Comments on: Reason #5387 on why Ohio is messed up

By: SERENO

SERENO — Wed, 09 Nov 2005 07:55:28 +0000

THEY WHINE AND COMPLAIN ABOUT ILLEGALS AND BORDER PATROLLING AND COURT COSTS, BUT HAVE LATINO WORKERS IN THEIR HOMES AS GARDNERS, HOUSE KEEPERS, BABYSITTERS, MECHANICS, ETC. … PISSESS ME OFF. WHETHER A LATINO LOOKS LATINO OR NOT IS NOT EXACTLY AN INTELLIGENT WAY OF DEFINING LEGAL STATUS, BUT THEN AGAIN MR. BRONSON DOESN’T SHINE VERY BRIGHTLY. IGNORING HIM DOESN’T MAKE MY SKIN CRAWL AS IT DOES ANNE. HE’S JUST THE RESULT OF THE USUAL IGNORANCE THAT SEEMS TO PERMIATE THOSE WITH INFERIORITY COMPLEXES AND TOO MUCH TIME ON THEIR HANDS….

By: irasali

irasali — Wed, 09 Nov 2005 05:53:49 +0000

he spends a lot of time speaking of the money spent on translation services. what about the money saved on cheap labor and unreported and unfiled taxes? very slanted article with the most annoying tone.

By: Julissa

Julissa — Tue, 08 Nov 2005 17:07:13 +0000

So much for journalistic integrity.

By: agustin

agustin — Tue, 08 Nov 2005 07:48:39 +0000

some things, what it comes down to, the difference between a dialect and a language is an army. although a dialect is suppossed to come out of an other language or be marked by regionalism, like the dialect of Southerners and cowboys. or like we say in the bay area, that’s hella lame what that cracker said about folks. if you still have the energy, you should still write. but i don’t even bother. if you want to reply, you should quote an encyclopedia on the distiction of language and dialect, as well as point out how a Latino includes people from Argentina, Chile (which are very European) to indigenous peoples. what this fuc.ers sometimes mean, is Mexicans and Central Americans. in all truth, this fuc.ers talk about “illegals” but for them it means mexican. tell them that if they don’t want us in this country to get the fuc. out of Mexico and the rest of Latin America, like they have been doing since this country was created.

By: elenamary

elenamary — Tue, 08 Nov 2005 03:41:07 +0000

Xolo,

I guess I am coming at this from a lingustics point of view (my bachelors was in Spanish linguistics). In terms of linguistics there is a difference between dialect and language albeit not always a clear one.

My other reason for identifying them as languages is because often we refer to dominate (in terms of numbers) languages as languages and those with less speakers as dialects. It is as if we are devaluing it as a language because less people speak it.

A rule of thumb, generally, on what is a dialect and language is whether the people can understand each other when speaking the same language. However, we know this doesn’t always work. For example there are some people in South Eastern United States whom I cannot understand at all when they speak, yet they are speaking English. And then again I sometimes can quite easily follow Italian speakers because of my Spanish. That said the languages Mr. Bronson listed where as you also noted, languages.

By: cindylu

cindylu — Tue, 08 Nov 2005 02:06:05 +0000

I have one more for inaccuracies. He mentioned something about an “English only” initiative in California. This implies that CA voters went to the polls and voted on a proposition to make English the official language. In 1998, CA voters voted on a proposition regarding bilingual education.

Again… poor excuse for a “journalist.”