LANGUAGE AND SOCIETY
The Janus-like character of language (language is two things at the same time)
- Technology of communication
- Identity marker
As a pure technology of communication:
1. Language should not arouse strong emotional responses
I might have a sentimental attachment to my mother language (that is all). Also, more comfortable
speaking that language
2. The best we can do is to improve it:
Philosophical languages of 17th Century. The idea was that a more precise language will help us
nd truth (Leibnitz, Newton, Wilkins, Dalgarno… forerunners of symbolic logic).
Arti cial languages of 19th Century: Volapük, Esperanto (the most successful)… they were created
when there is not global language. If language is technology, we can create better technologies.
Thinking about technology of communication here were many spelling reform movements which
tried to simplify the language. English is the craziest.
As a marker of identity:
1. A language is not necessarily a source of political problems
Language has always been a marker of identity: speech has traditionally helped to identify the
place/ social position of people (“he comes for Gasconia”, member of the clergy, a peasant, a merchant…)
Language was irrelevant for most of the people, most of the time (up to 19th Century)
1. NATIONALIST TURN IN LANGUAGE MATTERS
Genesis 11:1-9. Myth of the Tower of Babel
One people - one language
The whole earth was of one language, and of one speech. “The people is one, and they have all one
language”
ROMANTIC VIEW OF LANGUAGE
The main idea is that the genius of a people is encapsulated/ captured in its language.
- Herder: “each nation speaks in accordance with its thought and thinks in accordance with its speech”.
- W. Von Humboldt: “language is (…) the outer appearance of the spirit of a people; their language is their
spirit, and their spirit is their language; we can never think of them su ciently as identical”
- Fitche: “whether a particular language is found, there exist also a particular nation which has the right to
run its own a airs”
- Jordi Pujol: “a people is a fact of mentality, of language, of feelings. It is a historic fact, and it is a fact of
spiritual ethnicity. Finally, it is a factor of will. In our case, however it is in an important sense an
achievement of language”
- O. Junqueras: “La identidad colectiva o nacional de un pueblo se expresa a través de la lengua (…) la
lengua (que) puede unir a los hombres, también tiene capacidad de diferenciarlos
Three main components of the Romantic language ideology:
1. Languages, which evolve naturally, precede (or give way to) states or nationalist movements. (If I have a
language, I have a nation).
But quite often is the contrary ( rst we have the nation or movement, which “creates” the language
(e.g. Batua, Modern Hebrew)
1. Languages not only encapsulate di erent views of the world, but they also have the power to make
us see the world di erently (Sapir- Whorf hypothesis)
However, the Sapir- Whorf hypothesis is false (e.g. McWhorter: The Language Hoax)
When you are speaking a language, you try to understand the culture of that language without
making any mistakes.
fi
fi
ff
ff
ff
fi
ffi
2. A natural/ fair political partition of the world should be based on language.
In some parts of Europe, there were intellectuals inventing a language (nation building).
2. IDEAL TYPES
CIVIC NATIONALISTS ETHNIC NATIONALISTS
Law is important Common roots (“blood”) are important
Choice (to do whatever you want under the Law) Inheritance
Rational attachment (to the State) Emotional attachment (to your family, ancestors…)
Unity by consent Unity by ascription (not decided)
Democratic pluralism Ethnic majority rules
Liberty (depends on the wellbeing of the nation) Fraternity
Individuals create the nation Nation creates individuals (endows them with some
rights)
Identity Identity
You are what you have become You are what your language/ ancestors determine
It has many dimensions (multiple, inclusive, It tends to be one-dimensional (discrete, exclusive)
continuous)
National Languages National Languages
Feel attached to it, but it is also a technology of Language is a building rock that de nes the identity
communication that sustain both the democratic of the people, who belongs and who does not, and
procedures and equality. COMMON LANGUAGE the content of their rights. NATIONAL LANGUAGE
3. LINGUISTIC POLICES
Two main principles to democratically accommodate linguistic rights.
PERSONALITY PRINCIPLE
Individuals should enjoy the same set of (o cial) language rights wherever they decide to live in the
country. Proviso: minimum level of demand.
It is more oriented towards individual rights.
TERRITORIALITY PRINCIPLE
Linguistic rights vary form region to region, depending on their linguistic demography (e.g.
Switzerland, Belgium).
