American Community Survey Reports

U.S. Department of Commerce

Economics and Statistics Administration

U.S. CENSUS BUREAU

U S C E N S U S B U R E A U

Helping You Make Informed Decisions

Language Use in the United States: 

2007 Issued April 2010

ACS-12

By

Hyon B. Shin

and 

Robert A. Kominski

INTRODUCTION

This report provides information on the number and 

characteristics of people 

in the United States in 

2007 who spoke a language other than English 

at home. While the vast 

majority of the population 5 years old and over 

in the United States spoke 

only English at home (80 

percent), the population 

speaking a language other 

than English at home has 

increased steadily for 

the last three decades. 

The number of speakers 

increased for many nonEnglish languages, but not 

all. This changing landscape of speakers of nonEnglish languages in the 

United States is highlighted 

in this report.

Data from the 2007 American 

Community Survey (ACS) are used 

to describe the language use of the 

U.S. population aged 5 and over. 

Responses to language and Englishspeaking ability questions that were 

historically collected once every 10 

years in the decennial census are now 

captured every year in the ACS. As 

Appendix A (at the end of this report) 

shows, questions about language have 

varied greatly over time. Since the 

1980 decennial census, however, the 

same series of three questions has 

been used in U.S. Census Bureau data 

collections (see Figure 1). The fi rst 

question pertains to everyone 5 years 

old and over. It asks if the person 

speaks a language other than English 

at home. A person who responds “yes” 

to this question is then asked to report 

the language. The Census Bureau 

codes these responses into 381 detailed 

languages. The third question asks 

“how well” that person speaks English, 

with answer categories of “very well,” 

“well,” “not well,” and “not at all.”

Data on speakers of languages other 

than English and on their Englishspeaking ability provide more than 

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2007 American Community Survey.

Figure 1.

Reproduction of the Questions on 

Language From the 2007 American 

Community Survey
2 U.S. Census Bureau

Four Major Language Groups

Spanish includes Spanish, Spanish Creole, and Ladino.

Other Indo-European languages include most languages of Europe and the Indic languages of 

India. These include the Germanic languages, such as German, Yiddish, and Dutch; the Scandinavian 

languages, such as Swedish and Norwegian; the Romance languages, such as French, Italian, and 

Portuguese; the Slavic languages, such as Russian, Polish, and Serbo-Croatian; the Indic languages, such 

as Hindi, Gujarati, Punjabi, and Urdu; Celtic languages; Greek; Baltic languages; and Iranian languages.

Asian and Pacifi c Island languages include Chinese; Korean; Japanese; Vietnamese; Hmong; Khmer; 

Lao; Thai; Tagalog or Pilipino; the Dravidian languages of India, such as Telugu, Tamil, and Malayalam; 

and other languages of Asia and the Pacifi c, including the Philippine, Polynesian, and Micronesian 

languages.

All Other languages include Uralic languages, such as Hungarian; the Semitic languages, such as 

Arabic and Hebrew; languages of Africa; native North American languages, including the American 

Indian and Alaska native languages; and indigenous languages of Central and South America.

Table 1. 

Population 5 Years and Older Who Spoke a Language Other Than English at Home by 

Language Group and English-Speaking Ability: 2007

(For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, and definitions, see www.census.gov/acs/www/) 

Characteristic

Total people

English-speaking ability

Very well Well Not well Not at all

NUMBER

 Population 5 years and older ..................... 280,950,438 (X) (X) (X) (X)

Spoke only English at home ........................ 225,505,953 (X) (X) (X) (X)

Spoke a language other than English at home .......... 55,444,485 30,975,474 10,962,722 9,011,298 4,494,991

Spoke a language other than English at home........ 55,444,485 30,975,474 10,962,722 9,011,298 4,494,991

Spanish or Spanish Creole ........................ 34,547,077 18,179,530 6,322,170 6,344,110 3,701,267

Other Indo-European languages ................... 10,320,730 6,936,808 2,018,148 1,072,025 293,749

Asian and Pacific Island languages ................. 8,316,426 4,274,794 2,176,180 1,412,264 453,188

Other languages ................................ 2,260,252 1,584,342 446,224 182,899 46,787

PERCENT

 Population 5 years and older ..................... 100.0 (X) (X) (X) (X)

Spoke only English at home ........................ 80.3 (X) (X) (X) (X)

Spoke a language other than English at home .......... 19.7 55.9 19.8 16.3 8.1

Spoke a language other than English at home........ 100.0 55.9 19.8 16.3 8.1

Spanish or Spanish Creole ........................ 62.3 52.6 18.3 18.4 10.7

Other Indo-European languages ................... 18.6 67.2 19.6 10.4 2.8

Asian and Pacific Island languages ................. 15.0 51.4 26.2 17.0 5.4

Other languages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1 70.1 19.7 8.1 2.1

(X) Not applicable.

Note: Margins of error for all estimates can be found in Appendix Table 1 at <www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/language 

/appendix.html>. For more information on the ACS, see <www.census.gov/acs/www/>.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2007 American Community Survey.
U.S. Census Bureau 3

just an interesting portrait of a 

changing nation. Routinely, these 

data are used in a wide variety of 

legislative, policy, and research 

applications. Legal, fi nancial, and 

marketing decisions regarding 

language-based issues all rely on 

information that begins with data 

on non-English language use and 

English-speaking ability.1

Table 1 provides some basic 

information from the 2007 ACS 

about speakers of non-English 

languages and their Englishspeaking ability. Of 281.0 million 

people aged 5 and over, 55.4 

million people (20 percent of this 

population) spoke a language other 

than English at home. While the 

Census Bureau codes 381 detailed 

languages, data tabulations are 

not generally available for all of 

these detailed groups. Instead, the 

Census Bureau collapses languages 

into smaller sets of “language 

groups.” The simplest collapse 

uses four major groups: Spanish; 

Other Indo-European languages; 

Asian and Pacifi c Island languages; 

and All Other languages. These 

four groups are further explained in 

the text box.

Of the 55.4 million people who 

spoke a language other than 

English at home, 62 percent 

spoke Spanish (34.5 million 

speakers), 19 percent spoke an 

Other Indo-European language 

(10.3 million speakers), 15 percent 

spoke an Asian and Pacifi c Island 

language (8.3 million speakers), 

and 4 percent spoke an Other 

language (2.3 million speakers). 

The majority of speakers across 

all four of these major language 

groups reported speaking English 

1 Self-reported data on English-speaking 

ability have demonstrated the measure to be 

highly reliable and usable. See “How Good 

Is How Well? An Examination of the Census 

English-Speaking Ability Question,” <http://

www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo

/lang_use.html>.

“very well.” The percentage of 

these groups reporting an Englishspeaking ability of “very well” 

ranged from around 50 percent of 

Asian and Pacifi c Island language 

speakers to 70 percent of speakers 

in the Other language group.

People speaking at a level below 

the “very well” category are thought 

to need English assistance in some 

situations.2 Around 24.5 million 

people reported their Englishspeaking ability as something 

below “very well” (that is, “well,” 

“not well,” or “not at all”). Higher 

percentages of people needing 

English assistance were present for 

speakers of Spanish (47 percent) 

and Asian and Pacifi c Island 

languages (49 percent) than among 

Other Indo-European languages 

(33 percent) or Other languages 

(30 percent).

