Athens Journal of Law - Volume 8, Issue 4, October 2022 – Pages 505-520

Language Policies and Linguistic Rights

By MD. Tanvir Alam*

Linguistic Planning and Policy (hereinafter LPP) focuses on overt and covert laws
that determine when, how, by whom, and which language has been spoken, as well
as the ideals and privileges associated with all of those languages. LPP researchers
study the evolution of top-down and bottom-up policy documents, as well as their
application and influence at the municipal, regional, state, and national level.
Whereas the emphasis of LPP is on how effects are developed, enforced, sometimes
challenged, non-linguistic factors are frequently overlooked. The ecological analogy
grounds LPP research in the bigger social, economic, and language context. These
frames and analogies are frequently employed in LPP research, particularly in new
and emerging fields of study and discussion. LPP uses methods like conversation
analysis, corpus analysis, and film studies on a regular basis.

Keywords: Linguistics; Research; LPP

Introduction

Personal freedoms are an essential component of the global legal

transformation that has occurred since 1945. They've also become an important
part of contemporary national discourse. Rights rhetoric has infiltrated mainstream
political society as well as many non-legal scientific domains. 1 When an
individual or a group does have a claim, it is usually expressed in terms of rights,
and most often, in terms of rights expressed in terms of Many organisations have
found the rights debate to be extremely beneficial in the past few decades. 2 For
instance, the legal basis of some subgroups, such as lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and
transsexuals, has improved greatly in a short amount of time, thanks in part to
appeals to civil rights.3 Nevertheless, the right republic's triumph has resulted in
an increase in rights complaints. The number of interests covered by rights
lawsuits has increased dramatically. 4 The list of civil rights under multilateral
treaties is amazing, and it appears to be growing all the time. Many minority
language activists, attorneys, and researchers are drawn to the idea of human
rights, and they frequently discuss and use national rights as if they were clearly
civil liberties or existing before affirmative legislation. A number of experts on
minority language problems, for example, have advocated for a human rights
framework for language rights. 5 They have, in fact, promoted the idea of language

*
B.A. in English, Dept. of English, Daffodil International University, Daffodil Smart City, Ashulia,
Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Email: [email protected]
1
Homberger (1998).
2
Ricento (2002).
3
Shoamy (2007).
4
Pavlenko (2011).
5
Bloor & Wondwosen (1996).

https://doi.org/10.30958/ajl.8-4-9 doi=10.30958/ajl.8-4-9
Vol. 8, No. 4 Alam: Language Policies and Linguistic Rights

civil rights. The argument for linguistic individual rights implies a far-reaching
linguistic rights framework for the welfare of all world residents. The linguistics
human rights-based approach places great emphasis on communication rights to
education.6 According to the argument, only the right to study and then use one's
native tongue, as well as at least one of the national languages of one's place of
residency, are considered inherent, basic linguistic rights.
When viewed outside of the framework of education for women, however,
the concept of linguistic civil rights is less solid7. International bodies can
sometimes help to create a false impression of a high level of linguistic rights law.
For example, if one goes to the website of the International Council Area of
Education, Science, and Heritage Institutions (UNESCO) and looks at the
multilateral treaties trying to deal with language groups, one gets the sense that
lingual civil liberties are a well-defined classification with a solid foundation in
existing global legislation.8 A study of the substance of forty-four articles related
to language groups demonstrates that the collection of linguistic civil rights is less
rich, and their area of preservation is less comprehensive, than what it seems on
the face.9 In this work, I will attempt to demonstrate that the linguistics principle
of justice on issues of language has several flaws. This method is based on a set of
assumptions about constitutional principles that the study of legal interpretation
may find at best questionable. To begin with, it is noteworthy that the concept of
constraints (specific work area, massive number, demography density, corpora and
standing three conditions, and so on) is seldom acknowledged in the grammatical
human rights-based approach. 10 The notion of boundaries is much more
compelling if linguistic civil liberties become rights, because a sense of limitations
is central to the concept of privileges; many civil liberties are not ultimate because
they invariably conflict with each other or with other respectable values. This has
been emphasised by eminent scholars who have long been committed to minority
language preservation and revival.11
According to Josh Fish, the premise of an ethnic and linguistic republic must
include some sense of boundaries. The main problem, though, is that the actual
position and importance of language issues in civil rights, humanitarian treaties,
and constitutions could be changed. High aspirations can end in disappointment in
this domain. The claims to language human rights stand in stark opposition to
affirmative constitutional requirements, both internationally and domestically. The
lingual human rights-based approach vibrates between contemplating lingual civil
dignity as international legal standards and contemplating them as spiritual values,
or makes a claim; among wide-ranging proclamations of massive violations and
deprivations of linguistic civil rights, including lingual genocide, and the search as
to what should be considered unalienable rights, foundational lingual free speech.