It is more oriented towards collective rights, or the rights of language groups (right to linguistic
maintenance/ survival)
4. IN SPAIN
The problem is with the speakers of other languages than Spanish, that feel their language (and
identity) is threatened, and that it has to be protected.
The debate has focused on the problem of maintenance/ promotion of those other languages. Or
what kind of approaches could be implemented to attain that goal that preserve democratic/ liberal
principles.
Linguistic promotion as a mechanism to remedy the e ect of past injustices
fi
ffi
ff
5. LINGUISTIC RIGHTS. 3 MAIN APPROACHES
WILL KYMPICKA
• Approach to linguistic rights
Every person has a right to have “a context of choice” to develop as an autonomous individual. This
“context of choice” depends on the existence of a “societal culture”, that provides of a full range of options
in all areas of life.
If that “societal culture” is threatened, its members have a right to ask for measures that protect it.
The emphasis is that individuals have to have a context of choice.
• Caveats
- Only an applicable when the people in question are monolinguals. If they are bilinguals and speak the
dominant language they already have a context of choice
- Only applicable if the societal culture is vulnerable: I.e. if there really is a societal culture that is likely to
disappear in the foreseeing future
- It can only be temporary (and not permanent), in order to make the social culture to be robust again
- At a di erent level, or the level of implementation. Special protection measures have to be consistent
with individual rights. For example:
You can not create language “hostages”. It would be troubling from a liberal perspective to force
other-language speakers to support those measures. (People should be able to opt-out)
BIO-DIVERSITY APPROACH
Argument:
All languages have an equal right to ourish
Rationale:
Linguistic diversity is very much like biodiversity, and it is necessary that the world is not deprived
from the di erent world views that languages carry in order to maximise the survival of humankind
Problems:
- Languages do not have rights. Only people have rights.
- It is culture, and not language that carry di erent values/ views of the world; and those values can be
expressed in any language
REDRESS PAST INJUSTICES
Linguistic promotion as a mechanism to remedy the e ect of past injustices. It allows for di erent
points of departure (of di erent value):
1. My national identity has su ered, and I deserve redress. This is not a valid argument from a liberal point
of view (similar to saying that “I am Anabaptist, and I fell very strongly about it. We, Anabaptists, are a
fewer and fewer, and we require the state to do something about it”).
But: we cannot ask the state to promote as equally as possible all identities
2. My “societal culture” has shrunk, and it has to be strengthened in order to give me and my co-speakers
a “context of choice”. Argument with 2 problems:
- If the societal culture shrank, how much was because of repressive measures, and how much
because of choice (language shift)
- Problem of implementation: who is going to pay for that? You cannot compound an injustice with
another justice.
6. CONCLUSIONS
There is no such a widespread consensus that supports linguistic immersion. There is no
polarisation of preferences regarding the linguistic regime in the schools, i.e. it is not the case that all those
who want immersion are against individual linguistic rights.
Most Catalans would like a more balanced distribution of languages. Most Catalans a ord the
Catalan language a privileged position in the language hierarchy in the educational system (positive
discrimination).
There is room for negotiation around this long-lasting, contested issue.
ff
ff
ff
ff
ff
fl
ff
ff
ff
————
SIGN LANGUAGE AND THE DEAF COMMUNITY
Writing of a Deaf community or of someone who culturally identi es as a Deaf person requires a
capital D. “d” is reserved to refer to the audiological (nonhearing) condition.
1. WHO ARE DEAF PEOPLE?
There are many di erences turning Deaf people. Hegemeyer suggests that there are 9
subpopulations among Deaf people in the USA, referred to Deaf people’s patters of communication.
1. Those who use sign language as their primary language
2. Those who can communicate in both ASL (American Sign Language) and English
3. Those mostly from the hearing-impaired group who communicate primarily through speech
4. Adults who became deaf later in life. They have had the experience of hearing normally for either short
or long periods.
5. The elderly who became hearing-impaired or deaf later in life
6. Those who do not know either ASL or English but communicate through gestures, mime, and their own
signing systems.
7. Those who have residual hearing and can hear with the use of various aids.
8. Those who are both death and blind
9. Those who have normal hearing but they understand signing or are fully conversant with Dead culture
and integrate with a Deaf community.
Deaf people are not a single group.
ARE DEAF PEOPLE A MINORITY GROUP?
Deaf people form a distinct minority group. Generally, Deaf people have much less power and
prestige and lower recognition. They have been regarded as “problems”, whose situation is similar to those
of most ethnic minority groups in the world.
