Essay on We Really Monolingual?
The article Are We Really Monolingual? written by Michael Erard discusses one of the most interesting issues in our society –monolingualism and multilingualism in the United States. The author of the article tries to find out whether the average Americans are monolingual or multilingual. The main argument of Michael Erard is that most Americans speak more than one language. The ideological assumptions of the author include several significant statements. First of all, the widespread assumption is that few Americans can speak more than one language in comparison with the representatives of other nations. The reason is that most Americans are not interested in learning other languages. English is an international language of communication which is learned in all countries of the world. However, the author does not agree with this statement. The second vital assumption is that many Americans can speak some other languages than English because they had an opportunity to learn other language at school, at work, or at university, or as hobby by means of computer software.
In order to forward the argument in the article, the author uses several rhetorical strategies. First of all, Michael Erard uses logic in order to persuade his readers. He tries to find as much explanations as possible. He refers to the data represented by the United States Census Bureau, but he criticizes it because the question that indicates the number of multilingual speakers in the United States is not correct. Moreover, Michael Erard refers to some other sources and specialists who have already studies the issue. For example, he refers to the Oxford linguist Suzanne Romaine who believes that “bilingualism and multilingualism “are a normal and unremarkable necessity of everyday life for the majority of the world’s population” (Erard). Also, the author of the article refers to the Stockholm University linguist Mikael Parkvall who has investigated the data on global bilingualism and who find out that 80% of people on our planet speak 1.69 languages. It means that the average person on our planet is bilingual.
In addition, Michael Erard uses pathos that makes an appeal to the readers’ emotions. This communication technique is represented by the use of metaphors, rhetorical questions and by general emotion of the speech. The author of the article tries to make the readers respond emotionally to the issue and to identify with his own point of view.
The author’s argument is convincing and rather effective because Michael Erard uses sufficient grounds and backing. However, he creates several logical fallacies. For example, he creates a fallacy of destruction because the issue discussed in the article is not known to be true, and it can be assumed to be false. Michael Erard writes: “There are countless Americans who speak languages other than English outside their homes…None of the above are identified as bilingual by the Census Bureau’s question” (Erard). The other fallacy is causal fallacy oversimplification. Michael Erard writes: “After all, the bureau’s primary goal in asking this question is not to paint a full and complete portrait of the language proficiencies of Americans but rather to track immigrants’ integration into mainstream American society and to ascertain what services they need, and in what languages”. One more fallacy that is found in the article is appeal to ignorance. The author writes that “Multilinguals may outnumber monolinguals, but it’s not clear by how much”.