6
Skutnabb-Kangas (2019).
7
Haque & Patrick (2014).
8
Bui & Nguyen (2016).
9
Chayinska, Kende & Wohl (2021).
10
Batterbury (2012).
11
Tardy (2011).

506
Athens Journal of Law October 2022

Certainly, the method is well-intentioned; it attempts to ensure minority language

multigenerational continuity and to address some of the current imbalances.12 Yet,
it should be noted that language civil liberties must be regarded in this light as
aspirations and ambitions first and foremost, rather than as entitlements already
acknowledged by internationally enforceable standards and whose successful
fulfilment can be required of states. In this article, I suggest a more comprehensive
definition of issues of language. I will demonstrate that the universal absorption or
equivalence of linguistic rights in general is not only incorrect but also distorts the
connection between government and policy. 13 While civil liberties should limit (at
least in theory) government action, linguistic minorities are frequently ceded to the
political system. It is important to distinguish between rights that are now
categorised as fundamental or constitutionally guaranteed rights and ambitions that
one thinks should be classified similarly. Many people, of course, oppose
government arrangements and demand the establishment of international law to
acknowledge more political rights. That is absolutely justifiable, but I have
decided to concentrate on the current state of language usage.14 All throughout the
article, several speculative reasons for the low status or uneven acceptance of
language usage in local and international legislation will be provided.

Literature Review

Beginning with our reading, we arrive at the following definitions,

frameworks, concepts, and theories that plans and policies have produced in
establishing human and linguistic rights:

(a) Linguistic, colonisation, and the essential need for suitable policy
documents to mitigate the latter's negative consequences for old colonies:
The truth that the past of languages is inextricably linked to European
colonialisation, Asia, and America, both intensely and cognitively, no longer
generates any scepticism. 15 This is especially true in the aftermath of the
publication of Herrington's seminal novel Language Studies in an Imperial Globe,
which was accompanied by a slew of other trophies such as documents on colonial
rule and Preacher Philology, all of which have been presaged in some ways by
Herrington's momentous job in Language Studies and the equally ground breaking
work Dialect and Marginalization. William Johnson, who’s pivotal 1786 email to
the Asiatic Society in Calcutta set the groundwork for what would become known
as linguistic analysis in the twentieth century, as well as George Abraham
Grierson, whose ambitious plan. The Textual Questionnaire of Asia (started in
1894 and completed in 1928), were both intimately involved with the colonial
power of the Indian subcontinent, including its complex autocracy.

12
Kamwangmalu (2012).
13
Gao (2016).
14
May (2003).
15
El-dali (2011).

507
Vol. 8, No. 4 Alam: Language Policies and Linguistic Rights

However, such actual events only serve to emphasise the close proximity of
the reality of the new linguistic philosophy to the era of imperialism and the
mentality it promoted16. They offer no conclusive evidence of a direct connection
or suspected coordination or cooperation here between the pairs. However, as soon
as it starts to give a brief overview, we are hit by the realisation that the colonialist
mentality and its poisonous ideology were woven into the very thoughts of these
early forerunners of modern "scientific" linguists. That mentality has yet to be
completely tracked down and eradicated, and it will continue to rear its head
occasionally until that mission is completed.17
This is true when it comes to many conceivably focused linguists' reticence or
lack of desire to fully face the dramatic reforms in language ecosystems arising
from unparalleled massive immigration and people all over the world starting to
come into intimate interaction with each other due to digital rebellion, making fun
of Saussure's concept of "filibusters," which linguists hold dear to their soul. The
forthright declaration that contemporary languages are, at their core, still 19th-
century fields serve as a gloomy reminder that some of their fundamental notions
need to be completely overhauled in order to remove the remaining remnants of
their imperial baggage. The very contentious notion of the "native speaker" is one
of Contemporary Linguistics' work instruments that reveals its imperial origins 18.
It is "one of the foundation myths of contemporary linguistics," because it is linked
to a number of other well-entrenched notions that shaped the nineteenth-century
Zeitgeist. She keeps adding to her famous book "The Beginnings of the English
Native Person Speaking" as it gets close to the end. Even though it's been present
for a long time, Anglo-Saxonism acquired a decidedly distinctive character in the
nineteenth century, which rendered it compatible with the increasing race theory
being established in the new science of man, including by colonial thinkers and
advocates. "The British view of Asia was extremely tactile," it says at the start of
her novel. The clumsy way that the inherent challenges of broad linguistic
diversity are very often stage-managed in such set-ups reveals the continuing
impacts of European colonialism on the nascent countries of Africa, Asia, and
America. To start, let us recall that language speakers are primarily a European
fantasy, a method of addressing all around the fifteenth century, maybe around.
The entire concept had come to maturity as a result of a strategy of
purposefully restricting minorities' right to use their own language for the sake of
"nation-building" (thus the late nineteenth century phrase "One people, one
government, one tongue"). When these European countries went on a rampage to
conquer and colonise Asia, Africa and the Americas, they brought with them a
new idea of national identity based on a shared language and tried to make
linguistic policies that fit with this idea. As the articles in this collection that
examine the complicated linguistic circumstances of Bahraini and Saudi Arabia
indicate, the outcomes were a complete disaster, particularly in the less secure
areas of Africa, and the ramifications are still felt years later. The publishing of

