3.Spanglish – slang, dialect or a future language?

There are many different linguistic opinions on Spanglish and usually not completely against or in favor of this phenomenon, however, there is an outstanding group of people who absolutely disapprove of Spanglish – people from Spain.

3.1.Linguists and their opinion on Spanglish

There are a lot of disputes about Spanglish. To decide whether Spanglish is a kind of slang, dialect or even a language, it is important to define these terms.

Language – a) is a system of signs used by the members of a language community for communication and thoughts; b) complex linguistic entity, as well as the ability of the language user to implement a certain system of signs for communication and thought (Štekauer 2000: 2)

Slang⁶ – informal language consisting of words and expressions that are not considered appropriate for formal occasions; often vituperative or vulgar

Dialect⁷ – the usage or vocabulary that is characteristic of a specific group of people (WordNet database)

Those three definitions suggest Spanglish could be considered as a dialect as it is the usage or vocabulary used by a specific group of people – Latino immigrants in the USA. However, it should be vocabulary of one language and not a combination of two languages, as in Spanglish.

The Spanglish is not taken as a language is admitted also by Stavans. He says “We are at the point in history where we have not yet come to see Spanglish as a solid, fully-recognizable language”. (qtd. in Johnson). He adds “It’s still evolving and it’s a rapid transition but I’d define it now as a proper dialect that results from the clash of Spanish and English in a variety of possibilities. Words and verbal codes are being reinvented and recognized to add up to something new. Many people in the US would still not even accept Spanglish as a description and prefer to call it something like Mexican-American.” (qtd. in Johnson)

For Roberto González Echevarría, those who speak Spanglish are mainly lower-class Hispanic people, not very literate, who use it because “they lack the vocabulary and education in Spanish to adapt to the changing culture around them” (Echevarría 1997: 1).

Jon Juaristi says openly about Spanglish “No es una lengua, sino el resultado frustrado de la tentative de hablar inglés por parte de hispanohablantes.” (“It is not a language, but it is the result of the attempts of Spanish speakers to speak English”; Juaristi 2001: 1). He adds that for that particular reason it should not be taken as a problem of Spanish, but as a problem of English (Juaristi 2001: 1).

In comparison with Echevarría’s opinion, Ilan Stavans writes that Spanglish is now moving from the state of being a language of poor Hispanics to a “farewell to the once persuasive inferiority complex that prevailed among Latinos north of Rio Grande” (Stavans 2004: 5).

Morales explains that when “Latinos became more adept at English they began to combine the two languages according to an internal rhythm that reflected at once their transplantation and their re-created homeland in the U.S.” (Morales 2002: 96) which stands in contrast with the Echaverría’s claim. He points out that it was their decision to combine the two languages, not something caused by the unsuccessful attempts to speak English properly.