a sense, speaking a second language is like having some insurance in the event of common types of brain damage.
Plus, having knowledge that isn't common often leads to new and interesting job opportunities.

Learning additional languages have benefits aside from the "accomodating foreigners" aspect.
For one thing, having useful knowledge won't kill anybody.
Additionally, in the event of brain damage to the primary language center of the brain, such as with a stroke, it might still be possible to communicate in a second language. In a sense, speaking a second language is like having some insurance in the event of common types of brain damage.
Plus, having knowledge that isn't common often leads to new and interesting job opportunities.

I won't deny it.

I will deny that Americans are all mono-lingual slackasses. That's just not true.

I could personally care less about learning another language. I lived with foriegners for awhile and I had no real urge to learn anything but swearwords.

Another thing:

People who know two languages or have English as a second language speak it around you about you. They know you can't understand what their saying but you know their talking about you because you hear words like "gringo".

The more I think wbout it the more I realize foriegn people are *******s.

Learning more than one language also gives you a much better idea what "different languages" actually means. It shows you what a translation is. It can help break down prejudisms against people who don't speak your language well (because you'll be in that situation yourself), it might even make you more aware of how your language affects how you think - and so on.

Your implication that the proliferation of English is due to American arrogance is itself arrogant.



Ironic.

Excellent point.

Well now, isn't that special. Just because a non-american can speak more than one language doesn't mean they're any smarter than anyone else or are any less naive or have a wider world view. I think you're just creating excuses to bitch about Bush, again. Have fun, but don't expect many to pay attention to you.

The idea that people who are immigrants (especially illegal Mexicans) speak more than one language is ridiculous.

The fact is that most Mexicans can barely read or write their own language.

^ gross exaggeration.

The idea that people who are immigrants (especially illegal Mexicans) speak more than one language is ridiculous.

The fact is that most Mexicans can barely read or write their own language.

And how many Mexicans do you know personally? I know quite a few who can read and write quite well in both Spanish and English. Does this mean I just don't know most Mexicans? Or could it imply that you're just generalizing a whole group of people based on your prejudice?

And how many Mexicans do you know personally? I know quite a few who can read and write quite well in both Spanish and English. Does this mean I just don't know most Mexicans? Or could it imply that you're just generalizing a whole group of people based on your prejudice?

Like optimus said is was a gross generalization like the opening post is.

Anyways I know thousand of Mexicans. I started a community program to help Mexican migrants acquire skills to help them better their lives.

Yo soy puro mexicano in mi corazon.

it might even make you more aware of how your language affects how you think - and so on.

I used to think that. I used to wonder about languages with characters instead of letters, and what they mean as ideas. People are always saying a word in Arabic or Chinese has no real English definition. I don't belive that. I don't believe in any language as superior, it depends on the person and their ability to understand abstract thoughts and concepts, or foriegn concepts.

/EDIT/

I was told by a Muslim guy that there are some Arabic words that still have no definition. "Al Azif" (from Necronomicon infamy) has no real definition. Kind of funny.

I don't believe in any language as superior, it depends on the person and their ability to understand abstract thoughts and concepts, or foriegn concepts.

No this is right-one example is chivalry-we couldnt say it's defineable per se because it alludes to an elaborate code of ethics for the days of knights and feudalism-chivalry is from the word for "horse" "horsemanship" just doesn't cover it-but it's not as though it were incomprehensible-another example is algebra-to define algebra you have to teach algebra,
People knowing more than one language arent at all necessarily smarter,I speak several and this board is full of single language users that are way smarter than me..(I couldnt find al aziz,though,sorry)

Most Americans speak only English, and have no idea what's going on in the world outside of their country, if even their side of town. THen we elect people who reflect our naive and narrow world view, for example George Bush, and expect them to be able to, by and large, rule the entire planet.

A good example of that is the attack on the Iraqis. Dick Cheney was specifically asked if Americans were ready for a long, drawn out guerilla resistance, and he said he was sure (as did Bush and Rumsfeld and the rest of them), that it wouldn't happen. If they weren't so completely clueless, they could have predicted this and planned for it, but they, reflecting so much of America, were too unaware (and seemingly proud of it) of how the culture in the Mideast would be affected by an invasion and occupation by America.

I agree with you , American citizens live in their own coccon oblivious to all what is going around them . So dont be astonished when you ask an American for the geographical location of Iraq , for example , and s/he tells you it is in Africa . Put differently , Americans are easily influened by their Media , they believe anything this latter conveys . Knowing more than one lge enables you to check other sources and get in the know of many various information rathen than from one biased source .

Little known useless fact: algebra is an arabic word :l

Little known useless fact: algebra is an arabic word :l

obviously it's a muslim conspiracy...