FINDINGS

Characteristics of People 

Speaking a Language Other 

Than English at Home

While the majority of people spoke 

only English at home, important 

diff erences exist across some 

social characteristics. Figures 2a 

to 2c show the number of people 

speaking a language other than 

English at home for the four major 

language groups by Englishspeaking ability by age, nativity, 

and educational attainment. 

Figure 2a shows that the group 

aged 41 to 64 had the largest 

number of English-only speakers 

(78.3 million), compared to 42.3 

million speakers aged 5 to 17, 

72.4 million speakers aged 18 to 

40, and 32.6 million speakers aged 

65 and over. Conversely, foreignlanguage speakers numbered 10.9 

million (21 percent) among 5 to 17 

year olds, 23.1 million (24 percent) 

2 For example, the Voting Rights Act of 

1965 uses these criteria to determine the 

need for bilingual election materials.

among 18 to 40 year olds, 16.1 

million (17 percent) among 41 

to 64 year olds, and 5.3 million 

(14 percent) among older people. 

Across the four major language 

groups, a disproportionately large 

number and proportion of all 

people who spoke a language other 

than English at home were those 

aged 18 to 40 who spoke Spanish. 

Among all 55.4 million speakers of 

non-English languages, 15.3 million 

(28 percent) met this description. 

About half of speakers of nonEnglish languages also reported 

that they did not speak English 

“very well.” The proportion of 

older Spanish speakers who 

reported lower levels of Englishspeaking ability, however, was even 

higher—57 percent of people 41 

to 64 years old and 65 percent of 

Spanish speakers 65 years old and 

over reported their English-speaking 

ability as less than “very well.”

Figure 2b focuses on the nativeborn and foreign-born status of 

individuals. This fi gure shows that 

among Spanish speakers, nearly as 

many were native born as foreign 

born (17.0 million compared to 17.5 

million). This is not the case for the 

other three language groups —all 

three had more foreign born. 

Spanish speakers who were foreign 

born were more likely to speak 

English less than “very well” than 

native-born Spanish speakers 

(73 percent compared to 21 

percent). Among the remaining 

three groups, the foreign-born 

Asian and Pacifi c Island language 

group was the only one where 

those speaking English less than 

“very well” outnumbered those 

speaking “very well.”

Of those speakers of a non-English 

language who were foreign-born, 

12.6 million were citizens and 

19.3 million were noncitizens. 
4 U.S. Census Bureau

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2007 American Community Survey.

Native

 born

Naturalized citizen

Not a citizen

“Very well”

Spanish

Other Indo-European languages

Asian and Pacific Island languages

All Other languages

Less than

“very well”

 

Major Language Groups and English-Speaking Ability by Nativity and Citizenship: 2007

(Population 5 years and older, in millions. For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, 

and definitions, see www.census.gov/acs/www/)

 

Figure 2b.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2007 American Community Survey.

65 years

and older

0.9 0.3 1.2

2.7 1.0 3.6

2.0 1.3 3.2

0.7 0.3 1.0

0.3 0.1 0.4

1.24 0.3 1.5

 5.8 2.1 7.9

42.3

32.6

0.8 1.5 2.3

1.0 0.8 1.8

0.3 0.7 0.9

0.1 0.1 0.2

41 to 64

years

18 to 40

years

5 to 17

years

1.2 1.8 3.0

0.5 0.2 0.7

3.9 5.1 9.0

78.3

72.4

2.1 1.3 3.4

Major Language Groups and English-Speaking Ability by Age: 2007

(Population 5 years and older, in millions. For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, 

and definitions, see www.census.gov/acs/www/)

 

Figure 2a.

7.7 7.7 15.3

“Very well”

English only

Spanish

Other Indo-European languages

Asian and Pacific Island languages

All Other languages

Less than

“very well”

 3.3 0.6 3.9

0.7 0.1 0.9

1.4 0.3 1.7

13.4 3.6 17.0

2.6 10.0 12.6

1.6 1.4 3.0

1.1 1.8 2.9

0.4 0.3 0.7

1.7 1.9 3.6

0.5 0.2 0.7

2.1 2.7 4.9

2.0 1.4 3.4

Foreign

born

4.7 12.8 17.5

3.6 2.8 6.4

2.9 3.7 6.6

0.8 0.5 1.4
U.S. Census Bureau 5

12th grade education, high school 

graduate, some college experience, 

and a bachelor’s degree or more. 

Most Spanish speakers 25 years 

old and over had not completed 

high school (41 percent)—a larger 

percentage than for the other three 

major language groups (15 percent 

for Other Indo-European language 

and 17 percent for both Asian and 

Pacifi c Island language speakers 

and for Other language speakers). 

Conversely, while the college 

completion level (bachelor’s degree 

or more) for the three non-Spanish 

language groups ranged from 34 

to 45 percent, only 14 percent of 

the Spanish-speaking population 

attained this level of education.

For all four language groups, those 

who had not completed high school 

had larger proportions of speakers 

with limited English-speaking ability 

than for those who reported speaking English “very well.” In addition, 

individuals who were high school 

graduates and also spoke Asian 

and Pacifi c Island languages had a 

higher proportion speaking English 

less than “very well.”3

Languages Spoken in the 

United States: A Historical Look

As Appendix A shows, census 

questions about language have 

varied over the years. In some 

censuses, questions were asked 

of “mother tongue” (the language 

spoken in the household when the 

respondent was growing up) or 

were asked only of the foreign-born 

population. Since the 1980 census, 

however, the same three questions 

have been asked of everyone aged 

5 and over in the household. 

Table 2 provides a detailed list of 

17 diff erent languages spoken in 

the home for the period 1980 to 

2007.4 This list provides data for 

only those languages that were 

available in all four time periods. 

Table 2 shows the growth of some 

languages since 1980 as well 

as the real and relative decline 

of others. In 1980, 23.1 million 

3 For people 25 years old and over who 

were not high school graduates, those who 

spoke Other Indo-European languages “very 

well” (38.9 percent) was not statistically 

diff erent from those who spoke All Other 

languages “very well” (37.6 percent). Reciprocally, those who spoke less than “very well” 

for both languages were not statistically different from each other (61.1 percent and 62.4 

percent, respectively). 4 Data from 1980, 1990, and 2000 are 

from decennial censuses, whereas the data 

from 2007 come from the 2007 American 

Community Survey. For more information 

about language use and English-speaking 

ability diff erences between the census and 

the American Community Survey, read 

“Comparison of the Estimates on Language 

Use and English-Speaking Ability from the 

ACS, the C2SS, and Census 2000 (Report).” 

This report can be accessed at <http://

www.census.gov/acs/www/Downloads

/Language_Comparison_Report_2008-03

.doc>. Corresponding tables are accessible at 

<http://www.census.gov/acs/www

/Downloads/Language_Comparison

_Tables_2008-03.xls>.

Foreign-born Spanish speakers 

were more likely to be noncitizens 

than any of the three other groups 

(72 percent compared to 46 

percent of Other Indo-European 

speakers, 45 percent of Asian and 

Pacifi c Island speakers, and 51 

percent of All Other speakers). 

In addition, a much larger number 

and proportion of foreign-born 

Spanish speakers who were not 

citizens reported speaking English 

less than “very well” (79 percent), 

more than any other language 

group, whether citizen or not.

Figure 2c shows the four major 

language groups and the Englishspeaking ability of their members 

by four levels of educational 

attainment for the population 

25 years old and over: less than a 

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2007 American Community Survey.