However, whereas most ethnic minority groups live in geographically de ned areas, Deaf people are
scattered throughout most placed in the world. Many of them also are not born into a Deaf culture.
3. THE CENTRALITY OF SIGN LANGUAGE.
A common denominator: sign language. Through it, there is the possibility of establishing
community culture, a sense of identity. Sign language has become into a symbol of unity.
WHAT IS SIGN LANGUAGE?
It is a fully developed, authentic language which allows its users to communicate the same
complete meaning as does spoken language. It is not gesturing. Gesturing is relatively unsystematic and is
used in an ad hoc way to express a small number of basic ideas. In contrast, signing us a very extensive
and complete means of communication. It can perform the same range of functions as a spoken language.
It has increasingly been seen as the natural language of Deaf people.
Breakthrough occurred when the Swedish government o cially recognised Swedish Sign Language
as a native language of Sweden. This was a crucial global precedent, a recognition as a distinct social
group.
WHY NOT LIPREADING?
Lipreading is often cited as the “normal” way for Deaf people to communicate with each other and
with hearing people and thus join mainstream society. In reality, lipreading is very di cult. It assumes that
Deaf people must assimilate and accommodate themselves to the world of hearing people.
4. PERSPECTIVE ABOUT DEAF PEOPLE BEFORE THE ETHNIC REVIVAL
The dominant and typical history view of Deaf people is as people who were retarded, incapable,
disadvantaged, incomplete, and a medical problem. They were generally deprived of the rights. This view is
typical of opinions about Deaf people before the ethnic revival: the view that the world of `deaf people is
lifeless and hollow. This “pre-ethnic revival” negative image of Deaf people accents popular misconceptions
rather than focusing on the positive aspects.
ff
ffi
fi
fi
ffi
NEW PERSPECTIVES OF DEAF PEOPLE
• A new Construction of Identity
Deaf people are progressively expressing and valuing their own self-constructed identity. As part of
this growing themselves move toward self-identi cation. That is, the Deaf community does not center upon
its lack or loss of hearing as a main characteristic. Instead, they de ne itself as a cultural group in which
membership is de ned by attitude toward one’s deafness. Identi cation with the Deaf community is
therefore about self-perception rather than physical characteristics.
Some Deaf people wish to belong solely to mainstream culture and not to the Deaf community. For
Deaf people, one central distinguishing feature of belonging to a Deaf community is often the use of sign
language as their rst and preferred language. Use of sign language establishes a boundary.
The Deaf Vineyarders did not see themselves as disabled, deaf, or having a handicap.
5. A NEW MEANING OF DEAFNESS AMONF DEAF PEOPLE.
When deaf children grow up among deaf friends and family, they often do not know that they are
deaf. They do not consider being unable to hear a concern or an issue, they usually accept the way they
were born. It is only when other people’s constructions of their deafness relayed to them that deafness
becomes a perceived problem.
The hearing community often de nes deafness as being de cient and not being able to
communicate “properly”.
6. MEMBERSHIP IN THE DEAF COMMUNITY.
Deaf people do not always belong to Deaf communities. Being deaf does not male someone a
member of a local or regional Deaf community. Deafness is often regarded as a necessary but not a
su cient condition for membership in the Deaf community. Higgins suggests that membership is achieved
through 3 overlapping and interacting criteria:
- Identi cation with the Deaf world
- Shared meanings and experiences that come from a Deaf person
- Participation in the Deaf community’s activities.
Some people Deaf people feel they are stigmatised as members of Deaf communities and therefore
wish to mix with hearing groups. However, Deaf communities force a perpetual dilemma. The extent to
which they either strive for separation from mainstream hearing society or prefer integration is endlessly
discussed and individually resolved.
7. ETHNIC AWAKENING AND DIGLOSSIA AMONG DEAF PEOPLE.
Many Deaf people do not use sign language as their only language. Diglossia occurs when 2
languages exist together in a society in a relatively stable arrangement by attaching di erent uses to each
language. Deaf people are increasingly bilingual.
Having both sign language and literacy in a majority language presents a danger of a perceived
di erences in status, with literacy. However, this perception depends on where and how literacy is taught.
A SYMBOL OF THE AWAKENING: GALLAUDET UNIVERSITY
Since the 1960s, the Deaf community’s ethnic revival has drawn strength from and been part of
other liberation movements. One of the best-known representations of an ethnic awakening among Deaf
communities is the recent development and vitality of Gallaudet University, based on Washington D.C.
