Use of Language in Immigration

In order to dehumanize a group of people, there must first be a clear separation between who is the “us” and “them.” The conservative documentary Border War: The Battle Over Illegal Immigration (2006), takes the viewer into the lives of several people who are impacted by the growing issue of undocumented Mexican immigrants crossing the The Mexico–United States border. This film creates a one-dimensional or single conception of undocumented immigrants through the use of language, such as “illegal” or “alien” and various other combinations. Another method is through the imagery it showed while there was dialogue being said. Most of the imagery in this film creates a narrative that undocumented Mexican immigrants are violent and a threat to Americans. Additionally, the sympathizers and protesters against border reform were portrayed as anti-American radicals. The production of this documentary was not only used to direct our view of undocumented immigrants to a single account, but also to establish false truths that turn undocumented immigrants into a “them.”

The first theory to be discussed is symbolic interactionism, which can be related to the term “illegal immigration” and some of the other words that derive from this. The main idea covered and supported by this theory, is the fact that communication is based on the exchange of symbols. In a sense language, words etc. are symbols, and the terminology given to the current social problem contributes to the creation of perceptions that people have. For instance, when an average American thinks of the word “illegal immigrant” the first thing that comes to mind is a brown/Hispanic immigrant, most likely a

The wide spread communication and popularity of the three chosen candidates, Marco Rubio, Donald Trump, and Ben Carson, are especially important in this research as their policies are broadcast over many media forms and to millions of viewers. The majority of research into this subject uses a ‘big picture’ kind of immigration language, by focusing explicitly on candidates we can explore the more marked influence these words

But one prevalent issue that has continued to be the source of much controversy is immigration. Founded on immigration this issue is not new to this country. Although it’s an issue that has been around for many years the mixed sentiments directed at it have only continued to become more prevalent. This may be due to the various perspectives from which it is viewed. The way in which an issue is looked at is influenced by various factors which become evident when the issue of immigration is discussed.

In order to understand the use of the term illegal immigrant in this paper, it is necessary to understand the meaning of illegal immigration. Illegal immigration means: A foreigner who has either entered a country illegally (e.g. without inspection or proper documents) or who has violated the terms of legal admission to the country (e.g. by overstaying the duration of a tourist or student visa).

“On Political Labels” by Christopher Borick and “Four Words That Will Decide the Election” by David Green both deal with how language is used in politics. Borick’s essay is a more historical and informative of the origins of political language and key words, while Green’s essay is a game plan for the Democrats to defeat the Republicans by using their own rhetoric against them. David Green makes great points in his essay, but because of his left wing bias and his overall view of Republicans being almost idiots discredit his essay. This is because of the multiple schools of thought that aren’t taken into account for in his essay. Borick’s historical analysis of political terms gives the reader a greater understanding on the rebuttals the Democrats and Republicans can use, but his overall naïve tone on politics today makes his essay almost utopian or unrealistic. Since both essays were written before the 2012 election, they have some outdated views because of our current changing political climate. The current political climate has made the Democratic Party is leaning more European Socialist, while the Republican Party is being dominated by any reactionary movement that is prides itself on nationalism and anti-immigration rhetoric.

This, it seems, is the year of the anti-politician as far as the Republican Party is concerned. As election year rapidly approaches some of the top GOP Presidential candidates are non-politicians. The anti-establishment rhetoric is only increasing as the regular Republican voter is fed up with the path of the party, which is leading to lifetime politicians falling further behind in the polls. Two candidates in particular who have never held political office are leading one Monmouth University poll released on September 3, 2015. This poll, which was conducted nationwide, has Donald Trump leading the rest of the GOP candidates with 33% of the vote while Ben Carson is second with 18%. (MLA) Although Trump and Carson agree on some of the lingering

The subject of illegal immigration coupled with the concern of the growing number of illegal immigrants in the United States has been a long standing national debate. A single finite definition of the term “illegal immigrant” has proven difficult to specify. For the purposes of this paper, I will use the term “undocumented immigrant” defined as an individual who has “entered the United States illegally or violated the terms of their residency status” (Chan, Scott, Krishel, Bramwell, and Clark, 2006).

Republicans and Democrats have been fighting over the issue of immigration since the 1900s. Immigration has been an issue declared by both Democrats and Republicans alike over debates, elections and even the presidency. Each political party has different viewpoints of immigration and how it effects society and the U.S. as a whole. Immigration is the great division between two opinions. These two sides are: one being people that are accepting with immigrants coming in and out of the U.S., while the others say there shouldn’t be any immigrants coming to the U.S. Both parties have different stances on these issues, however, neither are as reliable as the facts.

Throughout the article, “The Framing of Immigration,” George Lakoff and Sam Ferguson hold an affirmative tone encouraging the public to view immigration not only politically, but also emotionally. The authors’ claim that today’s current debate on immigration is not fully grasping all the aspects, such as an analyzing immigrant's reasons for fleeing and how they live in America, later affecting it -- these reason must be taken into account to find an efficient solution where all countries must help to end this conflict. To emphasis their main claim they break down immigration, analyzing how they are referred to in a degrading manner, are being treated unfairly by the government in America, and encouraging readers to understand their perspective.

This paper looks at the rhetorical style of three articles regarding immigration. The article have various viewpoints and each looks at different aspects of the immigration. The articles all have in depth analysis on the topic they are covering. I will look at each article by analyzing the way the article is presented. I will try not worry about the topic, but the style of the writing and tone. Each article has characteristics of audience and rhetoric which gives them a sense of credibility.

Immigration has always been a contentious issue in the United States. Benjamin Franklin thought that an influx in German migration into the United States would flush out the predominately British culture at that time. Furthermore, a continual wave of foreign cultures began pouring into the American metropolitan areas at the turn of the 20th century. The migration of these people began a mass assimilation of cultural ideology and customs into the United States. With recent technological advancements, such as television and the internet, news and information can be widely shared concerning immigration. With the continual increase of news programs, Americans today are often bombarded with all sorts of pressing issues in today's society-

Immigration is a controversial topic that has impacted our society for decades perplexed by policies media coverage, perceptions based on one’s own lack of knowledge, personal experiences and a host of other factors that influence how our society views immigrants and immigration policies. The United States is a diverse population of people and filled with experiences that come from various walks of life that contribute to enhancing our social culture, economic development, and cultural acceptance.

Legal terms try normalized the fluidness of language. Discontent arises when these terms are perceived as to become hate speech. In the context of immigration terms such as “illegal aliens” are metaphorical attempts to cognitively grasp social discourse surrounding immigration (Cunning Ham 2). The term “illegal alien” origin is quite complex. In Impossible Subjects, Mae Ngai explains that the term is used to indicated one’s origin in a legal context. Ngai finds that the use of term “alien” is rooted in American law. Typically, the term “alien” refers to a person who is foreign to their current geographic setting but, in the United States legal system, it indicates one’s lack of citizenship (Ngai X). Discussion and debates about immigration terms rise in the 1980’s.

All my life, my mother and father has told me how hard it has been to support our families in Vietnam. The economy from here to there is so horrible that we have to support them. We're always sending at least about a million in Vietnamese money which is equal to about a hundred in American money due to the currency between America and Vietnam. Because of these two reasons, I am in favor of having better immigration process for people who come outside the US.