Major Language Groups and English-Speaking 

Ability by Educational Attainment: 2007

(Population 25 years and older, in millions. For information on confidentiality 

protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, and definitions, 

see www.census.gov/acs/www/)

Figure 2c.

Bachelor’s

degree

or more

0.1 0.9 1.1

1.0 0.8 1.8

0.3 0.9 1.2

0.2 0.2 0.4

0.1 0.2 0.3

0.54 0.8 1.4

 1.9 7.3 9.2

2.1 0.9 3.0

2.4 0.8 3.1

1.8 1.1 2.9

0.4 0.1 0.5

Some

college, or

associate’s

degree

High school

graduate

Less than

12th grade

0.6 0.6 1.2

0.3 0.1 0.4

2.8 1.3 4.1 78.3

1.1 0.5 1.6

2.8 3.2 6.0 72.4

“Very well”

Spanish

Other Indo-European languages

Asian and Pacific Island languages

All Other languages

Less than

“very well”
6 U.S. Census Bureau

in Table 3. In 2007, seven of 

these languages had more than 

a million speakers. With 34.5 

million speakers, Spanish was by 

far the most commonly spoken 

non-English language. Chinese 

was the only other detailed 

language with at least 2 million 

speakers. Even at this detailed 

level, however, there were still fi ve 

other specifi c languages with over 

a million speakers: French, Tagalog, 

Vietnamese, German, and Korean.

The English-speaking ability of the 

speakers of these specifi c language 

groups varied greatly; in some 

cases, certain groups reported 

speakers with higher levels of 

English-speaking ability, while other 

groups had speakers who were less 

adept with English. Some groups, 

speakers (50 percent decline). It is 

now the ninth-ranked language 

on the list of languages other 

than English spoken at home. 

Other languages, such as Polish, 

Yiddish, and Greek, also had large 

proportionate decreases. While 

increased immigration led to 

gains for some language groups, 

other groups experienced aging 

populations and dwindling migrant 

fl ows into the United States. 

Languages Spoken in the 

United States

Most of the detailed language 

information the Census Bureau 

provides uses a list of 39 individual 

languages and language groups. 

These 39 languages and the 

respective English-speaking ability 

of their speakers are detailed 

people spoke a language other 

than English at home, compared 

to 55.4 million people in 2007 

(a 140 percent increase, during 

which the U.S. population grew 

34 percent). The largest numeric 

increase was for Spanish speakers 

(23.4 million more in 2007 than in 

1980). Vietnamese speakers had 

the largest percentage increase 

(511 percent). Eight languages 

more than doubled during the 

period, including four that had 

fewer than 200,000 speakers in 

1980: Russian, Persian, Armenian, 

and Vietnamese.

Some languages declined since 

1980. Italian, the second-most 

frequently spoken non-English 

language in 1980 (after Spanish), 

had a net decline of about 800,000 

Table 2. 

Languages Spoken at Home: 1980, 1990, 2000, and 2007

(For information on confi dentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, and defi nitions, see www.census.gov/acs/www/) 

Characteristic

1980 1990 2000 2007

Percentage 

change 

1980–2007

 Population 5 years and older . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210,247,455 230,445,777 262,375,152 280,950,438 33.6 

Spoke only English at home . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187,187,415 198,600,798 215,423,557 225,505,953 20.5

Spoke a language other than English at home1 . . . . . . 23,060,040 31,844,979 46,951,595 55,444,485 140.4

Spoke a language other than English at home2  . . . . 23,060,040 31,844,979 46,951,595 55,444,485 140.4 

 Spanish or Spanish Creole . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,116,194 17,345,064 28,101,052 34,547,077 210.8

 French (incl. Patois, Cajun, Creole) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,550,751 1,930,404 2,097,206 1,984,824 28.0

 Italian . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,618,344 1,308,648 1,008,370 798,801 –50.6

 Portuguese or Portuguese Creole . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 351,875 430,610 564,630 687,126 95.3

 German . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,586,593 1,547,987 1,383,442 1,104,354 –30.4

 Yiddish . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 315,953 213,064 178,945 158,991 –49.7

 Greek . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 401,443 388,260 365,436 329,825 –17.8

 Russian . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173,226 241,798 706,242 851,174 391.4

 Polish . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 820,647 723,483 667,414 638,059 –22.2

 Serbo-Croatian . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150,255 70,964 233,865 276,550 84.1

 Armenian . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100,634 149,694 202,708 221,865 120.5

 Persian . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106,992 201,865 312,085 349,686 226.8

 Chinese . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 630,806 1,319,462 2,022,143 2,464,572 290.7

 Japanese . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 336,318 427,657 477,997 458,717 36.4

 Korean . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266,280 626,478 894,063 1,062,337 299.0

 Vietnamese . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197,588 507,069 1,009,627 1,207,004 510.9

 Tagalog . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 474,150 843,251 1,224,241 1,480,429 212.2

1 The languages highlighted in this table are the languages for which data were available for the four time periods: 1980, 1990, 2000, and 

2007.

2 The total does not match the sum of the 17 languages listed in this table because the total includes all the other languages that are not highlighted here. 

Note: Margins of error for all estimates can be found in Appendix Table 2 at <www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/language

/appendix.html>. For more information on the ACS, see <www.census.gov/acs/www/>.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 1980 and 1990 Census, Census 2000, and 2007 American Community Survey. 
U.S. Census Bureau 7

Table 3. 

Detailed Languages Spoken at Home by English-Speaking Ability for the Population 

5 Years and Older: 2007

(For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, and definitions, see www.census.gov/acs/www/)

Characteristic

Number of 

speakers

Percentage 

of speakers 

of a nonEnglish 

language

English-speaking ability

Very well Well Not well Not at all

 Population 5 years and older ............... 280,950,438 (X) (X) (X) (X) (X)

Spoke only English at home .................... 225,505,953 (X) (X) (X) (X) (X)

Spoke a language other than English at home ...... 55,444,485 100.0 55.9 19.8 16.3 8.1

Spoke a language other than English at home .... 55,444,485 100.0 55.9 19.8 16.3 8.1

Spanish or Spanish Creole .................... 34,547,077 62.3 52.6 18.3 18.4 10.7

Other Indo-European languages ............... 10,320,730 18.6 67.2 19.6 10.4 2.8

French .................................... 1,355,805 2.5 78.2 14.5 6.8 0.4

 French Creole .............................. 629,019 1.1 56.7 24.3 14.8 4.3

 Italian .................................... 798,801 1.4 71.8 17.2 9.6 1.4

 Portuguese ................................ 687,126 1.2 56.6 22.0 14.9 6.4

 German . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,104,354 2.0 82.8 12.6 4.4 0.3

 Yiddish ................................... 158,991 0.3 70.3 18.3 9.5 1.9

 Other West Germanic languages ............... 270,178 0.5 76.2 19.7 3.4 0.7

 Scandinavian languages ...................... 134,925 0.2 86.4 11.3 2.2 0.1

 Greek . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 329,825 0.6 73.0 16.5 9.6 1.0

 Russian ................................... 851,174 1.5 49.8 25.2 18.2 6.7

 Polish . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 638,059 1.2 56.8 24.0 15.2 4.1

 Serbo-Croatian ............................. 276,550 0.5 58.4 24.4 14.3 2.9

 Other Slavic languages ....................... 312,109 0.6 61.6 23.0 12.5 2.9

 Armenian ................................. 221,865 0.4 55.1 21.7 14.9 8.2

 Persian ................................... 349,686 0.6 61.7 22.6 12.4 3.3

 Gujarati ................................... 287,367 0.5 64.1 21.5 10.6 3.9

 Hindi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 532,911 1.0 79.6 15.3 4.0 1.1