Communication throughout the university in classrooms and meetings between students is by signing. They
not only educate Deaf students but also conduct research and developmental activities.
There is one particular event that symbolises the ethnic revival: the rst deaf president in its 124-
year history, was selected. It came to mark a new era in the identity, power, and position of Deaf people.
ACTION FROM THE AWAKENING: DEAF STUDENTS AND BILINGUAL EDUCATION
One traditional approach dominated the education of Deaf children. It was based on beliefs that:
- Deaf children should integrate into mainstream society
- The curriculum could not be taught though sign language but required majority language pro ciency
- Signing as a language was insu cient for full intellectual development
ff
ffi
fi
fi
fi
ffi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
ff
fi
- Sign language was only temporary crutch for those for whom the majority spoken language was
essential
- Achievement in the curriculum requires both oral and written literacy in a majority language
A second approach based on “total communication”. All modes of communication are regarded as
appropriate for those who are deaf or partially hearing. This most recent approach has been developed in
light of 10 principles:
- Sign language should be the rst language of all Deaf children and should be regarded as their primary
language
- It should be used to teach curriculum subjects
- It can be used to teach English, usually reading and writing
- The culture and language of the deaf community are recognised and validated, with children learning that
they belong to the culture of Death people
- It is important to begin with and build on a child’s existing linguistic and intellectual resources. Concepts
and knowledge developed in the 1st language transfer easily to the 2nd language. Use of children’s
ethnic language gives them pride and con dence in their culture and community. Children’s self-esteem
and self-identity are boosted by use of their ethnic language. School performance and curriculum
attainment is raised when the ethnic language is celebrated rather than devalued. The lower achievement
of minority language students and Deaf students needs to be addressed by enrichment forms of bilingual
education (Baker)
- Deaf children cannot acquire a spoken language easily or quickly because they have limited hearing
abilities
- The acquisition of a sign language should begin as early as possible, ideally soon after birth
- Deaf children need to be aware of Deaf communities and of bilingual education for Deaf children and, to
enhance their child’s curriculum achievement, to expect signing to be the medium of curriculum delivery
as well as of literacy in the majority language
- The supply of trained personnel in Deaf bilingual education and the availability of sta preservice
education programs
- Teaching in a bilingual Deaf education system may require tam teaching.
————
LECTURE: BANAL NATIONALISM
1. NATIONS AND LANGUAGES
They had declared that Belgium should be split into a loose confederation of 2 independent states
— Dutch-speaking Flanders and French-speaking Wallonia. No background explanation was o ered ti say
why Flemish-speakers might wish to establish their own state. Language groups wanting their own state. 2
messages:
- Telling British readers something about ‘them’, the Belgians, who might soon not be known as ‘Belgians’
- Implicit message about ‘us’, the British readers and what ‘we’ are expected to know. ‘We’ assume to
possess such common-sense ideas about nations.
Social scientists often assume that is natural that speakers of the same language should seek their
own political identity. In the search for security, people who speak the same language are irresistibly drawn
together, this is a part of human nature. Edwards has observed that “language is still commonly taken to be
the central pillar of ethnic identity”. Indeed, it is sometimes assumed that nations, comprising di erent
linguistic groups, are fragile compromises, which might be torn apart by the next set of crises and
insecurities. Herder and Fichte were declaring that the basis of a nation, and indeed its genius, lay in its
language.
Erich Hobsbawm writes that historians of nationalism should distance themselves from nationalist
myths, for “no serious historian of nations and nationalism can be a committed political nationalist”.
Ideologies are patterns of belief and practice, which male existing social arrangements appear
‘natural’ or inevitable. It is actually ‘natural’ that those who speak the same language will wish to form a
national groupings.
fi
fi
ff
ff
ff
2. STUDYING NATIONALISM AS AN IDEOLOGY
Nationalists can be identi ed as extremists who, impelled by a violently emotional psychology, seek
irrational ends; or they can be painted as heroic gures who, in particular, are to be found overseas, battling
against repressive colonialists. The term ‘nationalism’ should be restricted to the beliefs of others. Such
terms banish the word ‘nation’. The problem is that such terms overlook the object to which the ‘loyalty’ or
‘identi cation’ is being shown: the nation-state.
There is another reason for using the term ‘nationalism’ to describe what is familiar and ‘here, at
home’.
fi
fi
fi
