Maintaining the status quo

2018 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 173-195 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carol Ready
Keyword(s):  
Language Policy ◽  
Language Ideology ◽  
Status Quo ◽  
Minority Languages ◽  
Policy Documents ◽  
The Status ◽  
Regional Or Minority Languages

Abstract Arabic is considered one of the defining cases of diglossia (Ferguson, 1959; Sayahi, 2014). Despite previous scholars’ critiques that the construct of diglossia perpetuates linguistic and societal inequalities, few studies have examined how this seminal construct has been enacted in language policy (Woolard & Schieffelin, 1994; Pennycook, 1994; Harris, 1981). This paper addresses this gap by examining language policy in context through an intertextual analysis of language policy documents including the 1992 European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages and several reports on their fulfillment of the charter’s requirements. Using Irvine and Gal’s (2000) framework of three semiotic processes of ideology, the texts demonstrate the use of the notion of diglossia as a tool of iconization, fractal recursivity, and erasure used to naturalize current linguistic inequalities. Consequently, diglossic descriptions are taken up in policy documents in service of a particular language ideology that justifies suppression of minority languages such as is the case of Arabic in Ceuta.

English in Swiss higher education

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Studer ◽  
Aisha Siddiqa
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Language Policy ◽  
National Language ◽  
Policy Planning ◽  
Pragmatic Approach ◽  
Policy Documents ◽  
The Status ◽  
National Languages ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Language Question

This chapter reviews the current discourses surrounding English in higher education, focusing on the impact Englishization has had on education and language policy-planning in Switzerland. While English is in direct competition with national languages at the obligatory school levels, and the debate about the status of English is evident in national language policymaking, higher education institutes (henceforth HEIs) have taken a pragmatic approach, broadening their educational offerings to include English-medium courses and programmes at all levels. Taking legal, strategy and policy documents as its basis, this chapter discusses themes that impact thinking about language in higher education in a small multilingual nation and reviews how the language question has been addressed by policymakers at the national and institutional levels.

When political institutions use sociolinguistic concepts

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (263) ◽  
pp. 13-18
Author(s):  
David Karlander
Keyword(s):  
Political Institutions ◽  
The Political ◽  
Minority Languages ◽  
Social Standing ◽  
State Support ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Arena ◽  
The Status ◽  
Regional Or Minority Languages

AbstractIn this essay, David Karlander examines what happens when concepts developed by scholars of language circulate and become embedded in policies and law. In exploring how the distinction between a “language” and a “dialect” became encoded in the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages (ECRML), Karlander examines the consequences when applied to the status and state support of minority languages in Sweden. What counts as a language, he demonstrates, is not simply an “academic” matter. When sociolinguistics enters the public arena, it has the potential to affect the political and social standing of real communities.

scholarly journals Language policy in multi-level systems: A historical institutionalist analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 709-727
Author(s):  
Elin Royles ◽  
Huw Lewis
Keyword(s):  
Language Policy ◽  
Policy Development ◽  
Minority Languages ◽  
Policy Studies ◽  
Theoretical Contribution ◽  
Policy Choices ◽  
Welsh Language ◽  
Multi Level ◽  
Regional Or Minority Languages ◽  
Distinct Field

Efforts are underway to develop a stronger political science perspective regarding the practice of language policy to establish language policy as a distinct field of public policy studies. The article’s original theoretical contribution is to develop a framework, grounded in historical institutionalism, to analyse the multi-level institutional factors that influence language policy choices relating to regional or minority languages within European multi-level states. The framework is tested by applying it to analyse the multi-level factors that condition language policy decisions regarding the Welsh language, and through further investigating the framework’s significance and robustness to analyse language policy trajectories in two contrasting European cases. Overall, the article makes the case for the strengths and adaptability of the framework in producing convincing explanations of the multi-level dimensions of language policy development in different institutionalised contexts and calls for greater investigation of its ability to analyse other regional and minority languages in Europe.

scholarly journals The orthography of revived Cornish as an attempt at pluricentricity

2020 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 66-86
Author(s):  
Merryn Davies-Deacon
Keyword(s):  
Minority Languages ◽  
Learning Materials ◽  
Unsuccessful Attempt ◽  
Equal Status ◽  
The Status ◽  
Written Form ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Uk Government ◽  
Regional Or Minority Languages ◽  
The Uk

Abstract After over twenty years of debate over Cornish orthographies, recognition by the UK government according to the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages in 2003 led to the creation of what was initially intended as a “single written form” for use in official contexts. However, the inevitable impossibility of finding a compromise that pleased opposing groups of speakers with differing ideologies meant that the eventual Standard Written Form (SWF) was pluricentric, comprising two “main forms”. While these were initially stated to be of equal status, this has been hard to maintain since the SWF’s implementation: with more speakers using Middle Cornish forms, the Late Cornish forms are less visible and commonly believed to be subsidiary. Drawing on such perceptions, along with learning materials and other resources, this paper examines the status of the SWF today and offers some reflections on this unsuccessful attempt at pluricentricity in a minoritised language.

scholarly journals Language Policy: European Criteria and Ukraine

2019 ◽  
pp. 9-31
Author(s):  
Bohdan Azhniuk
Keyword(s):  
Language Policy ◽  
Language Planning ◽  
Minority Languages ◽  
Language Diversity ◽  
National Unity ◽  
Scientific Publications ◽  
Linguistic Rights ◽  
Expert Opinions ◽  
Regional Or Minority Languages ◽  
State Language