 Urdu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 344,942 0.6 70.1 19.1 8.3 2.4

 Other Indic languages ........................ 616,147 1.1 61.4 24.4 10.2 4.0

 Other Indo-European languages ............... 420,896 0.8 62.5 22.9 11.5 3.2

Asian and Pacific Island languages ............. 8,325,886 15.0 51.4 26.2 17.0 5.4

 Chinese ................................... 2,464,572 4.5 44.4 25.7 19.6 10.3

 Japanese ................................. 458,717 0.8 53.8 29.1 15.7 1.4

 Korean . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,062,337 1.9 41.8 29.3 24.2 4.7

 Mon-Khmer, Cambodian ...................... 185,056 0.3 46.3 25.6 21.4 6.7

 Hmong . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181,069 0.3 52.9 24.1 15.5 7.4

 Thai . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144,405 0.3 48.4 34.8 14.7 2.1

 Laotian ................................... 149,045 0.3 51.1 23.5 19.9 5.4

 Vietnamese ................................ 1,207,004 2.2 39.3 29.0 25.2 6.5

 Other Asian languages ....................... 634,608 1.1 70.1 20.2 7.5 2.2

 Tagalog ................................... 1,480,429 2.7 69.0 23.8 6.5 0.6

 Other Pacific Island languages ................. 358,644 0.7 63.1 26.0 10.0 0.8

Other languages ............................ 2,250,792 4.1 70.1 19.7 8.1 2.1

 Navajo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170,717 0.3 75.3 14.4 7.3 2.9

 Other Native American languages .............. 200,560 0.4 86.4 10.0 3.2 0.4

 Hungarian ................................. 91,297 0.2 71.6 20.0 7.3 1.0

 Arabic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 767,319 1.4 66.2 22.1 9.7 2.0

 Hebrew . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213,576 0.4 81.6 14.7 3.1 0.5

 African languages ........................... 699,518 1.3 66.2 22.6 8.8 2.3

 All other languages .......................... 107,805 0.2 62.3 19.0 11.6 7.0

(X) Not applicable. 

Note: Margins of error for all estimates can be found in Appendix Table 3B at <www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/language 

/appendix.html>. For more information on the ACS, see <www.census.gov/acs/www/>.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2007 American Community Survey.
8 U.S. Census Bureau

such as Spanish, Russian, Chinese, 

and Vietnamese, showed higher 

proportions of those speaking 

English less than “very well” while 

other languages, such as French, 

German, Scandinavian, and Hebrew, 

reported higher than average levels 

of speaking English “very well.”

As the number of languages spoken rises and falls over time, to 

some degree these patterns refl ect 

historical immigration and settlement patterns, along with other 

unique situations. For example, 

English is routinely taught in 

Scandinavian schools, and many 

speakers of Native American languages were born and raised in 

the United States and have routinely interacted with English their 

entire lives. Nevertheless, Table 3 

demonstrates that English-speaking 

ability varied widely across diff erent language communities.

Language Concentration in 

States

Languages spoken at home are 

not evenly distributed throughout 

the nation. Some areas have 

high percentages of speakers 

of non-English languages, while 

others have lower levels. Table 4 

shows the proportion of people 

who spoke a language other than 

English at home across the 50 

states and the District of Columbia, 

as well as the English-speaking 

ability levels in those states. 

As can be seen in Table 4 and 

Figure 3, the percentage of people 

who spoke a language other than 

English at home varied substantially 

across states; just 2 percent of 

West Virginians 5 years old and 

over reported speaking a language 

other than English at home, while 

43 percent of people in California 

reported the same. Moreover, 

Figure 3 shows that relatively high 

levels of other language speakers 

were common in the Southwest and 

in the larger immigrant gateway 

states of the East, such as New York, 

New Jersey, and Florida. With the 

exception of Illinois, relatively lower 

levels of foreign-language speakers 

prevail in most of the Midwest and 

in the South. 

Similarly, levels of English-speaking 

ability were also diff erent across 

states. Figure 4 shows the 

percentage of foreign-language 

speakers who reported their 

English-speaking ability was less 

than “very well.” In Montana, a 

relatively small percentage of 

foreign-language speakers (19 

percent) reported having diffi culty 

speaking English. In Arkansas, 

however, about half of all people 

speaking another language at home 

(51 percent) reported they had 

trouble with English.

Quite often, concentrations of specifi c language groups were found 

in certain areas of the country. In 

the short term, the factors creating 

these concentrations include points 

of entry into the United States 

and family connections facilitating chain migration (Palloni, et al. 

2003).5 In the longer term, internal 

migration streams, employment 

opportunities, and other family 

situations help to facilitate the diffusion of language groups within 

the country. 

Figures 5a to 5h are a series of 

maps that show the geographic 

distribution of the most commonly 

spoken languages in the United 

States.6 These maps show the 

percentage of people 5 years 

old and over in each state who 

spoke Spanish, French, German, 

Slavic languages, Korean, Chinese, 

5 Palloni, A.; D.S. Massey; M. Ceballos; 

K. Espinosa; and M. Spittel. 2001. “Social 

Capital and International Migration: A Test 

Using Information on Family Networks.” 

American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 106, 

No. 5: 1262–1298. 6 Figures 5a to 5h illustrate the proportions of these languages by state, but many 

of the percentage of speakers in each state 

are relatively small comparable to the total 

population of the state. The percentages for 

these maps can be found in Appendix Table A 

at <www.census.gov/population/www

/socdemo/language/appendix.html>.

Vietnamese, and Tagalog.7 The 

intervals shown on each map are 

determined by dividing the range 

of values for each language into 

four equal intervals.

For Spanish speakers, three 

states (Texas, California, and 

New Mexico)8 were in the highest 

interval, but the southwest 

corridor of the United States also 

had a sizable percentage of the 

population speaking Spanish (see 

Figure 5a). Louisiana and Maine 

had the highest percentage of 

French speakers, but Florida and 

many states in the Northeast had a 

substantial percentage as well. The 

presence of French Creole speakers 

in Louisiana and of Haitian Creole 

speakers in Florida contributed to 

the higher levels of French speakers 

in these states (see Figure 5b).

Figure 5c shows German speakers 

spanning the Canadian border of 

the United States, with the highest 

percentages in the Dakotas.9 

Pennsylvania had a sizable number 

of speakers of Pennsylvania 

Dutch, which is a West Germanic 

language. Indiana, with a relatively 

large number of people of 

German ancestry, also had a high 

percentage of German speakers.10 

Slavic languages, which include 

Russian, Polish, and Serbo-Croatian, 

had the highest percentage of 

speakers in Illinois, New York, 

New Jersey, and Connecticut.11 

A substantial level of Slavic 

7 French includes French Creole; German 

includes other West Germanic languages; 

and Slavic languages include Russian, Polish, 

Serbo-Croatian, and other Slavic languages. 8 The percentage of Spanish speakers 

living in California (28.5 percent) was not 

statistically diff erent from the percentage 

of Spanish speakers living in New Mexico 

(28.2 percent). 9 The percentages of German speakers 

living in North Dakota (1.8 percent) and in 

South Dakota (1.5 percent) were not statistically diff erent from each other. 10 For more information on ancestry, visit 

the Ancestry Web site at <www.census.gov

/population/www/ancestry/index.html>. 11 The percentage of Slavic speakers living 

in New Jersey (1.8 percent) was not statistically diff erent from the percentage of Slavic 

speakers living in Connecticut (1.7 percent).
U.S. Census Bureau 9

Table 4.

