Persian as a national language, minority languages and multilingual education in Iran

Author(s):  
Negar Davari Ardakani
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.


2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 14-35 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Phillipson

Summary The article analyses whether the expansion of English is adding to linguistic repertoires, or whether a process of linguistic capital dispossession of national languages is taking place. It explores the role that discourses of ‘global English’ and of English as a ‘lingua franca’ play in processes of global and regional European integration. It considers whether the linguistic capital of all languages can be made productive when in much of Europe there is a marked downgrading of the learning of foreign languages other than English, alongside the continued neglect of many minority languages. Language pedagogy and language policy need to be situated within wider political, social and economic contexts. EU schemes for research collaboration and student mobility are of limited help in maintaining linguistic diversity. The Bologna process furthers European integration but intensifies the hegemony of English. Nordic universities are moving into bilingual education, combining English with a national language. The 2006 Declaration on a Nordic Language Policy aims at ensuring that Nordic languages and English develop in parallel, that all residents can maintain their languages, and that language policy issues should be widely understood. If neoliberalism and linguistic neoimperialism are determining factors, there are challenges in maintaining the vitality of languages, and organizing school and university education so as to educate critical multilingual citizens.


2012 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 139-155
Author(s):  
Joan F. Chevalier

Subtractive bilingualism is widespread throughout Siberia, with indigenous youth often more proficient in Russian than in their non-Russian local languages. Siberia’s national schools, which are secondary schools offering instruction in local languages of Russia, provide critical institutional support for minority languages. The goal of this interdisciplinary regional study is to present an overview of national schools’ development in two neighboring southern Siberian republics, Altai and Tyva, up to the present, and to evaluate the role of national schools’ local language programs in promoting language vitality. The study examines a shift in priorities and challenges in local language education since 1991, the factors contributing to the shift, particularly federally-enacted educational reforms, and what has been done in these regions to meet these challenges.


2013 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 333-361 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Reilly

This article considers the YouMeUnity Report proposal for the inclusion of new language provisions in the Australian Constitution as part of a package of reforms for the constitutional recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. The article outlines the important symbolic and substantive effects of recognising language rights in the Constitution. The article explains how the recognition of a national language and the recognition of minority languages are conceptually distinct — promoting a national language is aimed at promoting national unity and enhancing the political and economic participation of individuals in the state, whereas protecting minority languages is aimed at recognising linguistic diversity, enriching the cultural life of the State, maintaining connections with other nations, and recognising language choice as a basic human right. The article argues that there is a strong case for minority language recognition, and in particular, the recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander languages, in the Australian Constitution, but warns against the recognition of English as the national language.


2017 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 103-114 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eduardo D. Faingold

Abstract The constitutions, organic acts, and statutes of the territories of the United States and the Freely Associated States are given an exhaustive screening to identify legal language defining the linguistic obligations of each territory or associated state and the language rights of individuals and groups dwelling within. The author suggests that the territories of the United States and the Freely Associated States are well served by “hands-on” policies declaring provisions that protect the rights of language minority groups, or of all people living in the territory (i.e., Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and American Samoa) and associated states (i.e., the Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, and the Republic of Palau). As in many states in the United States, the absence of an explicit language policy in the United States Virgin Islands has not prevented it from practicing implicit language policies that promote the use of English while also allowing minority languages to be used in the territory. Unlike many states in the United States which declare English as the sole official language and/or enact provisions to protect official English, none of the territories and associated states of the United States declares English as the sole official language or establishes provisions that hinder the rights of language minority groups.


2021 ◽  
pp. 211-218
Author(s):  
Chaim Seymour

The article raises the role of the minority national language within a global information society. The Hebrew language is a unique case of the revival of a classic language. In the early twentieth century a project was carried out to establish a technical university in what was then called Palestine The founders preferred to teach in Gem an, the dominant international scientific language technology. They daimed that Hebrew was unsuitable for scientific discourse. The opposition succeeded in defeating the founders and thus guaranteed the use of Hebrew in the fields of science and technology. The changing relationships and tension between the local language and the international lingua franca is still subject to debate today and the events of the so-called language war have much to teach us.


2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (18) ◽  
pp. 7267 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lubei Zhang ◽  
Linda Tsung ◽  
Zhuoma

This paper explores sustainable multilingual education policy for minority languages in one of the higher education institutions (HEI) in the Tibetan Autonomous Region (TAR) in China. Following Spolsky’s theory of language policy ecology, this study conducted a survey of 276 students, examining the language education policy implemented inside and outside the classroom in their campus lives. The data were analyzed from the perspective of policy orientation, management issues and actual linguistic practice. The results showed that Chinese, Tibetan and English were all valued and respected in the current policy; however, the academic function of language was mainly undertaken by Chinese, while the social function was equally shouldered by Chinese and Tibetan. The findings gave us an insight into the present status of language education in this specific HEI in Tibet, and further offered valuable information for the design of sustainable multilingual policies for minority education at the higher education level in China.


2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 131-139
Author(s):  
Lina-Jodi Vaine Samu ◽  
Helen Moewaka Barnes ◽  
Lanuola Asiasiga ◽  
Tim McCreanor

Focus group interviews conducted with Aotearoa New Zealand–born Pasifika young adults aged 18–25 years highlighted their intense apprehension about the diminishing abilities of New Zealand–born Pasifika people to speak their ancestral/heritage Pasifika languages in Aotearoa. Some Pasifika languages are also declining at their homeland wellsprings. There has been no comprehensive strategic national language policy developed in New Zealand where Pasifika heritage and other community languages can flourish. New Zealand appears to default to a monocultural given where English prevails without critique. Minority languages are battling it out with each other for legitimacy of existence. Resulting from New Zealand’s failure to create a comprehensive languages strategy for all, younger generations of Pasifika neither have fluency in their ancestral languages which impact negatively on their identity security and their ability to attain critical fluency in English to thrive as their migrant parents and grandparents envisioned they would in Aotearoa New Zealand.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document