[William O.]

I see you’ve taken the reality road and your points are exact with in the realm of what the U.S. stance on official languages spoken in this country. Yet Global and Multi-National business pride themselves on diversity and hiring individuals who communicate in other language forms – I gather that your business is limited your local market. The U.S. seeks to be divers in its national culture; yet, the U.S. government applications of standards are limited by the understanding of those who apply the standards. I say this to help you understand the reasoning for such a standard. There is no justification within the government for changing the national language to a multi-tongue system of communication, but that is not to say that the U.S. should not make efforts to educate is people on common languages amongst their regional neighbors. On the case of Ebonics, this deviation from the English language has merit and is no more than of the case of history repeating itself. The English language originates from base languages – Latin as one example. The change in parlance is based on the conditional affect placed on people by their peers as well as opportunities to make complex or simplify object identification. References to existing English words are no more than that and Ebonics (or slang) is no more than that. It is the impact of dialects, nuances, the need to communicate with differences, and the evolution of languages

User Detail :  

Name : William O., Gender : M, Race : Black/African American, City : Washington, State : DC, Country : United States, Education level : Over 4 Years of College, 

[Author]

Posts