Nathan's Post #3: Do you speak English? vs Do you read English?

I grew up in Richmond, in a very diverse area. It was/is so diverse that when I came to William and Mary all I could think of was "wow, there are a lot of white people here". Generally speaking I have thought for most of my life that the thing that galvanized a nation is a nation's use of language. More precisely I felt that everyone speaking the same language was the most important bridge between people in the same nation. Anderson's point that there is a key distinction between print language binded national consciousness leads to this weeks question of the how does a modern nation fit into Anderson's view of printed language uniting national consciousness. Globalization and technology has made the world very small. Where it can be argued that the printing press binded nations, the internet has made print less binding and actual speech more binding to a nation. Especially in a nation like the United States printed language is not the organizing idea that binds everyone's views.

In the United States English is the predominant language most people who come here speak at least some English. The US has a high percentage of immigration so it is unrealistic to think that everyone who comes here is fluent in Enlglish, but most english as a second language immigrants can survive daily life by only knowing little conversation english. Being exposed to print media not in your native tongue is less and less likley today for many reasons. One reason is that printed media is dying, books are no longer the main way people consume information. The internet allows people who, lets say speak Spanish, to view a website that is created in English by translating it for them. Also printed media does not bind a national consciousness like it once did is because the advent of modern culture's use of images. Many English as a second language speakers can use pictures to decipher their way through everyday print. Many of my second generation Latino friend's parents can't read too well, but they usually get by pointing to pictures beside words on a menu, for example. But I can still converse with them in small ways to ask and receive simple useful information, that transfer of information is what binds the consciousness

Not to undermine Anderson on this point but that print binded the nation, but currently I dont think the binder is print. I do think that at one point in human history printed media was key to developing nations. But I think that the reason print did bind and conversation currently binds is that they allow for easy transmission of information.