The Linguist

Chartered Institute of Linguists AUTUMN 2025 The Linguist 13 FEATURES The argument is that a single official language is needed for national unity. Here is how the Order explains its motivation: "The United States is strengthened by a citizenry that can freely engage and exchange ideas in one shared language… a policy of encouraging the learning and adopting of our national language will… empower new citizens to achieve the American dream. Speaking English not only opens doors economically, but it also helps newcomers engage in their communities, participate in national traditions, and give back to our society." Well, yes. Obviously, life is more efficient and cohesive when people understand each other. And for anybody who wants to get on in life in the US, it makes sense to become proficient in the country's dominant language. But the overwhelming majority can understand each other already. English has long been the country's de facto official language. So, why proclaim it official now? We might presume the Order is intended to help the 8% of the population with limited English proficiency to learn it better. That is, after all, more than 20 million people. The Order asserts: "Establishing English as the official language will not only streamline communication but also reinforce shared national values, and create a more cohesive and efficient society." No, it won't. Merely decreeing that a particular language is the official one won't make people magically able to understand it. What is to be done to help those 20+ million people? Nothing. In fact, even less than before. The only substantive element in the Order is to revoke an earlier one from the Clinton era that required government agencies in receipt of federal funding to provide assistance to those with limited ability in English (e.g. interpreting, translation, signage, multilingual documents). The new Order does not actually prohibit federal agencies from offering services in other languages (to do so would probably contravene aspects of the constitution); it only relieves them of the obligation to do so. However, several federal agencies have already been required to alter their website texts regarding matters of diversity and inclusion. There is going to be pressure on these agencies to withdraw their language services too, and it would be popular with those who see the current provision as a waste of money. Individual state bodies may find themselves pressured to follow suit. The effects could be disastrous. For people with limited English ability, things like school registration, driver's licence applications, testifying in court, reporting crimes, access to healthcare services, access to information in emergency situations and voting registration would become more difficult, even impossible. These people would (to use the words of the Order) "engage in their communities" and "participate in national traditions" less than they do now. The only communities in which they would be able to participate would be ghettoised ones. In this way, the withdrawal of these services would have the opposite effect to the unifying one purportedly intended. It is to be hoped, therefore, that the Order turns out to have only a symbolic effect. In California, for example, which adopted official English in 1986, it is still possible to take your driving test in any of 32 different languages. But even in this best case scenario, the Order will still have socially divisive effects. It means that people whose social status in most cases is already low are positioned even lower. They no longer have the right to assistance with participation in everyday public life; instead, they have become supplicants for this assistance, dependent on the grace and favour of the agencies who (might) provide it. So, we return to the question: why did Trump bother with the Order? The answer, sadly, is that it chimes with his anti-immigrant agenda. In a speech earlier this year, he derided immigrants who speak "languages that nobody has ever heard of", adding that "it's a horrible thing". The Order panders to a section of the anglophone American population who feel threatened, even offended, when they see or hear other languages around them. Some feel especially phobic about Spanish, which is used at home by around 14% of the population. In a presidential candidates' debate in 2015 Trump asserted: "This is a country where we speak English, not Spanish." To oppose the two languages in this way is indicative of a fundamental misconception about language and languages. Linguistic ability is not a matter of either/or. Around 50 million people in the US speak both English and Spanish well. Unfortunately, though, this monolingualist ideology – the assumption that proficiency in language X is an obstacle to proficiency in language Y – is quite widespread throughout the anglophone world. It is a belief that flies in the face of reality. What's more, research has consistently found that plurilingual ability is good both for individuals themselves and for society. In this political context, Trump's assertion can be seen as a declaration that Americans should not speak Spanish. It is here that the truly insidious nature of his Order lies. Its text encourages the 'adopting' of English which, given the context, can be interpreted as code for giving up your own language. That is certainly how some people in authority have seen it. They take the monolingualist belief further, assuming that if one language is ordained as the one you should use, you shouldn't ever use another. In this century, in parts of the US with laws designating English as official, there have been cases of school pupils getting into trouble for speaking another language – not during class, but merely on school premises. Trump's Order finishes with a reference to it being 'implemented'. But as it contains no provision for any implementation, it is easy to imagine that those who are upset when they hear other languages being used will take it as an opportunity to indulge in a bit of ad hoc implementing themselves, by demanding that only English be used in public/communal spaces, that non-English signage be removed, and that local government documents appear only in English. A person seen or heard to be using another language will open themselves up to the accusation of being 'un-American'. Trump's Order further marginalises, and may well stigmatise, those not already fluent in English. It will lead to further divisions and antagonisms in American society – and inefficiency. A longer version of this article first appeared in the summer 2025 issue of Babel: The language magazine. The withdrawal of these services would have the opposite effect to the unifying one purportedly intended

• Cover