Language policy and language planning in mainland Southeast Asia: Myanmar and Lisu

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
David Bradley

AbstractMost nations in mainland Southeast Asia and elsewhere have one national language as a focus of national identity and unity, supported by a language policy which promotes and develops this language. Indigenous and immigrant minority groups within each nation may be marginalized; their languages may become endangered. Some of the official national language policies and ethnic policies of mainland Southeast Asian nations aim to support both a national language and indigenous minority languages, but usually the real policy is less positive. It is possible to use sociolinguistic and educational strategies to maintain the linguistic heritage and diversity of a nation, develop bilingual skills among minority groups, and integrate minorities successfully into the nations where they live, but this requires commitment and effort from the minorities themselves and from government and other authorities. The main focus of this paper is two case studies: one of language policy and planning in Myanmar, whose language policy and planning has rarely been discussed before. The other is on the Lisu, a minority group in Myanmar and surrounding countries, who have been relatively successful in maintaining their language.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Seyed Hadi Mirvahedi

<p>This thesis examines how Azeri, a minority language with the largest number of speakers in Iran, is marginalized by de facto monolingual language policies of the state favoring Farsi, the only official language, over Azeri in the three selected domains. The research provides insights into how family language policies, i.e. attitudes, ideologies and practices in the home, are influenced by macro policies of multilingual nation-states, leading to language maintenance/shift among minority groups.  The investigation adopted and integrated a number of complementary theoretical frameworks and paradigms. An ecology of language paradigm (Haugen, 1972; Hornberger & Hult, 2008; Mühlhäusler, 1996) was used to situate the research within a broader sociopolitical, historical and economic context. The ethnolinguistic vitality model (Giles, Bourhis, & Taylor, 1977), and language policy and planning (LPP) frameworks proposed by Shohamy (2006) and Lo Bianco (2005, 2008c, 2012a; 2013) were utilized to explore the complex interaction between macro level LPP activities and micro level attitudes and practices. The integrated model demonstrates how language policies implemented within state-run domains and institutions produce particular Discourses. The proposed framework further illustrates how such Discourses may influence people at the grass roots level which in turn could lead to language maintenance/shift in different communities and groups.  The data base for the study comprised two phases: the first phase involved ethnographic observations of the public sphere (linguistic landscape data), language use in the home (three case studies), and the local channel for Azeris (media data), interviews with fifty children, and authorities of ten kindergartens and preschools. A focus-group interview was also conducted in this phase to assist with designing an attitude questionnaire which was administered in the second phase to 150 parents of young children.  The empirical data suggests that family language policies among Azeris in Tabriz are constantly and increasingly influenced by monolingual policies of the state. The institutionalization and legitimization of Farsi through de facto LPP activities has resulted in formation of uncommitted, if not negative, attitudes among Azeri parents regarding their ethnic language. The analysis shows how a Farsi-only education system cajoles kindergarten principals into favoring Farsi over Azeri, leading them to suggest that parents and children speak Farsi in the home to ease their integration into the education system.  The linguistic landscape data demonstrates the absence of Azeri both in top-down governmental and private individual signage indicating its low status compared to Farsi and English, the two prevalent languages in public signage in Tabriz. Exploring the broadcasting media suggests Azeris' inclination towards Farsi, and then in a second place, Turkish channels. As a result, having attracted only one percent of Azeri audience, the only available channel provided by the government for Azeris, Sahand TV, provides arguably no institutional support for Azeri. The findings suggest that although family members may be viewed as free agents to choose a particular language to speak in the home, in reality such choices are highly constrained by the ecology surrounding the home which is shaped by LPP decisions and activities.  Overall, this thesis sheds light on the complex nature of language policy and planning in multilingual nation-states, and how they impact on language maintenance/shift processes among minority groups, whilst also illuminating how language ecologies are manipulated by nation-states to achieve particular non-linguistic goals.</p>