16
Erikson, Schipper, Scoville-Simonds et al (2021).
17
Guyo (2017).
18
Mufwene (2002).

508
Athens Journal of Law October 2022

this novel, titled Linguistic Plans and Programs: Philosophies, Ethnic Groups, and
Symbolic Interaction Areas of Authority, is a great addition to the increasing
articles on the subject and it is certain that it will give a much-needed jolt to some
to awaken from their 'doctrinaire deep sleep.' As we read through the chapters that
make up this book, it becomes clear that the writers understand the importance of
translation studies in mitigating the erosive after-effects of colonial rule that still
exist, although in nuanced and often unnoticeable ways, in most of the individual
nations that were only recently sculpted out of the ruins of colonial rule. Language
instruction strategy, of course, is a critical and fundamental aspect of this
approach. Because, as the authors point out in Chapter One, "what qualifies as a
language" comes out to be a major concern in post-colonial reality, which the
authors of this series of papers focus on through tales from Africa, America, and
the Arab world. The participants say that teaching approaches in these kinds of
settings are influenced by this tiered concept of speech and the system of linguistic
rights that it implies.
It is difficult to stress the critical need for investigations like those described
in this book. However, they also emphasise the need for more voices from the
South to join the crowd. There is a good reason for this: imperialism and its
residual effects are plain to see and assess. However, how one goes about it will
reflect one's position and viewpoint. In other words, from the perspectives of those
on the 'Khushi' half of the colonialist split and those on the murky half, there are
sure to be at least two approaches to the problem. Descriptions of the legacy of
colonialism that claim impartiality and moral impartiality frequently wind-up
trivializing (no humour!) the true narrative of imperial slavery's enormous pain
and long-term effects. Only real concerned speakers talking on behalf of the
oppressed can effectively advocate for structural adjustment in the shambolic
condition of things left over after colonialism and make reparations for the
ongoing inequalities. As a result, the findings included in this book are a step in
the proper direction.

(b) Language strategy and preparing modernity's post structuralism

Landscape:
Language is a complicated, multifaceted, and culturally contentious topic.
Language learning is any systematic endeavour to influence current aspects of
language choice, organisation, and learning. While language learning is prevalent
in all facets of life, it is most visible in the educational field, where it is concerned
primarily with decisions concerning the language of instruction. Since education is
generally seen as the foundation of cultural and ideological regional integration, its
importance can be recognised. This process generates a direct or indirect official
language for a certain organisation (e.g., a school): a set of rules or standards
meant to direct language conduct. It is said to have introduced the word "state
development" and "vocabulary development" as a way to standardise the
Norwegian language. Linguistic policy differs depending on a person; levels of
participation; goals; individuals and institutions engaged; underpinning linguistic
ideology; local contexts; power dynamics; and historical background, among
many other factors.

509
Vol. 8, No. 4 Alam: Language Policies and Linguistic Rights

For instance, North American, European, African, Asian, Latin American,

and Ukrainian cultures, for instance, do not have the very same theoretical-
methodological concerns and techniques. Despite this diversity, the establishment
of language laws as an organised field coincided with that of psycholinguistics. A
conference hosted by William Brilliant at California State University in 1964,
which brought numerous experts, was one organisational marker of this rise. We
regard language planning's birth as a discipline to become an ideology structure
that enforces an "area of things, a series of methods, a corpus of dependencies
mainly, a game of laws and descriptions, of methods and technologies. This initial
stage of language policy formation in the countryside as a discipline field, taking
aim at standardizing and trying to rationalise mainly depending on the
characterisation of the connection between language families and their functional
areas within the confines of the unified state, was marked by what we can consider
"crosslinking partisanship. This era is evident in a field-defining corpus of writings
from the 1960s and 1970s that connected language management with industrialisation
and nation-building activities.
The release of Language Difficulties of Emerging Economies in 1968 was
one illustration of the experts' interest in policy matters. The notion of
"epistemological patriotism" directed linguistic planning forward towards a
specific linguistic philosophy. Ideologies are common sense ideas about linguistic
structure and functionality that are implemented through institutions and everyday
activities to prescriptively position their practitioners in the social structure. Aspects
of language are beliefs about the purposes, goals, conventions, expectancies,
inclinations, and responsibilities that influence linguistic practice. Ideologies
express larger socio-political philosophies. Any organised selection of a language
variation as the information transmission for conducting governance and schooling
has enormous stratified implications for the groups or individuals whose variations
are excluded and undervalued. "Position policy choices conform to ruling elite
beliefs or react to conflicting ideas among those maintained by the ruling elite and
those of other diverse stakeholders," we mean in this way. In other words, a
"reflectionist" view, in which language is considered as a corpus of phrases
accounting for autonomously existing things, shaped the creative phase of the
discipline of applied linguistics. All policymaking debates on linguistics, however,
are motivation and effort in the respect that they are socially constructed, and so
they are related to questions of power dynamics and inequalities, as later key
theoretical advances demonstrated. When a government 'brands' a vernacular
under the correct institutional constraints, a modern social construct is created; a
new image is forced on the empirical reality. Standards, hierarchy categories of
language (colloquial expressions, normal, classic, hybrid, and dialect), and the
identification of linguistic forms are instances of an initial domain of items and
procedures in language learning and teaching (among many others, instructional
languages, formal, global, lexicon modernisation, renationalisation, and
etymological unity). In its broadest definition, standardisation entails the choice,
definition, and application or enforcement of a standard. The rhetorical techniques
of codification and socialisation force order on the chosen norm, resulting in a

