Re: emulsifying bilingualism

From: Martin Owen (mowen@rem.bangor.ac.uk)
Date: Mon Apr 03 2000 - 05:46:53 PDT


Jay highlights an number of the major ideological devides in the
bilingualism debate.
1) two language ideologies, one associating language with individual
identity and the other associating
     language with specific territory. These ideologies are in direct
conflict with each other. Arguments
     for the inherent relationship of language with individual identity
undermine the efforts of those working to preserve indigenous minority
languages threatened by demographic swamping, as speakers of mainstream
languages move into the areas historically dominated by indigenous
languages but do not learn or use these indigenous languages; on the other
hand, arguments for the inherent relationship of language with territory
undermine the efforts of advocates of immigrant language rights. There is
a tension between the right of the individual to make meaning in the way
that is appropriate to them and a collective need to sustain a language
form.

This goes one stage further because there is also an ideology which goes
beyond autochthony (ie territorial issues), the association of language
with the modern conception of the centralised state. It was significant in
the establishment of France and Itlay, where the language was used as a
force to create statehood... and so it continues (eg Eritrea , Chefena
Hailemariam; Sjaak Kroon; Multilingualism and Nation Building: Language
and Education in Eritrea , Joel Walters Journal of Multilingual and
Multicultural Development Volume 20 Number 6 December 1999)
     
2) Bilingual education is a two edged sword.
Bilingual education has a number of roles eg to sustain the minority
language in an autochthonous language region, or, to use the mother
tongue language for the education immigrants to a region where there is a
different language.

This presents other ideologies for bilingual education. In one case it
might be seen as a vehicle for sustaining language purity, in the other
case (eg hispanic-English, Russian-Latvian) it can be viewed as a
transitional process to educate into the "official language" but making
use of "good" educational practice by utilising the learner's mother
tongue. Both have tinges of authoritarianism.

Smith (1999) International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism
Volume: 2 Number: 4 notes about
 the understandings that young Mexican-American students develop about the
status of languages and language use in their bilingual school. The term
linguistic ecology is used his paper to describe the communicative
behaviours of a group, as well as the physical and social contexts in
which those exchanges occur. The data strongly suggest that children in
bilingual classrooms discern the critical lack of support to maintain
their first language. This case study documents and interprets the social
and educational processes through which bilingual children in one US
school come to appreciate the prestige and power of English versus
Spanish. It is through their recognition of the greater social status
afforded English even in bilingual programs that motivates them to
transition away from their mother tongue."

We might ask for whose benefit do we attempt to sustain a language?

There is real concern amongst language "purists". There is evidence to
suggest that language evolution as far as minority languages are concerned
is the first part of their death throws. As soon as it becomes ok to
switch codes, as soon as it is acceptable to include large chunks of the
dominant tongue, as soon as it is acceptable to " speak English for the
important things" and just save your native tongue for the odd ceremonial,
you begin to kiss goodbye to the language.

From an individualist perspective, the "anything goes in my use of
language" approach seems fine. I just express myself. However there are
key advantages to using a "world" or a "state" languages for the
individual. I can quite happily drop my Welsh speaking (as I did for 30
years). However do I have some shared responsibility for other Welsh
speakers? Does my use or non-use of a language go beyond my
"individualness"

"Hizkuntza bat ez da galtzen ez dakitenek ikasten ez dutelako, dakitenek
hitz egiten ez dutelako baizik!" (in Basque)

"A language does not die because those who don't know it don't learn it,
but because those who know it don't use it!"
                                                                          
                                   
  Mike writes:
"Somehow I think those who study the development of standards of other
kinds ought to have some helpful things to say about standards for
spoken language and their feedback effects on human practice."

Those of us who have studied second languages through processes like the
Israeli Ulpan schemes know how crucial it is for street credibility to not
use the formal and standardised forms of the language. I have cited
previously that the language spoken by Professors of Welsh in the street
diverges greatly from their written form. Nothing, but nothing gives an
English person away when they are speaking Welsh more than the formality
of their syntax and tha lack of the colloquial linguistic "hooks"(...you
know) missing from thier language.

Listening to my teenage daughter speak with her friends it is interesting
to ear the code shifts, in which Language (captial L) shifts are only one
dimension. However these kids are ideologically aware of why they speak
Welsh even though they have complete access (as native speakers) to
English as well. From my perspective explicitly addressing of the
ideology behind language learning is an ESSENTIAL component of language
learning and use.

Martin

PS I do not refer to Wenglish here. It is quite acceptable in morphing a
language to adopt useful semantics from other languages. The verb "like"
has morphed into the Welsh "licio". It is used with the same syntax as any
other verb in Welsh.

Another interesting morphing is the word "jeans". We have no letter J in
the Welsh alphabet. This needs to be placed alongside the fact that Welsh
mutautes beginings of words a lot. Some mutations are asprirant and
softenning B to Mh, C to Ngh. P to Ph and so on. Although we have no J,
the natural cadence of the language has produced a mutation of Nj.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue May 23 2000 - 09:21:11 PDT