2018 ◽  
Vol III (I) ◽  
pp. 215-243
Author(s):  
Ayaz Ahmad ◽  
Sana Hussan ◽  
Safiullah

This paper evaluates the Language Policy and Planning's (LPP) Methodological Rich Points (MRP) in the geographic, ethnic and linguistic composition of Afghanistan. The theoretical construct is taken from the work of Nancy H. Hornberger on MRP in LPP. The paper explores a range of primary and secondary sources, and finds that the presence of inequality, marginalization and oppression in intra-ethnic and intralanguage group relations, sharing of resources and power account for neglect of the MRP in Afghan LPP. The geographic details in conjunction with explanation of historical process of migrations and conquests explains that most of the minority language speakers are concentrated in the difficult to reach areas of Afghanistan for their safety. Further, the limiting factors of Afghan geography explains the preservation of minority languages from the effects of majority languages. The study concludes with the proposal that it would be helpful to avoid the pitfalls of the current LPP in future by giving due attention to MRP.


Author(s):  
Hiwa Weisi

Abstract The current language policy and planning of many countries still adhere to the nation-state ideology of “one nation equals one official language”. This issue is likely to cause the linguistic minority groups to devalue or even abandon their own mother tongue and identify with the official language of the country. A case in point is Iran where Persian is the only official language and other languages are merely tolerated, but not promoted. The principal aim of this study is to find factors that lead Kalhuri Kurdish people to choose to speak with their children in Persian at the risk of losing their native language, a phenomenon which may happen as a result of linguistic/language suicide or because of linguicide. Therefore, a researcher-designed and validated questionnaire was administered to 384 Kalhuri Kurdish parents. The results indicated that the language policy and planning in Iran has made Kalhuri parents use Persian in interactions with their children instead of using their own vernacular, Kalhuri. The sociolinguistic implications of the study are discussed in the light of the research findings.


1994 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 156-176 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert B. Kaplan

In 1992, the author of this paper was invited to New Zealand to work within the Ministry of Education on the development of a New Zealand National Languages Policy. Prior to the arrival of the author, Waite (1992a) had prepared a comprehensive document laying out the language issues in New Zealand (see also Peddie 1991). A search of the documentation available in New Zealand (see, e.g., Kaplan 1981, National Language Policy Secretariat 1989) suggests that the notion of a National Languages Policy has been under discussion in New Zealand for more than a quarter of a century. Largely, that discussion has produced a great number of seminars, retreats, symposia, colloquia, and other meetings, and a plethora of reports, most now overtaken by time.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Seyed Hadi Mirvahedi