510
Athens Journal of Law October 2022

dichotomy between normal and non-normal, but it's these culturally implanted
values that drive people's language choices. As a result, since they construct
systemically sanctioned linguistic hierarchy, these processes are tactics for
reaching agreement, authority, and inequity. To put it another way, standardizing
and cutting back on the factors that distinguish presents the effects of factors that
determine opportunities in an uneven socio-linguistic body of work. It's a
profoundly democratic activity since it uses normalizing and naturalizing tools,
including schooling institutions, to build distinction and dominance. Both theorists
and people who worked on building a country's social identity were involved in
language planning and policy.
Standardised, as practice of linguistic strict discipline or institutional, plays a
critical part in the creation of "individual nations," according to a group of
specialists in the subject of nationalist research. As a result, language learning has
always been a political construct. Language has aided in the construction of
abstract, separated, and regulated (normalised) language conceptions that have
been replicated by educational guides. The term "normal language philosophy"
describes this perspective on English. Furthermore, at the start of language laws as
a discipline field, "in keeping with the prevalent academic weather of science
positivity, only a minority of LPP founders were extremely sceptical about the
boundaries of technological procedures, and many envisioned exorcising subjective
nature and preferences from consideration." These technical considerations have
taken precedence over political concerns, assisting in the formation of a realist
approach that, despite repeated critique, continues to serve as a model for current
language laws. The critical linguistics ethnography method for linguistic design
arose as a response to established methods and is influenced by social theory. The
concept of ‘social environment' is far more complicated in this viewpoint than in
the old approach. A backdrop is a dynamic system in social contact that is defined
and regulated as a cultural and social area by a generally positioned presentation of
an assemblage of societal beliefs, information, circumstances, and behaviours. It is
a multi-layered system of physical and metaphorical relationships that organises
the use of speech. Contextual factors are not solely strictly regulated, exceedingly
instructed, or objectively engrained, as in ritualistic discourse commands (e.g.,
general practitioner interplay) or other organisations of socialisation (e.g.,
education), where people are placed as per fairly constant roles (e.g., Silverstein's
preconceived indexicality). Dialogic activities build and alter settings, making
them "emerge." The conclusion for applied linguistics is that research needs to
focus on the emotional realm of ideas and representation as well as the factual
features of the environment. In this popular tendency, language is seen as divorced
from its enabling context in the popular tendency (this is required before standard
linguistics are imposed). On the other hand, in the scientific viewpoint, "speech" is
understood as "cultural," but it is always dialogically permitted, regionally
controlled, and appreciated. Language policy is a paragon of practical dialogue in
this way since it connects linguistic and socio-political problems. Most notably,
the conventional paradigm's issue of the "autonomous person" has been
transformed into a matter of "speech" and action in the metaphorical frontiers of
power dynamics. Thus, the complete discourse machinery, including historical

