I'm not sure what you're driving at, Noel. Should the 11:00 Mass then be celebrated in Korean and the Anglophiles told to suck it up, or are you rather suggesting that anyone who prefers their mother tongue to Latin is a whiner?

Mass in Latin solves the "which vernacular language group gets the 'prime time'?" question. Quite seriously.

Charles,

I would disagree that people don't understand what's going on. Try this example: an average group of Catholics attends a conference hosted by the Leadership Conference of Women Religious, and the same group of Catholics then attends a Solemn High Mass, according to the Extraordinary form.

In the first case, everyone understands the language being spoken, because it is the vernacular of the participants and the presenters, but few understand the words. Fewer still have any doubt as to what is going on.

In the second case, few understand the language being sung but no one has the slightest confusion that this ceremony is the worship of God.

Or, if you prefer, take the painting Guernica and the song On Eagle's Wings, or, if you prefer, Here I am, Lord, or Be not Afraid In the case of the painting, only a small group probably speak Spanish, still fewer have studied art history and an even smaller group are specialists in Spanish art. Nevertheless, the drama of the painting is quite clear to those who take even a few minutes to absorb the painting. In the case of the music, nearly everyone in the group understands the language of the songs, everyone has an opinion on music (learned or not) and most people have heard of the composers who penned the stuff, but a tiny group see the danger which these pieces represent to the faith, and a similarly small number actually sing what's on the page.

Which "understands"?

I disagree, sort of. At the Latin mass ordinary people would understand something holy and resembling worship is going on, and at the LCWR that a bunch of goofy old ladies from the sixties and seventies are ranting about something again. Most congregations, in my experience in the South, simply do not have much of an understanding of Latin. They could be taught, but haven't been.

I think that in many cases, it isn't an issue of language per se, but of ethnicity. We had this in Latin Mass days too. The first bishop of the D. of Cleveland refused to set up separate churches for the Germans, who then raised enough of a stink with the Vatican that he had to give in. (He also gave the Irish churches French-speaking priests.) The Germans and Irish fought until 1903, when they finally encountered a bishop who would bang heads together.

The Mass is NOT about what the people understand, but how God designed his Church to worship him through tradition. Even VII says so in her docs.

I refer everyone to Kathy Pluth's recent article at the Chant Cafe in which she quite succinctly declares the obvious, that English is the lingua franca of this era in history. I concur. This is not said to infer that has any bearing on Noel's contention nor relate this "reality" is akin to the institution of the lingua franca of post-Constantinian Rome as the lingua sacra that we've inherited. The dead Latin could be said to have risen from the dead as the resurrected sacral language.
However, what's on the table is essentially a political concern in a country whose primary vernacular is, in point of fact, English. As sympathetic to the contemporary waves of new ethnicities entering this country's social fabric and our churches we may be, we are not doing them any favor by being so hospitable through segregating them from the de facto mother tongue of the country. I say this regardless of past practice among European immigrant conflicts mentioned above. And to complete the analogy, the American melting pot is not so much that good stew any longer, it is a gazpacho of distinctly different constituents who happen to share the soup base but do not conjoin at the point of serving and consuming.
But we are now a people of convenience, of capitulation to authority, of political correctness. We are inclined to those behaviors in all our interpersonal, communal experiences sacred and secular. But the Church could, if She* accepted the true sensus fidelium, and chose to celebrate Her most sacred rites in the sacral language, or if the vernacular in this country, only English. That opinion does not make me a bigot or racist, just a realist.
*That would be our bishops, FYI, IMO.