Population 5 Years and Older Speaking a Language Other Than English at Home by 

English-Speaking Ability by State: 2007

(For information on confi dentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, and defi nitions, see www.census.gov/acs/www/) 

State 

Population 5 years 

and older

Spoke a language 

other than English 

at home

Percent who 

spoke a language 

other than English 

at home

English-speaking ability

Very well Well Not well Not at all

 United States . . . . . 280,950,438 55,444,485 19.7 55.9 19.8 16.3 8.1 

Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . 4,318,848 183,831 4.3 53.6 16.6 20.4 9.3

Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . 632,806 100,508 15.9 60.6 25.7 11.7 2.0

Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,839,788 1,662,549 28.5 55.8 17.7 15.5 11.0

Arkansas . . . . . . . . . . . 2,637,847 167,962 6.4 48.8 21.2 20.7 9.2

California . . . . . . . . . . . 33,891,325 14,441,651 42.6 53.2 19.8 17.2 9.8

Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . 4,512,195 755,749 16.7 55.3 19.0 17.9 7.8

Connecticut . . . . . . . . . 3,290,325 639,586 19.4 60.5 21.0 13.7 4.8

Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . 805,602 96,929 12.0 62.7 17.6 15.5 4.3

District of Columbia . . . 551,980 80,195 14.5 68.6 15.8 11.4 4.2

Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,105,241 4,465,787 26.1 54.1 19.8 16.5 9.5

Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,818,349 1,056,615 12.0 51.9 21.1 18.9 8.1

Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,195,661 305,212 25.5 57.1 25.8 14.7 2.3

Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,382,539 135,893 9.8 59.5 17.5 17.0 6.0

Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,961,769 2,603,244 21.8 54.8 21.5 17.1 6.6

Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,903,675 437,434 7.4 60.0 19.9 14.5 5.6

Iowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,790,906 183,743 6.6 59.8 19.9 15.4 5.0

Kansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,580,638 256,109 9.9 56.1 18.6 18.1 7.2

Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . 3,963,318 164,024 4.1 55.3 21.1 18.4 5.1

Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . 3,996,750 328,041 8.2 68.2 17.4 10.9 3.5

Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,247,427 92,291 7.4 74.8 16.5 7.3 1.4

Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . 5,243,703 775,267 14.8 59.5 21.1 14.6 4.9

Massachusetts . . . . . . . 6,072,036 1,228,856 20.2 57.3 21.5 14.5 6.7

Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . 9,435,733 850,865 9.0 62.0 19.9 13.6 4.5

Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . 4,844,316 464,630 9.6 58.2 20.9 15.3 5.7

Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . 2,705,640 91,779 3.4 59.0 16.0 15.8 9.2

Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,484,696 316,838 5.8 61.0 20.2 14.1 4.7

Montana . . . . . . . . . . . . 898,614 37,055 4.1 80.9 12.6 5.4 1.0

Nebraska . . . . . . . . . . . 1,645,880 148,297 9.0 57.0 19.8 15.6 7.6

Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,371,632 650,338 27.4 52.9 23.0 16.6 7.5

New Hampshire . . . . . . 1,240,806 98,008 7.9 69.8 18.5 10.7 1.0

New Jersey . . . . . . . . . 8,130,371 2,262,008 27.8 58.2 20.5 15.5 5.8

New Mexico . . . . . . . . . 1,828,867 652,880 35.7 72.9 14.0 8.6 4.5

New York . . . . . . . . . . . 18,097,578 5,229,102 28.9 54.3 20.9 17.4 7.4

North Carolina . . . . . . . 8,429,207 814,645 9.7 51.8 19.2 20.3 8.7

North Dakota . . . . . . . . 599,205 35,387 5.9 73.5 15.7 9.4 1.3

Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,727,127 646,477 6.0 64.7 20.3 11.8 3.2

Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . 3,357,386 276,163 8.2 54.8 19.4 18.7 7.1

Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,511,093 504,621 14.4 53.4 19.1 18.7 8.8

Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . 11,703,178 1,107,017 9.5 62.1 20.1 13.8 4.0

Rhode Island . . . . . . . . 996,158 207,071 20.8 56.2 18.9 16.6 8.3

South Carolina . . . . . . . 4,113,842 241,144 5.9 54.5 20.8 17.8 6.9

South Dakota . . . . . . . . 740,248 46,384 6.3 75.9 14.6 7.6 1.8

Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . 5,750,581 335,560 5.8 54.6 20.6 18.0 6.9

Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,924,924 7,437,834 33.9 56.6 17.6 15.6 10.1

Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,392,633 331,682 13.9 57.0 19.1 16.4 7.5

Vermont . . . . . . . . . . . . 588,849 30,174 5.1 76.5 14.8 6.5 2.1

Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,201,765 956,248 13.3 59.7 20.8 14.7 4.8

Washington . . . . . . . . . 6,046,464 1,012,440 16.7 54.0 22.5 16.5 7.1

West Virginia . . . . . . . . 1,707,922 39,153 2.3 69.2 15.8 13.5 1.6

Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . 5,245,596 428,790 8.2 60.7 19.5 15.1 4.7

Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . 487,399 30,419 6.2 68.1 16.0 10.9 5.0

Note: Margins of error for all estimates can be found in Appendix Table 4B at <www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/language

/appendix.html>. For more information on the ACS, see <www.census.gov/acs/www/>.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2007 American Community Survey. 
10 U.S. Census Bureau

speakers also was found in the 

West Coast states (see Figure 5d).

Figure 5e shows Hawaii having 

the highest concentration of 

Korean speakers, followed 

by California and New Jersey. 

California and New York housed 

the highest percentage of Chinese 

speakers, followed by Hawaii and 

Massachusetts (see Figure 5f).

As with Korean speakers, higher 

levels of Vietnamese speakers 

were evident throughout the 

country rather than a large 

concentration among contiguous 

states. California had the highest 

percentage of Vietnamese 

speakers, followed by Hawaii, 

Washington, and Texas12 (see 

Figure 5g). Tagalog, a language 

of the Philippines, had its highest 

percentage of speakers in Hawaii. 

12 The percentages of Vietnamese speakers in Hawaii (0.9 percent), Washington 

(0.9 percent), and Texas (0.7 percent) were 

not statistically diff erent from one another.

presents the metro or micro areas 

in which 30 of the 39 detailed 

languages had the largest number 

of speakers.14 

As Table 5 shows, some languages 

were widely distributed across 

areas, while other languages 

had a large proportion of their 

speakers in just one or two areas. 

Of these languages, Yiddish is 

an extreme example of language 

concentration—76 percent of all 

its speakers lived in the New York 

metro area, with another 6 percent 

in the Poughkeepsie metro area, 

4 percent in the Miami metro area, 

and 2 percent in the Los Angeles 

metro area. This means that 88 

percent of all Yiddish speakers 

lived in just one of these four 

metro areas. The remaining 12 

14 The nine languages that are not on 

this list are those languages that are aggregated or are groups of languages, such as 

Other West Germanic languages or All Other 

languages.