511
Vol. 8, No. 4 Alam: Language Policies and Linguistic Rights

circumstances of structure and perception that (de) value language output, must be
studied. Language learning follows the official language and is neither consistent
nor homogenous. Linguistic Conflicts and the Way People Communicate for
instance, the Study of Contemporary Norwegian, for instance, identified four
layers of translation studies: normative choice, programming, integration, and
language additional explanation. These tiers were eventually expanded to also
include corpus making plans (scripting, trephinations, syntax, lexical standardisation,
poetic handbooks), status making plans (statutes and rulings regulate language
indicators or usage), development proposals (language learning practices), making
plans of usage (partisanship of linguistic propagation and use), and prestigious
making plans (partisanship of linguistic propagation and use) (evaluation of
linguistic uses). We can add "discussion design" to these 5 levels because it deals
with the ideology activity of organisations, communication, and authoritative
discourse in the production and dissemination of ideas and linguistic ideas. We
suggest that the idea of action at macro, mesa, and micro stages in language
planning reflects a "dynamics of size."
There are two actual political aspects at play in this scalability point of view as
tried to apply to language laws as one that ties official language to organisational,
straight up and down, formal, and lawful behavior; and another that concentrates
policy statements on local traditions and behaviors, philosophies, and motivating
factors that ultimately lead subject areas to choose one or another preferred
language. For instance, it recommends a convergence of local policies and
procedures, focusing on linguistic control, linguistic ideology, and linguistic
behaviours. The lines between applied linguistics and teleology become increasingly
blurred in this scenario. While linguistic planning research has focused primarily
on the macro scale, it is crucial to understand that policy and planning acts are at
the micro level as well," says the author. A level geopolitics has also influenced
what constitutes linguistics in Africa, Latin America, and the Arab world.
Furthermore, in such situations, educational strategies are influenced by this tiered
aspect of language and the system of linguistic rights that it implies. In this view,
law and management, in this view, are philosophical socio-political systems that
are entrenched both in broad and regional settings. According to the study, "Policy
and planning are ideology practices that help to maintain uneven power dynamics
among dominant and minority dialect communities." We believe that by assuming
pre-organised concepts and procedures that can be applied to regional languages,
we risk reproducing global behaviours and beliefs that have historically favoured
some individuals and organisations over others (the so-called West- and Southeast-
oriented languages) (the so-called East- and South-oriented thoughts). We also
recognise that an examination of the linguistic rights system must take into
account capitalist development and technologies, which have turned ideals of
variety and native customs into commodities of want and purchase. "Language
and cultural relativity are hot topics in the business world," it says. It's a successful
industry studying linguistic variety and marketing the outcomes of that study.
Propose a timeline in a review of the literature on the topic of language policy and
planning:

512
Athens Journal of Law October 2022

• Emergent literacy planning studies, which began in the 1960s and focused
on the geopolitics of reunification, in which speech was viewed as a
commodity and subjected to technical skills;
• Critical literacy policy, which addresses the social processes that underpin
language policy and regulations; Expanded work in the late 1970s and
early 1980s that began to question the positivist paradigm of pioneering
pioneers;

We argue that a change like this seems pedagogical and only makes sense in
North American and European contexts, but it does not cause any problems for
colonialism and post-colonial applied linguistics. It unifies the goals, kinds, and
methodologies of language planning into a single framework. We know and
understand both as follows:

• The influence of Euro–North American viewpoints on how dialects have

been created in non-European or non-North American settings and
• Local non-Euro–North American ideas and "perceptions of speech"
require an analytical and historic approach. As a result, ethnography, as it
has been developed in North American and European academic settings,
may contribute to the reproduction of past colonial notions.

We believe that understanding how colonial recollections have been replicated

and modified into modern applied linguistics is aided by the past. Finally, because
laws are inextricably linked to certain racial attitudes, language stories also require
specific means of presentation. Immigrants' or refugees' language difficulties, for
example, are also issues of identity in the context of what defines membership in a
country or nationalist conditions.
In some cases, the use of the preferred language is an "established" basic
right. Destructive philosophies portrayed speech as a species (for example, "verbal
death"), laying the groundwork for the mainstream discussion on language. The
pastoral nomads' philosophy of terms (for example, Herrington's discussion on
language death) are methods of place-making and awareness production. A critical
interpretive ethnographic viewpoint argues for the incorporation of language
within a concept of transformational grammar by focusing on how local socio-
linguistic markets organise language abilities. From a social, historical, rhetorical,
multi-lingual, and multi-semiotic linguistic standpoint, the concepts of absorption
and assimilation, as well as accent, variation, and linguistic, can all be problematic.
The semantic structuring of social areas is another topic that is handled by
language learning. The term "lingual landscapes" was coined in the area of
language management, specifically in the settings of Belgium and Quebec, to
emphasise the linguistic in structuring public space via linguistic regulations on
visible signs. Yet, in the usual method of applied linguistics, which concentrated
primarily on concerns connected to corpora and position planning, the notion of
language systems was under-theorised and under-researched. It offered a
description of the notion that became the standard as the linguistic environment of
a certain area, province, or urban agglomeration is formed by the languages of

513
Vol. 8, No. 4 Alam: Language Policies and Linguistic Rights

official street signs, commercial posters, road names, street names, business shop
fronts, and publicly posted signs on government facilities. Though the seminal
paper used an analytical method to investigate languages as a factor of ethno-
linguistic vigour in multilingual settings, research methods and metaphysics have
since advanced significantly, employing a variety of multiple perspectives and
methodologies such as semiology, ethnology, and discourse. The course's research
today incorporates sociocultural philosophy to investigate how cultural and
contemporary factors manifest themselves inside the language system. This
anthropological historical focus challenged the abstraction and self-contained
concept of "speech," rather expanding it to include all kinds of semiotic interaction
and how they are connected to certain other societal, geopolitical, and economic
contexts.

