scholarly journals Functional and Facilitating: A Look into the Promotion and Standardization of Dutch as the Official Language in the Netherlands

Politeja ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (4(73)) ◽  
pp. 189-203
Author(s):  
Zhang Jiachen

Dutch society is open and international-oriented. A long standing tradition of world trade has contributed to the English proficiency of Dutch citizens. This, however, brings challenges to the status of Dutch as the national official language in the Netherlands. This paper takes the framework of national language capacity building proposed by Wen Qiufang and inspects the Dutch language policy in official language promotion and standardization. Results of the research show that coming from other languages that undermines the position of Dutch as national official language is gradually increasing. The Dutch solution is to put facilitating measures in place and to develop functional tools to support language users and learners. This solution can be valuable for the building of European multilingual landscape with its facilitating feature.

1979 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 137-154
Author(s):  
Hugo W. Campbell

In the multilingual community of Surinam the official language is Dutch. This language has occupied the official status during almost three centuries of colonial government, the intermediate stage of self-government (as part of the kingdom of the Netherlands from 1954 through 1975) and after complete independence in 1975. Though the status of official language did not change, a different language policy had to be adopted with respect to different role components in each of four historical periods. The language policy adopted in each of these periods can be considered the result of social changes which took place, and of attitudinal changes with respect to the functioning of other languages in the community. The changing role of the Dutch language in the four periods is discussed in terms of its changing socio-linguistic profile. The first change was that from an ethnic group specific position (the European population only) to an obligatory position which concerned the whole population. In each of these two periods Dutch was used in relation to all main functions (communication* education., religion and literature). During the period in which Dutch played the ethnic specific role the language Sranan was used as a promoted language to perform the same functions for the slave population of the 17th, 18th and 19th century. This language was also used as language of communication between the Europeans and the slaves. The social change from a slavery society to a society of citizens only had forced the governement to discourage the use of Sranan and to consider Dutch the only language in the country. This obligatory position was eventually disregarded in favor of a partial role of the Dutch language in a multicultural society. The recognition by the government of a multitude of cultural ambitions has led it to accept the possibility of the sharing of functions among languages. Especially with respect to intergroupcoinmunication and literature, the recognition-of the role of Sranan as national language became the main feature of this period. However, the emergency of Surinam-Dutch, as a variety (xized language) of the Dutch language used by the majority of the Dutch speaking community in Surinam, has given the governement of the new republic of Surinam an opportunity to promote cultural integration by means of this language variety. Though this too will have to share functions with Sranan (inter-group communication, literature, etc.), it is suggested that a stan-dardized version might not only change its promoted language status into that of national official language but also give a better criterion to judge and to stimulate performances in education and literature.


Author(s):  
Janny H.C. Leung

This chapter compares some of the ways official multilingualism has transformed public institutions across jurisdictions, and comments on why these transformations fall short of expectations. This gap is a product of, among other things, the general lack of specificity in constitutional provisions. The status of official or national language does not carry a fixed legal meaning. What does a government have to do to “enforce” an official language status? Polities that have granted official language status diverge in their understanding of the legal implications of such a status, their degree of commitment, and their corresponding institutional adaptation. The chapter goes on to consider the significance of the current state of legal implementation. It is observed that bureaucratic and funding structures of official language offices limit their power and representativeness, and attempts to create linguistic equality may inadvertently enlarge inequalities among speakers of the same language.


1981 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 115-136 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heinrich P. Kelz

