Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

In the context of U.S. bilingual education, language restrictionism is defined as systematic efforts to stop a linguistic or ethnic group of people from speaking, learning, or maintaining their native or home language. In the United States, language restrictionism has been justified under the banner of promoting national unity, ensuring the homogeneity of the citizenry, or as a means of “Americanizing” immigrants or native peoples. Learning and using the English language is usually considered the defining characteristic of “Americanism.”

Many scholars agree that a restrictive period of language policy lasted from the 1880s through the 1960s. James Crawford, in his book Educating English Learners, provides what may be the most comprehensive overview of the history of language restrictionism in the United States, as expressed in attitudes and policies restricting bilingual education. This entry draws from his work and that of others who have looked into this peculiarly American idea.

Although the founding fathers never selected an official language for the new nation, restricting the use of languages in public places, especially in schooling, is documented as early as the mid-17th century. Benjamin Franklin was perhaps the most notable personality who promoted language restrictionism. He opened an English-only parochial school for native German-speaking children in the 1750s. When parents realized that the school's emphasis was imposing a language shift away from German, they removed their children and withdrew political support for Franklin. In 1780, John Adams also proposed opening an English-only school, but his request was ignored by the Continental Congress, probably because the support of German-speaking colonists was vital to the nation-building effort that lay ahead.

Terrence Wiley, in a book chapter titled “Accessing Language Rights in Education,” provides a history of educational language policy in the United States. In it, he identifies the groups against whom language restrictionism has been aimed historically: immigrants, including refugees, enslaved peoples, and indigenous peoples. He and others have argued that language restrictions targeting minority populations are directly and indirectly associated with social, political, economic, and educational policy debates. Further, presumed social hostility against certain populations resonates in the degree of restrictiveness against a language and the impact of restrictions on that population.

Enslaved Peoples

Often language restrictionism results in the emergence of new or altered languages as speakers resist restrictions on their native languages, chiefly the inability to study the conventional form of their languages in school. Language restrictionism, on the one hand, and powerlessness on the other are part of the explanation for how plantation owners exerted dominance over large slave populations in places where African slaves outnumbered Whites. Linguists such as John Baugh have presented the theory that African American Vernacular English (AAVE, sometimes called “Black English” or Ebonics) emerged because (a) slaves from different language backgrounds were forced to find means of communication, and (b) educational apartheid in the United States denied access to English language and literacy development for African Americans. In the case of language restrictionism aimed at African American slaves, compulsory ignorance laws barred access to literacy until 1865. Compulsory ignorance refers to the practice whereby slaves were prevented from speaking their own tongues, but also prevented from learning English. In some slaveholding states, Whites were punished if they were found teaching slaves to read and write. Even after the last laws against compulsory ignorance were voided in 1918, however, equal access to education for African Americans was not provided. In 1896, Plessy v. Ferguson upheld the “separate but equal” doctrine that further restricted access to schooling and to the language of schooling for 50 years, until it was overturned by Brown v. Board of Education in 1954. Baugh and others have documented anecdotal recollections that point to the gate-keeping structures that limit access to native speakers.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading