Why are we supposed to pronounce Latino words as if we were Latinos? by John T. Reed

Free Special Report:
The Biggest Mistakes Real Estate Investors Make

View Cart

Featured Products

	1 year Subscription to Real Estate Investor's Monthly
	Best Practices for the Intelligent Real Estate Investor
	Succeeding
	Distressed Real Estate Times
	How to Get Started in Real Estate
Checkout
How to Order

On June 17, 2006, I attended my son Steve’s graduation from UC Santa Barbara. Our whole family was bemused and annoyed by what I thought was racist behavior by the liberal dignataries on the podium.

They read the graduates’ names in a uniform, un-noteworthy way, unless they were Latino. All Latino names were pronounced as if the dignitary were a native speaker of Latin American Spanish, complete with exaggerated Js and rolled Rs and non-pronounciation of Cs and Gs as in “Managua, Nicaragua” being pronounced as Man Nah Wa, Nee Ah RRRRRah Wah. Furthermore, whenever the name was Latino, the announcer would switch to an exaggerated, celebratory glee normally only used by a mom speaking to a toddler who did it in the toilet instead of their diaper.

Either we pronounce all foreign names as a native of the country in question would or we pronounce them all as an American would. If we go all native, Paris becomes “Paree,” Berlin becomes “Berleen,” Moscow becomes “Moskva,” and so on. All Vietnamese and Chinese names would have to be pronounced using the sing-song tones of those languages. If German, a Slavic language, Yiddish, or Hebrew were the source, the guttural KH sound would have to be exaggerated and Ws would become Vs. All Irish and Scottish names would require a brogue. Etc.

Obviously, this is silly. In fact, it would sound like some sort of comedy routine. Indeed, the situation comedy Married With Children had a recurring gag in which a Latino newswoman would begin her broadcast by saying into her hand-held mike, “This is Miranda Veracruz de la Jolla Cardinal,” complete with rolled Rs, Ls that became Ys, Js that became Hs, and all the other ruffles and flourishes employed by the UC Santa Barbara bigwigs. Here's a Youtube video.

So why do they do that only with Latino names? It’s racist. The speaker feels that Latinos have a self-esteem problem that the other ethnic groups do not, therefore they require extra cultural deference—sort of affirmative action name pronunciation.

I’ve long been bemused by the propensity of the politically correct to sanction racism when it has been instigated by “minorities.” We have a Congressional Black Caucus which excluded a white congressman the majority of whose constituents were black. We have black studies majors in colleges. But if you substitute the word “white” for “black” in any of those things—Congressional White Caucus, white studies—you get an instant, near universal hostile reaction, and appropriately so. We are individuals not racial sterotypes.

No sooner did blacks eliminate segregation at Confederate Woolworth lunch counters than they re-instituted it via black-only tables in college and high school dining halls all over America.

With one graduate, the UC Santa Barbara liberals in charge went to the other extreme. They pronounced his name it a quiet, flat, monotone: Marlon Brando, Jr. Apparently they figured he did not need the self-esteem boost those “poor, pitiful” Latinos did.

John T. Reed