Alaska, California, and Nevada also 

had high levels, but not as high as 

Hawaii.13

Language Concentration 

in Metropolitan and 

Micropolitan Areas

Just as languages were dispersed 

unevenly across states, 

metropolitan and micropolitan 

statistical areas also displayed 

similar eff ects. Large metro areas 

such as New York, Los Angeles, 

and Chicago generally had large 

proportions of foreign-language 

speakers because of the economic 

opportunities in these places or 

because they act as gateway points 

of entry into the country. Not 

all of the high levels of language 

clustering occurred in these three 

metro areas, however. Table 5 

13 The percentages of Tagalog speakers in 

Alaska (2.3 percent), California (2.2 percent), 

and Nevada (2.2 percent) were not statistically diff erent from one another.

Figure 3.

Percentage of the Population Who Spoke a Language Other Than 

English at Home by State: 2007

United States: 19.7 percent

Note: Population 5 years and older. For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, 

nonsampling error, and definitions, see <www.census.gov/acs/www/>.

 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2007 American Community Survey.

Less than 10.0 percent (28 states)

10.0 to 19.9 percent (11 states)

20.0 to 29.9 percent (9 states)

MT

AK

NM

OR MN

KS

SD

ND

MO

WA

FL

IL IN

WI NY

PA

MI

OH

IA

ME

MA 

CT 

AZ

NV

TX

CA CO

WY

UT

ID

NE

OK

GA

AR

AL

NC

MS

LA

TN

KY

VA

SC

WV

RI 

DE 

MD 

NJ 

HI

30.0 percent and higher (3 states)

VT NH

DC 
U.S. Census Bureau 11

Figure 4.

Percentage of the Population Speaking a Language Other Than 

English at Home Who Spoke English Less Than 

“Very Well” by State: 2007

HI

United States: 44.1 percent

Note: Population 5 years and older. For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, 

nonsampling error, and definitions, see <www.census.gov/acs/www/>.

 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2007 American Community Survey.

MT

AK

NM

OR MN

KS

SD

ND

MO

WA

FL

IL IN

WI NY

PA

MI

OH

IA

ME

MA 

CT 

AZ

NV

TX

CA CO

WY

UT

ID

NE

OK

GA

AR

AL

NC

MS

LA

TN

KY

VA

SC

WV

RI 

DE 

MD 

NJ 

Less than 35.0 percent (11 states)

35.0 to 39.9 percent (8 states)

40.0 to 44.9 percent (18 states)

45.0 percent and higher (14 states)

VT NH

DC 

throughout the country. The 

Minneapolis-St. Paul, Fresno, 

Nashville, and Los Angeles metro 

areas each had about 5 percent of 

all Laotian speakers, leaving the 

remaining 81 percent of speakers 

spread throughout the rest of the 

country. 

This high degree of dispersion 

was actually more common among 

languages that have long been 

a part of the nation’s history. 

German, a language spoken by 

many immigrants to the United 

States over the last few centuries, 

was highly dispersed. The four 

largest concentrations in the 

United States account for just 15 

percent of all German speakers in 

the country. Similar high levels of 

dispersion are seen for languages 

such as French (77 percent 

outside the four largest metro 

concentrations) and Scandinavian 

languages (79 percent).

SUMMARY

This report provides illustrative 

evidence of the continuing and 

growing role of non-English 

languages as part of the national 

fabric. Fueled by both long-term 

historic immigration patterns and 

more recent ones, the language 

diversity of the country has 

increased over the past few 

decades. As the nation continues 

to be a destination for people 

from other lands, this pattern of 

language diversity will also likely 

continue. Given the patterns of 

location and relocation over time, 

local areas may see specifi c or 

diverse changes in the languages 

spoken in any given locality. 

percent of Yiddish speakers were 

spread throughout the rest of the 

country.

In other similar cases, the two 

or three largest concentrations 

account for a large overall 

proportion of the total number of 

speakers. Polish, for example, had 

31 percent of its speakers in the 

Chicago metro area, with another 

23 percent in the New York metro 

area. Among Hmong speakers, 

the Minneapolis-St. Paul (25 

percent), Sacramento (13 percent), 

and Fresno (12 percent) metro 

areas accounted for half of all 

speakers of this language in the 

United States.15 

By contrast, speakers of Laotian 

were much more widely dispersed 

15 The percentages of Hmong speakers 

in Sacramento (13 percent) and in Fresno 

(12 percent) were not statistically diff erent 

from each other.
12 U.S. Census Bureau 0.0 to 8.0 percent (37 states) 8.1 to 15.1 percent (8 states) 15.2 to 22.1 percent (3 states) MT AK NM OR MN KS NDSD MO WA FL IL IN WI NY PA MI OH IA MEMA CT AZ NV TX CO CA WY UT ID NE OK GA AR AL NC MS LA TN KY VA SC WV RI NJ DE MD HI VT NH 22.2 to 29.3 percent (3 states) DC 0.0 to 0.53 percent (35 states) 0.54 to 0.95 percent (13 states) 0.96 to 1.37 percent (1 state) MT AK NM OR MN KS NDSD MO WA FL IL IN WI NY PA MI OH IA MEMA CT AZ NV TX CO CA WY UT ID NE OK GA AR AL NC MS LA TN KY VA SC WV RI NJ DE MD HI VT NH 1.38 to 1.80 percent (2 states) DC MT AK NM OR MN KS NDSD MO WA FL IL IN WI NY PA MI OH IA MEMA CT AZ NV TX CO CA WY UT ID NE OK GA AR AL NC MS LA TN KY VA SC WV RI NJ DE MD HI VT NH 0.0 to 1.0 percent (40 states) 1.1 to 2.0 percent (7 states) 2.1 to 2.9 percent (2 states) 3.0 to 4.0 percent (2 states) DC MT AK NM OR MN KS NDSD MO WA FL IL IN WI NY PA MI OH IA MEMA CT AZ NV TX CO CA WY UT ID NE OK GA AR AL NC MS LA TN KY VA SC WV RI NJ DE MD HI VT NH 0.0 to 0.5 percent (39 states) 0.6 to 1.2 percent (8 states) 1.3 to 1.8 percent (2 states) 1.9 to 2.5 percent (2 states) DC Figures 5a–5d. Percentage of the Population 5 Years and Older Speaking Specified Languages by State: 2007 5a. Spanish 5b. French1 5c. German2 5d. Slavic languages3 1 French includes French Creole. 2 German includes other West Germanic languages. 3 Slavic languages include Russian, Polish, Serbo-Croatian, and other Slavic languages. Of all people 5 and older, 12.3 percent spoke Spanish. Of all people 5 and older, 0.7 percent spoke French. Of all people 5 and older, 0.5 percent spoke German. Of all people 5 and older, 0.7 percent spoke a Slavic language. For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, and definitions, see <www.census.gov/acs/www/>. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2007 American Community Survey.
U.S. Census Bureau 13 MT AK NM OR MN KS NDSD MO WA FL IL IN WI NY PA MI OH IA MEMA CT AZ NV TX CO CA WY UT ID NE OK GA AR AL NC MS LA TN KY VA SC WV RI NJ DE MD HI VT NH 0.0 to 0.3 percent (39 states) 0.4 to 0.7 percent (7 states) 0.8 to 1.1 percent (4 states) 1.2 to 1.6 percent (1 state) DC MT AK NM OR MN KS NDSD MO WA FL IL IN WI NY PA MI OH IA MEMA CT AZ NV TX CO CA WY UT ID NE OK GA AR AL NC MS LA TN KY VA SC WV RI NJ DE MD HI VT NH 0.0 to 0.3 percent (38 states) 0.4 to 0.6 percent (9 states) 0.7 to 0.9 percent (3 states) 1.0 to 1.4 percent (1 state) DC 0.0 to 0.7 percent (43 states) 0.8 to 1.4 percent (4 states) 1.5 to 2.1 percent (2 states) MT AK NM OR MN KS NDSD MO WA FL IL IN WI NY PA MI OH IA MEMA CT AZ NV TX CO CA WY UT ID NE OK GA AR AL NC MS LA TN KY VA SC WV RI NJ DE MD HI VT NH 2.2 to 2.8 percent (2 states) DC MT AK NM OR MN KS NDSD MO WA FL IL IN WI NY PA MI OH IA MEMA CT AZ NV TX CO CA WY UT ID NE OK GA AR AL NC MS LA TN KY VA SC WV RI NJ DE MD HI VT NH 0.0 to 1.0 percent (47 states) 1.1 to 2.2 percent (2 states) 2.3 to 3.3 percent (1 state) 3.4 to 4.5 percent (1 state) DC Figures 5e–5h. Percentage of the Population 5 Years and Older Speaking Specified Languages by State: 2007 5e. Korean 5f. Chinese 5g. Vietnamese 5h. Tagalog Note: The data for these maps are available in Appendix Table A. The margins of error for all estimates can be found in Appendix Table B. Both tables are available at <www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/language/appendix.html>. Of all people 5 and older, 0.4 percent spoke Korean. Of all people 5 and older, 0.9 percent spoke Chinese. Of all people 5 and older, 0.5 percent spoke Tagalog. Of all people 5 and older, 0.4 percent spoke Vietnamese. For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, and definitions, see <www.census.gov./acs/www/>. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2007 American Community Survey.
14 U.S. Census Bureau