SUMMARY Language Planning in the Philippines and the Development of a Philippine National Language The numerous languages spoken in the Philippine archipelago — though all belonging to the same language family — are so different from each other that normally speakers of different languages can only communicate by help of a lingua franca. They may either employ one of the six dominant native languages spoken by more than 80% of the total population: Tagalog (24.5%), Sugbuanon (Cebuano, 24.1%), Iloko (Ilocano, 11.3%), Hiligaynon (10.2%), Bikol (Vicolano, 6.8%), and Waray (Samar-Leyte, 4.8%) or they may use English. With the growing influence of the United States of America since the turn of the century and the building up of a new school system, English has gained predominance in the fields of education and administration, thus frustrating the first attempts at the establishment of Tagalog, the language of Manila, as a common official language. During the past 80 years, English has undergone a development towards what can rightly be called Filipino English, differing from British as well as American English. In 1936, when the Philippines had become a Commonwealth under President Quezon, Tagalog — mainly because of its comparatively wide influence and because it had already been the subject of rather detailed linguistic research — was again chosen to become the future national language. This decision was strongly opposed by the speakers of Sugbuanon and Hiligaynon, and, at the end of the 1950s, the government was forced to change the name of the National Language from Tagalog to Filipino. Since 1936, the national language-planning institution Surian ng Wikang Pambasa has been working on the further improvement of this Tagalog-based language, absorbing elements from various other native and non-native languages. Next to the universities, which are active in the field of language-planning, it is above all the influence of schools, films, newspapers, and the cultural attraction of Manila, the center of the Tagalog area, which helps to strengthen the significance of Pilipino (now called Filipino) as a National Language. The development, however, has by no means been completed, and its political impact has led to the formation of five schools which are at variance about questions of linguistic content and form, but also about the status an official National Language is to have within the framework of society. At present, language-planning institutions in the Philippines still have to solve four major problems which result from the conflicting positions of (a) English vs. the various native languages, (b) the native National Language vs. the other native languages, (c) the "old" national language Pilipino vs. the "new" one, Filipino, and (d) the purist vs. liberal trend in language-planning. The predominance of English has gradually been reduced by a growing tendency towards a "Bilingual Approach," and Tagalog/Filipino has won considerable favor in many parts of the country. But the rivalry between Pilipino as Official Language and Filipino as National Language is the center of a problem which cannot be solved by official planning alone. RESUMO La lingvoplanado en Filipinoj kaj la estiĝo de fïlipina nacia lingvo La multaj lingvoj parolataj en la filipina arhipelago ĉiuj apartenas al la sama lingva familio. Sed ili tiom diferencas unu de la alia, ke parolantoj de apartaj lingvoj kutime povas interkomunikiĝi nur per komuna helplingvo. Ili povas utiligi au unu el la ses ĉefaj indiĝenaj lingvoj, parolataj de pli ol 80 pc. de la enloĝantaro, t.e. la tagala (24,5%), la sugbuana (cebuana, 24,1%), la iloka (11,3%), la hiligajna (10,2%), la bikola (6,8%) kaj la varaja (4,8%), au ili uzas la anglan. Pro la kreskinta influo de Usono ekde la komenco de nia jarcento kaj la kreigo de nova lerneja sistemo, la angla ekregis en la edukado kaj la administrado, tiel malhelpante la unuajn klopodojn starigi la tagalan, la lingvon de Manilo, kiel komunan oficialan lingvon. Dum la pasintaj 80 jaroj, la angla evoluigis gis prave nomebla filipina angla, kiu diferencas disde la brita kaj la usona anglaj lingvoj. Kiam en 1936 Filipinoj igis Komunumaĵo sub la Prezidanto Quezon, la tagala, ĉefe pro sia relative vasta influo kaj car pri gi jam ekzistis iom vasta lingvistika esplorado, estis ankoraǔfoje elektita kiel estonta oficiala nacia lingvo. La parolantoj de la cebuana kaj la hiligajna forte oponis sin al tiu decido, kaj fine de la 1950-aj jaroj, la registaro estis devigata sangi la nomon de la Nacia Lingvo for de la tagala al la pilipina. Ekde 1936 la lingvoplana institute Surian ng Wikang Pambasa plue plibonigadas tiun lingvon, kiu bazigas en la tagala, ensorbante elementojn el pluraj aliaj indiĝenaj kaj neindigenaj lingvoj. Krom la universitatoj, kiuj aktivas en la lingvoplanado, cefe la lernejoj, filmoj, gazetoj kaj la kultura altirpovo de Manilo, la centro de la tagallingva zono, fortigas la gravecon de la pilipina, kiu nun nomiĝas la filipina, kiel Nacia Lingvo. Sed la evoluo certe ne finigis. Gia politika efiko kreis kvin skolojn, kiuj varias inter si pri demandoj de lingva enhavo kaj formo, sed ankaù pri la rolo de oficiala Nacia Lingvo en la kadro de l'socio. La lingvoplanaj institucioj en Filipinoj nuntempe devas solvi kvar cefajn problemojn, kiuj rezultas de la konfliktaj roloj de: a) la angla vid-al-vide al la diversaj indiĝenaj lingvoj; b) la indigena Nacia Lingvo vid-al-vide al la ceteraj indigenaj lingvoj; c) la "malnova" nacia lingvo, la pilipina, vid-al-vide al la "nova," la filipina; kaj c) la purisma vid-al-vide al la liberala tendencoj en la lingvoplanado. La superregado de la angla laùstupe reduktigis gis kreskanta tendenco al "dulingva aliro," kaj la tagala/filipina gajnis konsiderindan favoron multloke. Sed la konkurado inter la pilipina kiel Oficiala Lingvo kaj la filipina kiel Nacia Lingvo estas la koro de problemo, ne solvebla nur per la oficiala planado.