<p>This thesis examines how Azeri, a minority language with the largest number of speakers in Iran, is marginalized by de facto monolingual language policies of the state favoring Farsi, the only official language, over Azeri in the three selected domains. The research provides insights into how family language policies, i.e. attitudes, ideologies and practices in the home, are influenced by macro policies of multilingual nation-states, leading to language maintenance/shift among minority groups.  The investigation adopted and integrated a number of complementary theoretical frameworks and paradigms. An ecology of language paradigm (Haugen, 1972; Hornberger & Hult, 2008; Mühlhäusler, 1996) was used to situate the research within a broader sociopolitical, historical and economic context. The ethnolinguistic vitality model (Giles, Bourhis, & Taylor, 1977), and language policy and planning (LPP) frameworks proposed by Shohamy (2006) and Lo Bianco (2005, 2008c, 2012a; 2013) were utilized to explore the complex interaction between macro level LPP activities and micro level attitudes and practices. The integrated model demonstrates how language policies implemented within state-run domains and institutions produce particular Discourses. The proposed framework further illustrates how such Discourses may influence people at the grass roots level which in turn could lead to language maintenance/shift in different communities and groups.  The data base for the study comprised two phases: the first phase involved ethnographic observations of the public sphere (linguistic landscape data), language use in the home (three case studies), and the local channel for Azeris (media data), interviews with fifty children, and authorities of ten kindergartens and preschools. A focus-group interview was also conducted in this phase to assist with designing an attitude questionnaire which was administered in the second phase to 150 parents of young children.  The empirical data suggests that family language policies among Azeris in Tabriz are constantly and increasingly influenced by monolingual policies of the state. The institutionalization and legitimization of Farsi through de facto LPP activities has resulted in formation of uncommitted, if not negative, attitudes among Azeri parents regarding their ethnic language. The analysis shows how a Farsi-only education system cajoles kindergarten principals into favoring Farsi over Azeri, leading them to suggest that parents and children speak Farsi in the home to ease their integration into the education system.  The linguistic landscape data demonstrates the absence of Azeri both in top-down governmental and private individual signage indicating its low status compared to Farsi and English, the two prevalent languages in public signage in Tabriz. Exploring the broadcasting media suggests Azeris' inclination towards Farsi, and then in a second place, Turkish channels. As a result, having attracted only one percent of Azeri audience, the only available channel provided by the government for Azeris, Sahand TV, provides arguably no institutional support for Azeri. The findings suggest that although family members may be viewed as free agents to choose a particular language to speak in the home, in reality such choices are highly constrained by the ecology surrounding the home which is shaped by LPP decisions and activities.  Overall, this thesis sheds light on the complex nature of language policy and planning in multilingual nation-states, and how they impact on language maintenance/shift processes among minority groups, whilst also illuminating how language ecologies are manipulated by nation-states to achieve particular non-linguistic goals.</p>


Author(s):  
Yanty Wirza ◽  

Language policy and planning in Indonesia have been geared toward strengthening the national language Bahasa Indonesia and the preserving of hundreds of ethnic languages to strengthen its citizens’ linguistic identity in the mid of the pervasive English influences especially to the young generations. The study examines perceptions regarding the competitive nature of Bahasa Indonesia, ethnic languages, and English in contemporary multilingual Indonesia. Utilizing text analysis from two social media Facebook and Whatsapp users who were highly experienced and qualified language teachers and lecturers, the study revealed that the posts demonstrated discussions over language policy issues regarding Bahasa Indonesia and the preservation of ethnic language as well as the concerns over the need for greater access and exposure of English that had been limited due to recent government policies. The users seemed highly cognizant of the importance of strengthening and preserving the national and ethnic languages, but were disappointed by the lack of consistency in the implementation of these. The users were also captivated by the purchasing power English has to offer for their students. The users perceived that the government’s decision to reduce English instructional hours in the curriculum were highly politically charged and counterproductive to the nation’s advancement.


2015 ◽  
Vol 39 (2) ◽  
pp. 154-170
Author(s):  
Seyyed-Abdolhamid Mirhosseini

Traditional top-down conceptions of language policy and planning have been questioned by recent perspectives that advocate more localized accounts of language policy concerns in real-life social contexts. Schiffman’s (1996) conception of linguistic culture is one of these bottom-up approaches, which focuses on covert language policies. This study investigates some aspects of such covert orientations of speakers of the Mazandarani language towards their local vernacular in the bilingual Mazandarani–Farsi context of northern Iran. It specifically attempts to explore the current linguistic culture atmosphere in terms of assumptions, prejudices, attitudes, and stereotypes with regard to Mazandarani. These aspects of public belief are particularly investigated as referring to language use in ‘social situations’, ‘professional contexts’, ‘education’, and ‘media’. A group of 106 participants responded to a questionnaire that was aimed at eliciting their views on these linguistic culture domains as well as their ‘attitude’ towards Mazandarani. The study indicates that although the participants show very positive emotional attitudes towards their local language, their actual linguistic culture appears to be strongly in favor of the official national language, i.e. Farsi. Some concerns are raised as to the implications of such a loving-but-not-living linguistic culture for a more realistic understanding of language policy and planning.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document