The article discusses a much-debated in Ukraine issue: what are the principles of language policy that can be labelled European, what are the major sources for the deduction of these principles and to what extent they could be implemented in Ukraine’s current language policy. It is argued that these principles can be deduced from the following major sources: national constitutions and legislative acts on language issues, international legal instruments (The European Charter of regional or Minority Languages), international declarations (The Universal Declaration of Linguistic Rights) that are not legal instruments at the moment, expert opinions of international committees and other bodies like the Venice Commission, OSCE, etc, scientific publications on language policy and language planning. The analysis of these sources gives justification to the following principles as reflecting the mainstream European conception of language policy and language planning: 1) maintaining the leading role of the official state language as the backbone of national unity, 2) protection of endangered languages and preservation of language diversity, 3) promotion of the bilingualism with sufficient competence in the state language, 4) effective management of the enforcement mechanism. The ratification by Ukraine of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages called attention to its implementation in Ukraine. The comparison of Ukraine with most European countries shows that in terms of linguistic rights the country’s main language (Ukrainian) is in a rather underprivileged position. There is growing awareness in the society that the idea of official or semi-official Ukrainian-Russian bilingualism was designed as an instrument of Russian foreign policy and became one of the key factors that provoked political instability in the country. Nowadays Russian is associated with the annexation of Crimea and justification of further aggression and the official upgrading of its status is perceived as jeopardy for the Ukrainian national identity and statehood. The change of the popular attitude to the idea of the official bilingualism has modified the positions of the major political players.

Official status of languages in the United Kingdom and Ireland

2018 ◽  
Vol 47 (1) ◽  
pp. 77-102
Author(s):  
Daithí Mac Síthigh
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Minority Languages ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
The Status ◽  
Official Languages ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Regional Or Minority Languages ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Official Status

What are the official languages of the United Kingdom and of Ireland? Constitutions typically provide a starting point, although the answer is clearer in the case of the latter than the former. Nonetheless, the adoption of language legislation by the National Assembly for Wales and the Scottish Parliament, in respect of Welsh and Gaelic, forms part of a general shift towards official status within the UK; clarity in Northern Ireland, contemplated by the Belfast Agreement and St. Andrews Agreement, is further off. These changes also highlight an emerging story of the status of recognised languages at UK level. Meanwhile, the constitutional position in the Republic of Ireland has been supplemented by legislation and caselaw. This article considers the developing status of various languages (especially Welsh, Gaelic, and Irish) in the UK and Ireland, set in the context of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages, issues of identity and territory, and the similarities and differences between laws on language within and across both states.

Language ideology or language practice? An analysis of language policy documents at Swedish universities

Multilingua ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 33 (3-4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Beyza Björkman
Keyword(s):  
Language Policy ◽  
Language Ideology ◽  
Language Practices ◽  
Policy Documents ◽  
Or Management ◽  
Everyday Practices ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Policy Work ◽  
University Settings ◽  
Point Of Departure

AbstractThis article presents an analysis and interpretation of language policy documents from eight Swedish universities with regard to intertextuality, authorship and content analysis of the notions of language practices and English as a lingua franca (ELF). The analysis is then linked to Spolsky’s framework of language policy, namely language practices, language beliefs, values (and ideology), and language planning or management (Spolsky 2004). The results show that the language policy documents refer heavily to official documents that have as their primary aim to protect and promote the Swedish language (e.g., the Language Act 2009), which appears to have been the point of departure for the language policy work in these settings, reflecting their protectionist stance towards the local language, Swedish. Little focus is put on actual language practices in these policy documents. The description of language practices is often limited to the description of the existing situation, based on concerns about Swedish losing ground as a result of the widespread use of English. Similarly, the notion of ELF is used primarily for description of the existing situation without sufficient guidance as to how students and staff in these university settings are to use English in their everyday practices. These results bring to the fore the question of what the purpose of university language policy documents should be with reference to a speech community’s everyday practices. It is suggested here that university language policy documents would benefit from taking research on actual language practices as their starting point and base their work on research on language practices, striving to provide guidance on local choices made for communicative effectiveness.

A corpus-driven exploration of U.S. language planning and language ideology from 2013 to 2018

2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (6) ◽  
pp. 916-937
Author(s):  
Brett A. Diaz ◽  
Marika K. Hall
Keyword(s):  
Policy Analysis ◽  
Language Policy ◽  
Language Ideology ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Language Planning ◽  
Policy Documents ◽  
Policy Making Process ◽  
Ideological Structure ◽  
Large Corpus

Abstract Language planning is influenced by ideological stances, and exports those ideologies through the policy making process. Residing beneath policy documents lies a language policy of the texts themselves, policing their structure and linguistic forms by which ideologies are managed. Thus, a careful collection of such documents should offer rich grounds for analysis, to leverage claims of ideology against empirically founded patterns, and offer rigorous comparison across actors, genres, and policy areas. We conducted a corpus-driven exploration of all bills from Congressional sessions 113 to 115 (33,968 documents, 85,612,752 words), and describe the collocational character of U.S. language policy, the semantic preferences of those collocations, and discuss the exposed ideological structure of these bills. By utilizing such a large corpus, this study responds to two issues in corpus-aided language policy analysis: (1) a paucity of very large corpora analyses; (2) further utilizes corpus-driven methods to naively investigate ideologies in status planning.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document