2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 115-138
Author(s):  
Jette G. Hansen Edwards

Abstract This study examines the construction of linguistic identities at a time of significant political tension in Hong Kong, with a focus on Hong Kong’s three official languages: Cantonese, the most widely spoken variety of Chinese in Hong Kong; English, the longest serving official language of Hong Kong; and Putonghua, the official language of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), which became an official language in Hong Kong after the 1997 Handover of Hong Kong to PRC rule. Given the current political tensions between Hong Kong and the PRC, particularly in light of grassroots political movements such as the 2014 Umbrella Movement and the ongoing 2019 civil unrest due to the proposed introduction of an extradition treaty between Hong Kong and mainland China, the status of Hong Kong’s three languages is particularly interesting. Past research has primarily focused on the perceived value of these three languages in terms of instrumentality and integrativeness. The current study expands previous research by focusing on how the participants construct a linguistic identity of the self vs. a national language identity for Hong Kong, particularly within or in contrast to a national language identity of the PRC.


English in Malaysia has undergone several phases since it entered the country during the colonial period in the early nineteenth century. During the colonial period, English was used mainly for communicating between the colonialists and traders. English was the official language together with Malay when the country attained independence in 1957. However, it lost its status as an official language after ten years, in 1967, when Malay was made the sole official language. The medium of instruction which had been English gradually changed to Malay during the 1970s and 1980s with a deliberate reduction of the role of English in schools. In later years, nevertheless, there was official promotion of English arising from Malay being already firmly established as the national language and the need to keep abreast with global and regional changes. The status of English has, thus, shifted several times throughout the country’s post-colonial period. While it became the “second most important language” nationally and politically, there emerged some variation in its status in some domains, in speech vs writing and, of course, among individuals. Dynamic changes in Malaysian English have also taken place. This paper examines the developments in terms of the status of English in Malaysia, including terms like ‘EFL’ and ‘ESL’ which have been used, and discusses if they are still adequate. We will show how the status of English and the contexts of its uses have changed and why a single term, say ‘second language’, is of little use and has been throughout its history. We will conclude with tentative propositions of what might happen in the future.


2016 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
pp. 125-140 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elżbieta Kużelewska

Abstract Switzerland is often referred to as a success story for handling its linguistic and cultural diversity. Traditionally four languages have been spoken in relatively homogeneous territories: German, French, Italian and Rhaeto- Romanic (Romansh). The first three have been national languages since the foundation of the Confederation in 1848; the fourth became a national language in 1938. In effect, The Law on Languages, in effect since 2010, has regulated the use and promotion of languages and enhanced the status of Romansh as one of the official languages since 2010. While Swiss language policy is determined at the federal level, it is in the actual practice a matter for cantonal implementation. Article 70 of the Swiss Federal Constitution, titled “Languages”, enshrines the principle of multilingualism. A recent project to create legislation to implement multilingualism across the cantons, however, has failed. Thus Switzerland remains de jure quadrilingual, but de facto bilingual at best, with only a handful of cantons recognizing more than one official language (Newman, 2006: 2). Cantonal borders are not based on language: the French-German language border runs across cantons during most of its course from north to south, and such is also the case for Italian.