Methodology

This presentation provides a basis for language policy and planning as well as
an outline of primary factors. Following a short emergence to the ground that
explores some overall key issues by providing a framework for the kinds of
activities that describe the field, five phases cover four iconographic areas of major
focus to linguistic organisers, namely prestige planning, corpus preparation, dialect
planning, and prestigious planning, with a concluding part looking at approaches
to translation studies, with a focus on minority language privileges. Key
publications summarizing crucial current trends are reviewed in these categories.
As a result, we used journal articles from reputable sources for the research
methods, while the presumptions were made on a contract basis. Papers that look
at language planning from a crucial point of view show how strong the course has
become again.

(a) Framework
Linguistic policy (declarations of intention) and plans (application) (LPP) are
described as preparations frequently sizable and global in scope typically
performed by authorities with the goal of influencing, if not changing, current
societal ways of speech or literacy habits. The "linguistic design" procedures on
which the field was to be founded originated after WWII, but it was not until the
late 1960s that it began to take shape as a subject. Although conceptualizing the
subject was an early interest, there is still no widely accepted foundation for the
subject.
The goal direction to the 4 activities (status preparation, corpus planning,
dialect planning, and prestigious planning) generally used to describe self-control
is examined all over strategy and planting planning in a structure that implies that
consciousness of such objectives may be blatant (informative, scheduled) or
secretive (implied, unexpected), and may take place at several different levels
(macro, mesa, and micro). Other methods of defining the subject (e.g., linguistic
administration) are feasible. Although the sets of activities and their aims sound

514
Athens Journal of Law October 2022

right for explanatory reasons, they are extremely simplified by nature. In reality,
rhetorical and management objectives are usually numerous and more complex,
spanning a variety of activity kinds and perhaps clashing. Based on the chapters
produced for the Language Learning area, I'd want to propose four probable broad
advancements, each with likely outcomes for the area's orientations. These
sections were built all around the policy and planning framework for dialect that
was initially provided:

• Stages of language preparation While much of the research described in

LPP focuses on political or macro-level linguistic policy and planning,
micro-planning is becoming increasingly popular. While the latter has
significant consequences for goal formulation and allocating resources, the
latter while understudied in literature focuses on specific behaviour and is
gaining in popularity.
• False linguistic design While this may appear to be a contradiction in the
analysis of language planning, the failure to achieve LPP clarity, or to
tackle some language issues at all (namely, (in) decisions), has an impact
on how languages are learnt and delivered, as well as how they are
contextualised and perceived.

The role and objectives of planners have become more important as LPP has
evolved from being considered as a wide range of scientific processes to one with
an emphasis on context. Planning for compulsory early foreign language
acquisition, particularly English (ESL/EFL/EIL). Many countries across the world
are using LPP to boost early exposure to international dialects (particularly
English) with the aim of improving competency and allowing them to participate
in the information economy. LPP will look at how these programs were made and
how well they work, as well as how they affect language learning education for
regional, minority, indigenous, and other groups. Each of four types of linguistic
strategic planning we'll look at now illustrates these challenges to varied degrees.

(b) Status Planning

It looks at high-level preparing queries like "Which 2nd cultures should be
recognised, understood, and tried to teach?" and "What facets of the primary
language) chosen must be known, managed to learn, as well as tried to teach, i.e.,
which wide selection and to what level?" as well as "Who really should learn them
and whom will they be tried to teach?" and "When can learning start and in what
situations?" Samples from the Netherlands and Southern Europe are used to
demonstrate these concerns. According to the study, there are four dimensions to
the position of language skills:

• Their position for communication's sake.

• Their role as a lingua franca or medium for teaching language skills.
• Their status as immigrant or ethnic minority tongues.
• The extent to which linguistics or linguistic minorities are affected by l2
learning development.

515
Vol. 8, No. 4 Alam: Language Policies and Linguistic Rights

When adopting a status plan, all of these factors must be considered. Regardless
of the status quo's goals, planning decisions must be based on public needs. The
focus of the assessment then shifts to the type of requirements and how they might
be recognised and thus prepared for through assistance in their development.
Finally, it argues that while there is a sufficient body of knowledge and conceptual
foundation to address all status issues in the field of l2 learning, there still appears
to be a preferred choice for under informed laymen (party leaders) working to
develop laws without regard to research evidence or advice. (Expresses concern
about secret groups, who runs them, and the need to start teaching language early).