Table 5.

Distribution of Speakers of Specific Non-English Languages Across Metropolitan and 

Micropolitan Statistical Areas: 2007

(For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, and definitions, see www.census.gov/acs/www/) 

Detailed 

language

Metropolitan and micropolitan statistical areas with the largest proportion of speakers of specified language1,2

Total 

number of 

speakers 

of nonEnglish 

languages

Percent1st metro or 

micro area1

Percent2nd metro or 

micro area2

Percent3rd metro or 

micro area

Percent4th metro or 

micro area

Percent

Percent 

in all 

other 

areas

Spanish ......... 34,547,077 100.0 Los Angeles 12.8 New York 9.5 Miami 5.6 Chicago 4.3 67.8

French .......... 1,355,805 100.0 New York 10.1 Washington 4.5 Boston 4.1 Miami 4.1 77.2

French Creole .... 629,019 100.0 Miami 35.9 New York 28.1 Boston 6.5 Orlando 4.2 25.2

Italian ........... 798,801 100.0 New York 32.7 Boston 5.2 Chicago 4.9 Philadelphia 3.9 53.2

Portuguese ...... 687,126 100.0 New York 18.9 Providence 14.9 Boston 12.4 Miami 7.4 46.4

German ......... 1,104,354 100.0 New York 5.8 Chicago 3.6 Los Angeles 3.2 Washington 2.1 85.4

Yiddish .......... 158,991 100.0 New York 76.0 Poughkeepsie 6.2 Miami 3.8 Los Angeles 2.2 11.9

Scandinavian ..... 134,925 100.0 Los Angeles 6.2 New York 6.1 Seattle 5.4 Minneapolis 3.4 79.0

Greek ........... 329,825 100.0 New York 26.1 Chicago 13.6 Boston 6.0 Philadelphia 3.1 51.2

Russian ......... 851,174 100.0 New York 29.5 Los Angeles 6.3 Chicago 4.6 San Francisco 3.8 55.9

Polish ........... 638,059 100.0 Chicago 31.3 New York 22.8 Hartford 3.6 Detroit 3.3 39.0

Serbo-Croatian . . . 276,550 100.0 New York 11.9 Chicago 11.4 St. Louis, MO-IL 4.6 Phoenix 4.5 67.6

Armenian ........ 221,865 100.0 Los Angeles 71.8 New York 4.6 Fresno, CA 2.5 Boston 2.4 18.6

Persian. . . . . . . . . . 349,686 100.0 Los Angeles 29.3 New York 9.1 Washington 7.2 San Francisco 6.1 48.2

Gujarati ......... 287,367 100.0 New York 22.5 Chicago 11.2 Los Angeles 5.3 Philadelphia 4.9 56.2

Hindi ........... 532,911 100.0 New York 16.4 San Francisco 6.6 Chicago 5.7 Los Angeles 5.0 66.3

Urdu ............ 344,942 100.0 New York 23.4 Chicago 10.4 Houston 8.6 Washington 7.4 50.1

Chinese ......... 2,464,572 100.0 New York 20.6 Los Angeles 15.4 San Francisco 12.4 San Jose 4.9 46.7

Japanese ........ 458,717 100.0 Los Angeles 16.8 Honolulu, HI 9.7 New York 8.7 San Francisco 4.9 60.0

Korean .......... 1,062,337 100.0 Los Angeles 22.8 New York 15.0 Washington 6.0 Chicago 4.2 52.0

Mon-Khmer, 

 Cambodian ..... 185,056 100.0 Los Angeles 18.5 Boston 9.3 Stockton, CA 5.1 Seattle 4.6 62.5

Hmong .......... 181,069 100.0 Minneapolis 25.2 Sacramento 13.4 Fresno, CA 11.6 Milwaukee 5.2 44.6

Thai ........... 144,405 100.0 Los Angeles 15.7 New York 6.3 San Francisco 4.8 Washington 4.4 68.9

Laotian .......... 149,045 100.0 Minneapolis 5.1 Fresno, CA 4.6 Nashville 4.5 Los Angeles 4.5 81.3

Vietnamese ...... 1,207,004 100.0 Los Angeles 17.0 San Jose 9.3 Houston 6.1 Dallas 4.6 63.0

Tagalog ......... 1,480,429 100.0 Los Angeles 17.5 San Francisco 11.0 New York 9.1 San Diego 5.8 56.6

Navajo . . . . . . . . . . 170,717 100.0 Farmington, NM 16.5 Gallup, NM2 12.0 Flagstaff, AZ 10.3 Albuquerque, NM 5.4 55.9

Hungarian ....... 91,297 100.0 New York 20.1 Los Angeles 5.8 Cleveland 4.9 Chicago 3.9 65.3

Arabic .......... 767,319 100.0 New York 14.6 Detroit 11.2 Los Angeles 7.0 Chicago 5.7 61.6

Hebrew ......... 213,576 100.0 New York 38.8 Los Angeles 11.6 Miami 8.4 Boston 3.4 37.9

1 The Office of Management and Budget’s statistical area definitions (for metropolitan and micropolitan statistical areas) are those issued by that 

agency in December 2006. Each metropolitan or micropolitan statistical area with a state abbreviation after its name in the table indicates that the 

full title of that area is displayed. Below are the full titles of metropolitan statistical areas that are abbreviated in the table: 

 Boston = Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH 

 Chicago = Chicago-Naperville-Joliet, IL-IN-WI 

 Cleveland = Cleveland-Elyria-Mentor, OH 

 Dallas = Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX 

 Detroit = Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI 

 Hartford = Hartford-West Hartford-East Hartford, CT 

 Houston = Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown, TX 

 Los Angeles = Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA 

 Miami = Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach, FL 

 Milwaukee = Milwaukee-Waukesha-West Allis, WI 

 Minneapolis = Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI 

 Nashville = Nashville-Davidson–Murfreesboro–Franklin, TN 

 New York = New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-PA 

 Orlando = Orlando-Kissimmee, FL 

 Philadelphia = Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD 

 Phoenix = Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, AZ 

 Poughkeepsie = Poughkeepsie-Newburgh-Middletown, NY 

 Providence = Providence-New Bedford-Fall River, RI-MA 

 Sacramento = Sacramento–Arden-Arcade–Roseville, CA 

 San Diego = San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA 

 San Francisco = San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA 

 San Jose = San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA 

 Seattle = Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA 

 Washington = Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV

2 Gallup, NM, is the only micropolitan statistical area in this table. The other areas displayed in the table are metropolitan statistical areas.

