Mckay and Bokhorst chapter 4 and Farr and Song

As I was reading the book and the article I just had this recurring question of why are people in some way shape or form force to abandon their mother tongue in other to be proficiency in English. Or why it is that people are punish for speaking their mother tongue?  Throughout this week’s reading I felt like I was seeing people being force to do just that. Starting in Singapore with the annual speak mandarin campaign, which encouraged Chinese Singaporeans to replaces to use of dialect with Mandarin. And I just thought that this was outrageous, the campaign was not encouraging people to adopt or practice Mandarin it was asking them to completely replace their dialect language. And this same concept just about happens in other countries.  The other thing that also shocked me was the question of why people were getting penalized for using their mother language. For example the book mentioned the two nurses that were reprimanded for using Tagalog in the hospital. I just ask myself what sense does that make.  Why would someone not be able to communicate in their language of choice? The book continued with saying that the mayor of Monterey Park opposed gifts from the Chinese books store to the city library because “if people want foreign language (books) they can go (buy it) on their own (100). And in my head I am wondering what the logic behind refusing the gifts. To me, it seems like the issue on language has become such a big problem. We have gone as far as refusing students to communicate in their language in class, at work, and now in public domains. And I wonder what is so special about English that certain countries would go as far as forcing their citizens to abandon their dialects? Why is there a growing idea that English is the only acceptable language in the classroom? I feel like we are so preoccupied with certain things(such English only) that we do not have to chance to see how this impact children and their view on their language and culture. Telling someone that their language in not acceptable in the class or only using their language in “derision” circumstances only makes them feel as if they are not important. It encourages people to reject their own language to pursuit that which is more accepted in the community. The article by Farr and song just about took the words out of my mouth when it comes to language and the reason behind certain actions, “In order to deal most effectively with multiplicity of language ideologies in the classroom, we must first understand them” (651). I fell like too often teachers are too busy saying no that they don’t take the time to understand and pay attention to what is actually happening. This kind of behavior and attitude affect student. But all these issue stem from language policy and the impact it has on everyone.  Language policy not only affects those at the macro level on national language planning it also affect those at the micro level. Language policies go as far as impacting what kind of language people use in the community and at home.