Immigrants’s adoption of English as their primary language is one measure of assimilation into the larger United States society. Generally languages define social groups and provide justification for social structures. Hnece, a distinctive language sets a cultural group off from the dominant language group. Throughout United States history this pattern has resulted in one consisitent, unhappy consequence, discrimination against members of the cultural minority. Language differences provide both a way to rationalize subordination and a ready means for achieving it.
　　Traditionally, English has replaced the native language of immigrant groups by the second or third generation. Some characteristics of today’s Spanish-speaking population, however, suggest the possibility of a departure from this historical pattern. Many families retain ties in Latin America and move back and forth between their present and former communities. This "revolving door" phenomenon, along with the high probability of additional immigrants from the south, means that large Spanish-speaking communities are likely to exist in the United States for the indefinite future.
　　This expectation underlies the call for national support for bilingual education in Spanish-speaking sommunities’ public schools. Bilingual education can serve different purposes, however. In the 1960s, such programs were established to facilitate the learning of English so as to avoid disadvantaging children in their other subjects because of their limited English. More recently, many advocates have viewed bilingual education as a means to maintain children’s native languages and cultures. The issue is important for people with different political agendas, from absorption at one pole to separation at the other.
　　To date, the evaluations of bilingual education’s impact on learning have been inconclusive. The issue of bilingual education has, nevertheless, served to unite the leadership of the nation’s Hispanic communities. Grounded in concerns about status that are directly traceable to the United States history of discrimination against Hispanics, the demand for maintenance of the Spanish language in the schools is an assertion of the worth of a people and their culture. If the United States is truly a multicultural nation--that is, if it is one culture reflecting the contribution of many--this demand should be seen as a demand not for separation but for inclusion.
　　More direct efforts to force inclusion can be misguided. For example,movements to declare English the official language do not truly advance the cohesion of a multicultural nation. They alienate the twenty million people who do not speak English as their mother tongue. They are unnecessary since the public’s business is already conducted largely in English. Further, given the present state of understanding about the effects of bilingual education on learning, it would be unwise to require the universal use of English. Finally, it is for parents and local communities to choose the path they will follow, including how much of their culture they want to maintain for their children.
　　译文：
　　让英语成为移民的第一语言是将他们同化进入美国主流社会的手段之一。通常，语言不仅定义（不同的）社会团体，而且给社会结构的划分提供理由。因此，一种不同的语言将一个文化团体从讲主导语言的团体中区别开来。纵观美国历史，这样的模式导致了长期的、不让人愉快的结果--对文化少数派的歧视。语言的差别不仅使奴役合法化，而且提供了一条奴役的途径。
　　从传统上来看，移民群体中英语取代原有语言开始于第二三代。但是如今，讲西班牙语的人口中的一些特点显示了偏离这一传统模式的可能性。许多家庭与拉美保持着联系，往返于他们目前的和先前的社区。这种往返现象，随之而来的很有可能是更多的来自南方的移民，二者说明讲西班牙语的社区很有可能在相当长的时间里存在于美国社会。
　　这样的预测解释了呼吁国家支持西班牙语社区公共学校中的双语教育。然而，双语教育也许是出于不同的目的。在20世纪60年代，这样的项目是为了推进英语教育，防止学生由于英语不好而学不好其他科目。最近，许多支持者认为双语教育是保持孩子们本族语言和文化的手段。这件事情对有不同政治主张的人来说很重要，从一个角度上来说是融合，从另一个角度上来讲又是隔离。
　　迄今为止，关于双语教育对学习的影响众说纷纭，莫衷一是。不过，双语教育凝聚了美国西班牙语社区的领导力。考虑到历史上直接可见的歧视西班牙裔的状况，要求在学校保留西班牙语是对一个民族和一种文化的认定。如果美国确实是文化多元化的国家，也就是说，如果它的文化反映了许多种文化的贡献，那么，这种要求就应当被看做是为了融合而不是隔离。
　　更多直接促进融合的努力也许是不正确的。比如，推进英语为官方语言的运动实际上没有真正促进一个文化多元化国家的融合。这些运动隔离了两千万英语非母语的人。这些运动也没有必要，因为公共事务的处理大多数是用英语进行。进一步讲，考虑到目前对双语教育给学习带来的效果的理解，要求全民使用英语是不明智的。最后，应该由父母和社区自己来选择他们的道路，包括他们想要给他们的孩子保存多少文化。
　　总结：主要讲的是美国西班牙语社区双语教育的问题
　　第一段：语言是同化的重要手段。
　　第二段：讲西班牙语的社区将会长期存在于美国。
　　第三段：双语教育既融合又隔离。
　　第四段：双语教育的效果众说纷纭，从历史的角度看，是融合而不是隔离。