Note: Margins of error for all estimates can be found in Appendix Table 5 at <www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/language 

/appendix.html>. For more information on the ACS, see <www.census.gov/acs/www/>.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2007 American Community Survey.
U.S. Census Bureau 15

SOURCE OF THE DATA 

AND ACCURACY OF 

THE ESTIMATES 

The American 

Community Survey

Many of the fi ndings presented 

in this report were based on the 

American Community Survey (ACS) 

data collected in 2007. These data 

were based on the population living in either households or group 

quarters (which include correctional 

facilities, nursing homes, college dormitories, group homes, 

and overnight shelters) that were 

included in the ACS sample. The 

U.S. Census Bureau is both the 

sponsor and the collector of the 

American Community Survey.

The 2007 ACS is based on a sample 

of just under 3 million housing unit 

addresses and a separate sample of 

just under 200 thousand people living in group quarters. ACS fi gures 

are estimates based on this sample 

and approximate the actual fi gures 

that would have been obtained by 

interviewing the entire household 

and group quarters populations 

using the same methodology. The 

estimates from the 2007 ACS sample may also diff er from estimates 

based on other survey samples of 

housing units and group quarters 

and the people living within those 

housing units and group quarters.

The Decennial Census

Other fi ndings presented in this 

report that were not derived from 

the 2007 ACS were collected from 

previously published fi ndings 

based on data from each decennial 

census conducted by the Census 

Bureau since 1980. In general, 

the decennial censuses collected 

data from the population living in 

households as well as those living 

in group quarters such as those 

described above. 

Sampling and 

Nonsampling Error

Sampling error occurs when the 

characteristics of a sample are 

measured instead of those of 

the entire population (as from a 

census). Note that sample-based 

estimates will vary depending on 

the particular sample selected from 

the population, but all attempt to 

approximate the actual fi gures. 

Measures of the magnitude of 

sampling error refl ect the variation 

in the estimates over all possible 

samples that could have been 

selected from the population using 

the same sampling, data collection, 

and processing methods.

Estimates of the magnitude of 

sampling errors are provided in 

the form of margins of error for all 

key ACS estimates included in this 

report. The Census Bureau recommends that data users incorporate 

this information into their analyses, as sampling error in survey 

estimates could impact the conclusions drawn from the results. All 

comparative statements in this 

report have undergone statistical 

testing, and comparisons are significant at the 90 percent confi dence 

level unless noted otherwise. This 

means the 90 percent confi dence 

interval for the diff erence between 

the estimates being compared does 

not include zero.

In addition to sampling error, nonsampling errors may be introduced 

during any phase of data collection or processing. For example, 

operations such as editing, reviewing, or keying data from questionnaires may introduce error into the 

estimates. The primary source of 

nonsampling error and the processes instituted to control error 

in the 2007 ACS are described 

in further detail in the 2007 ACS 

Accuracy of the Data document 

(see Web link below).

Title 13, U.S. Code, Section 9, 

prohibits the Census Bureau from 

publishing results from which the 

identity of an individual survey 

respondent could be determined. 

For more information on how the 

Census Bureau protects the confi -

dentiality of data, see the 2007 ACS 

Accuracy of the Data document, 

available at <www.census.gov

/acs/www/Downloads/ACS

/accuracy2007.pdf>.

FOR MORE INFORMATION

Further information from the 2007 

ACS is available from the American 

FactFinder on the Census Bureau’s 

Web site, at <http://factfi nder

.census.gov/home/saff /main.html?

_lang=en>.

Measures of ACS quality—including 

sample size and number of interviews, response and nonresponse 

rates, coverage rates, and item 

allocation rates—are available at 

<www.census.gov/acs/www

/UseData/sse/>.

Additional information about 

language use is available on the 

Census Bureau’s Web site at 

<www.census.gov/ population

/www/socdemo/lang_use.html>. 

CONTACT

For additional information on 

these topics, please call 

1-866-758-1060 (toll free) or visit 

<www.census.gov>.

SUGGESTED CITATION

Shin, Hyon B. and Robert A. 

Kominski. 2010. Language Use in 

the United States: 2007, American 

Community Survey Reports, ACS-12. 

U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, DC.

USER COMMENTS

The Census Bureau welcomes the 

comments and advice of users of 

our data and reports. Please send 

comments and suggestions to:

Chief, Housing and Household 

Economic Statistics Division

U.S. Census Bureau

Washington, DC 20233-8500
16 U.S. Census Bureau

APPENDIX A.

Language Questions Used in Decennial Censuses

2000: (Collected for all ages; 

retained for persons 5 years old 

and over)

Does this person speak a language 

other than English at home?

What is this language?

How well does this person speak 

English (very well, well, not well, 

not at all)?

1990: (For persons 5 years old and 

over)

Does this person speak a language 

other than English at home?

What is this language?

How well does this person speak 

English (very well, well, not well, 

not at all)?

1980: (For persons 3 years old and 

over; tabulated for 5 years old and 

over)

Does this person speak a language 

other than English at home?

What is this language? 

How well does this person speak 

English (very well, well, not well, 

not at all)?

1970: (No age for question; 

tabulations limited)

What language, other than English, 

was spoken in this person’s 

home when he was a child? 

(Spanish, French, German, Other 

[specify] , None—English only)

1960: (For foreign-born persons)

What language was spoken in his 

home before he came to the United 

States?

1950: (Not asked)

1940: (For persons of all ages; 

asked under the category of 

“Mother Tongue [or Native 

Language]”)

Language spoken at home in 

earliest childhood.

1930: (For foreign-born persons; 

asked under the category of 

“Mother Tongue [or Native 

Language] of Foreign Born”) 

Language spoken in home before 

coming to the United States.

1920: (For foreign-born persons)

Place of birth and mother tongue of 

person and each parent.

Whether able to speak English.

1910: (Mother tongue was 

collected for all foreign-born 

persons, to be written in with place 

of birth; also collected for foreignborn parents. Specifi c instructions 

on correct languages to write in 

and a list of appropriate European 

languages were provided to the 

enumerator. Similar instructions 

may have carried over to 1920.)

Whether able to speak English; or, 

if not, give language spoken.

1900: (For all persons 10 years old 

and over)

“Can speak English” was asked 

after the two questions “Can read” 

and “Can write.”

1890: (For all persons 10 years old 

and over)

“Able to speak English. If not, the 

language or dialect spoken” was 

asked after the questions “Able to 

Read” and “Able to Write.”

1790–1880: (No evidence of 

language questions or Englishability questions)

Note: The universe used for data collection may 

not be the same as in tabulations. In some cases, 

data were tabulated for foreign-born only or White 

foreign-born only. Consult publications.