(c) Corpora Planning

It addresses what is understood about corpus planning and its relationship to

linguistic research and education in a review of the 2nd quintessential region.
Corpus planning, with its focus on the nature of the language to be taught to the
students, is the developing method with the most language knowledge for its
research methods, but it is moulded by prestige strategic planning. Its outcome
contributes greatly to communication plans, and it may make a contribution to, or
advantage from, a language's social reputation. The appropriate begins by outlining
the scientific foundations for corpus strategic planning (i.e., trephinations,
grammaticalisation, and lexicalisation), as well as exposition lexical growth,
aesthetic advancement, and restoration), with examples from both political entities
and tongues. Knowing this cycle lays the groundwork for creating curriculum
planning solutions, notably syllabi preparation and material design. Educators
frequently share information in the preparation and adjustment of syllabuses and
materials used in classes. Therefore, the significance of creating a system for
language education becomes clear at this stage. The increasing usage of English as
a lingua franca among non-native learners is one topic that becomes more of an
issue as English language teaching develops. The fact that many educational
resources are created by L1 groups and reflect norms becomes a key corpus design
problem. Furthermore, in such situations, it is being debated whether canonical or
various local literature are the best vehicles for instruction.

(d) Dialect Planning

In one ‘s evaluation of communication policy and planning, also known as

buyer-supplier, they found that in many countries, communication policy and
planning are the exclusive language policy actions, but that such actions are
restricted in their effect due to slow information sharing prices, a small viewing
public, and a shortage of funds. While communication planning is most commonly
associated with schools, it can also apply to less structured learning environments
in the public or in business. The chapter then looks at illustrations of the execution
of seven main communication policies (connect strategy, selection and training,
syllabus strategy, methods and equipment policy, resource planning policy, society
policy, assessment policy) and four major communication preparation (linguistic

516
Athens Journal of Law October 2022

upkeep, linguistic target acquisition, foreign/second language teaching, and

interlingual) objectives in three countries: Asia, Europe, and Norway.

Findings and Discussion

Although reputation or reputation management is not a well-developed field

within LPP, it proposes that users start by looking at three cases as Wales,
Malaysia, and Québec. The study of LPP in these political groups shows that
managing your reputation can be broken down into three different tasks as
follows:

• First, as in Québec, it appears that appearance (accolades) is linked to racial

or municipal identification (real or virtual) and linguistic development.
• Secondly, in Wales, the picture appears to be employed to illustrate a
technique of establishing and managing policy statements.
• Finally, as in Malaysia and especially in Québec, image has much to do
with motivation as well as the actions of language coordinators and the
people they serve. Each of these three types of images is examined in depth,
with additional examples provided to demonstrate the classifications.

It shows how many motivating factors associated with powerful nations and
powerless people influence language policy creation in the last section. Problems
of reputation or brand have an impact on what dialects are taught and how
minority language privileges are implemented. It tells a unique narrative about
how people can try to affect the status and reputation of linguistics. Minority
language liberties (MLR), also known as linguist civil rights, have become more
prominent as LPP's activity has become more intimately involved in its social and
economic relationships with the areas where language policy and planning take
place. The chapter examines the sometimes serious and complex character of the
interplay between LPP and MLR, emphasizing LPP's larger social, economic,
cultural, and political and social analyses, especially as it relates to the subject of
minority varieties' position, usage, and influence in the world today. This finding
contrasts with LPP's politically neutral, historically inaccurate, and technical
paradigms, which have distinguished it since its inception. While this modern
construction method for building languages fluently was considered as a virtue, it
resulted in the marginalisation of minority languages and their users, as well as the
creation of MLR studies as a result. In the framework of linguistic ecology and
language civil rights frameworks, the chapter also highlights MLR activists'
worries. Linguistic transition as well as lost opportunity; linguistic ecosystems;
nationalistic, porphyry, and chronological social constructivism; linguistic
substitute and mobility; lingual civil rights; tolerance-and publicity linguistic
privileges; and advancements in international and domestic legislation are among
the study topics covered in this paragraph. It might well be claimed that as a
response to these study results, linguistic coordinators and legislators are now
more openly discussing the political and social dimensions of LPP, as well as its

517
Vol. 8, No. 4 Alam: Language Policies and Linguistic Rights

implications for minority languages. These challenges are also making their way
more clearly into the language teaching field in the micro-planned perspective.
This paper gives an overview of LPP and looks at some recent changes and
possible future trends in the field of translation studies. It also looks at some of the
criticisms that have been made about it.

