Self-Determination of Peoples. A Legal Reappraisal. By Antonio Cassese. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995. Pp. xviii, 365. Index.

1996 ◽  
Vol 90 (2) ◽  
pp. 331-333 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Crawford
2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (267-268) ◽  
pp. 219-233
Author(s):  
Prem Phyak

Abstract The purpose of this paper is to analyze how research approaches and methods in language education policy could serve to erase local multilingualism and its associated epistemologies while reproducing inequalities of languages. This paper builds on “epistemicide” (Santos, Boaventura de Sousa. 2014. Epistemologies of the South: Justice against epistemicide. New York: Routledge) to critique how the knowledge constructed on the basis of the evidence collected by using research questions in binary/conflictual terms misrepresents the real experiences and voices of multilingual participants, particularly those from language-minoritized communities. This paper argues that advancing research and building educational practices upon the lived experiences of the people, particularly Indigenous and ethnic minorities, could help us resist the destruction of languages, epistemologies, and linguistic/epistemic self-determination of communities. I use the case of Nepal not only because I am familiar with its historical, sociopolitical, and cultural contexts (so I can provide an insider’s reflective perspective), but also because Nepal’s case offers new insights into understanding language ideological issues in the discourses of language education policies from the vantage point of “peripheral multilingualism” (Pietikäinen, Sari & Helen Kelly-Holmes. 2013. Multilingualism and the periphery. Oxford: Oxford University Press).


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document