Author(s):  
Iryna Kolesnikova ◽  

The article deals with the main options of violation of speech design in the information space of modern Ukraine both at the domestic and official levels. The language disbalance of the system due to the global fashion for foreign terminology, without taking into account adaptability in a particular linguistic environment, the permission to democratization of means of communication and the use of peripheral layers and dirty language, especially in blogs, errors in the administrative language the officials transitions, as a rule, to surzhyk, genocide of modern Ukrainian language in the advertising field and other factors of influence lead to the destruction of national language therefore the analysis of these problems extremely urgent. Preservation of literary speech design, its deprivation of typical mistake at such language levels as orthoepic, orthographical, morphological, lexical, syntactic, stylistic etc. creates conditions to address in the Ukrainian speaking space shortcomings. The author suggests to look at the violation of the rules of the literary language as a kind of grammatical invasion, that is, the process of the linguistic organism and adaptation in it, with further spread among those who violate the standards of the language. This phenomenon needs attention of the state level. Recently, there has been activity in the work of the Ukrainian government and public organizations related to the strengthening of the status of the Ukrainian language as an official language and the creation of favorable conditions for its development as a means of self-identification of the nation and a communication tool (adoption of the «Language Law»). However, these steps are still not sufficient. Constructive actions are needed to really cleanse the Ukrainian language of elements that are not typical of it (for example, profanity, when is cultivated among young people), and also in terms of increasing the literacy rate Ukraine and agencies put forward the item well-bred speech as one of the conditions for employment of an applicant for the position can be also considered as a positive thing.


2016 ◽  
pp. 425-434
Author(s):  
Dan Michman

The percentage of victimization of Dutch Jewry during the Shoah is the highest of Western, Central and Southern Europe (except, perhaps of Greece), and close to the Polish one: 75%, more than 104.000 souls. The question of disproportion between the apparent favorable status of the Jews in society – they had acquired emancipation in 1796 - and the disastrous outcome of the Nazi occupation as compared to other countries in general and Western European in particular has haunted Dutch historiography of the Shoah. Who should be blamed for that outcome: the perpetrators, i.e. the Germans, the bystanders, i.e. the Dutch or the victims, i.e. the Dutch Jews? The article first surveys the answers given to this question since the beginnings of Dutch Holocaust historiography in the immediate post-war period until the debates of today and the factors that influenced the shaping of some basic perceptions on “Dutch society and the Jews”. It then proceeds to detailing several facts from the Holocaust period that are essential for an evaluation of gentile attitudes. The article concludes with the observation that – in spite of ongoing debates – the overall picture which has accumulated after decades of research will not essentially being altered. Although the Holocaust was initiated, planned and carried out from Berlin, and although a considerable number of Dutchmen helped and hid Jews and the majority definitely despised the Germans, considerable parts of Dutch society contributed to the disastrous outcome of the Jewish lot in the Netherlands – through a high amount of servility towards the German authorities, through indifference when Jewish fellow-citizens were persecuted, through economically benefiting from the persecution and from the disappearance of Jewish neighbors, and through actual collaboration (stemming from a variety of reasons). Consequently, the picture of the Holocaust in the Netherlands is multi-dimensional, but altogether puzzling and not favorable.


2014 ◽  
pp. 384-406
Author(s):  
Bob Moore

During the German occupation of the Netherlands between 1940 and 1945, around 75% of the country’s Jewish population were deported and killed, primarily in the extermination camps of Auschwitz and Sobibor. Much attention has been paid to the factors which explain this, but this article questions how any Jews managed to survive in an increasingly hostile environment where there were no ‘favorable factors’ to aid them. The analysis centers on the attitudes of the Jews towards acting illegally, their relationships with the rest of Dutch society, and the possible opportunities for escape and hiding. It also looks at the myriad problems associated with the day-to-day experiences of surviving underground


2015 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 163-179 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan Graham

This essay explores the ways in which Ireland's sacralised national language figures in Beckett's work. Oblique references to Irish in the Beckett oeuvre are read against a history of Anglo-Irish investment in the language as a mode of ‘impatriation’, a means by which to circumscribe anxieties surrounding an identity fraught with socio-political anomalies. In addition, the suspicion of ‘official language’ in Beckett's work is considered in light of his awareness of the ‘language issue’ in his native country, particularly in relation to the powerful role of the Irish language in the reterritorialisation of the civic sphere in post-independence Ireland.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document