Conclusion

In terms of the relationship between LPP and Language Functions, carrying

out research on language laws reinforces Applied Languages as a growing field,
broadening further than language teaching to include a regard for human
interference in dialect and its societal consequences. Practical linguistics is now
widely regarded as a broad field concerned about social concerns wherein speech
plays a central role. As a result, recognizing what subjects of involvement and
conversation in LPP have been allows people to clarify what the latest events in
several countries Language Studies have been, to the extent that having to look
into the LPP investigation of time to look as per various research hypotheses
ratifies the parts of the city "in discipline" essence. Rising linguistic policy work in
light of the following theoretical propositions will enable agents from various
positions on issues (education, including such educators, school administrators,
and profs) to measure the impact of linguistic policy choices on their everyday
lives, as well as recognise their own roles in the development of explanation and
allocation of these policy initiatives. It can also reveal the patterns of language
strategy and wider social, financial, and political goals. The findings described in
this study can be used as a resource for people with an interest in LPP. It may also
aid in self-awareness within the area, revealing what countries researchers consider
to be important study topics as well as certain issues that must be addressed.
This study has provided us a look into the possibilities of developing future
studies evaluating recurring theories and approaches in several countries studies or
examining the architecture of collaborative relationships in creating knowledge in
the country’s domain of LPP. We feel that research examining a field's
consciousness helps us to better comprehend research methods and future research
directions. In other words, where we are now and where we are headed in the field
of LPP.

References

Batterbury, S.C. E. (2012). 'Language Justice for Sign Language Peoples: The UN
Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities' in Journal of Infrastructure
Preservation and Resilience 11:253-272.
Bloor, T. & T. Wondwosen (1996). 'Issues in Ethiopian Language Policy and Education'
in Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 17(5):321-338. DOI:10.
1080/01434639608666286

518
Athens Journal of Law October 2022

Bui, T.T.N. & H.T.M. Nguyen (2016). 'Standardizing English for Educational and Socio-
economic Betterment? A Critical Analysis of English Language Policy Reforms' in
R. Kirkpatrick (Ed.), English Education Policy in Asia. Springer.
Chayinska, M., Kende, A. & M.J.A. Wohl (2021). 'National identity and beliefs about
historical linguicide are associated with support for exclusive language policies
among the Ukrainian linguistic majority' in Group Processes & amp; Intergroup
Relations 4:924-940
El-dali, H.M. (2011). 'Towards an Understanding of the Distinctive Nature of Translation
Studies' in Journal of King Saud University - Languages and Translation 23(1):29-
45.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jksult.2010.01.001
Eriksen, S., Schipper, E.L.F., Scoville-Simonds, M., Vincent, K., Adam, H.N., Brooks, N.,
Harding, B., Khatri, D., Lenaerts, L., Liverman, D., Mills-Novoa, M. Mosberg, M.,
Movik, S., Muok, B., Nightingale, A., Ojha, H., Sygna, L., Taylor, M., Vogel, C. & J.J.
West (2021). 'Adaptation inter-ventions and their effect on vulnerability in developing
countries: Help, Hindrance or Irrelevance?' in Journal of World Development, vol.
141. www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X20305118
Gao, X. (2016). 'Linguistic Instrumentalism and National Language Policy in Mainland
China’s State Print Media Coverage of the Protecting Cantonese Movement' in
Chinese Journal of Communication 10(2):157-175. https://doi.org/10.1080/1754475
0.2016.1207694
Guyo, F.B. (2017). 'Colonial and Post-Colonial Changes and Impact on Pastoral Women’s
Roles and Status' in Pastoralism: Research, Policy and Practice 7:13. https://doi.org/
10.1186/s13570-017-0076-2
Haque, E. & D. Patrick (2014). 'Indigenous Languages and the Racial Hierarchizing of
Language Policy in Canada' in Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural
Development 36(1):27–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2014.892499
Hornberger, N. (1998). 'Language policy, language education, language rights: Indigenous,
immigrant, and international perspectives' in Language in Society, 27(4):439-458.
Doi:10.1017/S0047404500020182. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10993-011-9194-7
Kamwangmalu, N.M. (2012). 'A New Language Policy, Old Language Practices: Status
Planning for African Languages in a Multilingual South Africa' in South African
Journal of African Languages 20(1):50-60. DOI: 10.1080/02572117.2000.10587412
May, S. (2003). 'Rearticulating the Case for Minority Language Rights' in Current Issues
in Language Planning 4(2):95-125. DOI:10.1080/14664200308668052
Mufwene, S.S. (2002). 'Review: Colonization, Globalization and the Plight of weak
languages' in Journal of linguistics 38(2):375-395.
Pavlenko, A. (2011). 'Language rights versus speakers’ rights: on the applicability of
Western language rights approaches in Eastern European contexts' in Lang
Policy 10:37–58. DOI: 10.1002/9781405198431
Ricento, T. (2002). 'Historical and Theoretical Perspectives in Language Policy and
Planning' in Journal of Sociolinguistics 4(2):196-213. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-
9481.00111
Shohamy, E. (2007). 'Language Tests as Language Policy Tools' in Journal of Education
Policy and Practice 14(1):117–130. DOI: 10.1080/09695940701272948
Skutnabb-Kangas, T. (2019). 'Role of Linguistic Human Rights in Language Policy and
Planning' in Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics.
Tardy, C.M. (2011). 'Enacting and Transforming Local Language Policies' in College
Composition and Communication 62(4): 634-661.

519
Vol. 8, No. 4 Alam: Language Policies and Linguistic Rights

520