Societal Bilingualism Course Structure
Nigel Musk 1. Language Contact language change Master’s Course Spring Term 2010 2. Individual Bilingualism code-switching & code-mixing http://www.liu.se/ikk/forskning-och-forskarutbildning/ske/musk/courses/language-contact 3. Societal Bilingualism diglossia, language maintenance, language shift & language death (obsolescence) 4. Language Policy and Language Planning national langgg,uages, the EU and multiling ualism, lang gguage revitalisation & bilingual education
Three (prototypical) sociolinguistic Some snapshots of bilingualism in situations Wales
1. Standard-with-dialects TV series: Pam Fi Duw? (Why Me God?) – life in and around a bilingual (Welsh) secondary school 2. Societal bilingualism (multilingualism)
Welsh homepages 3. Diglossia Signpos ting
Demographics
Official Langgguage Polic y & Planning Bilingual A bilingual website roadidsigns in Cardiff
Cardiff Caerdydd
Demographics Fig. 2 Percentage && NumbersNumbers ofof WelshWelsh Speakers Speakers Demograp hics of Bili nguali sm 60 1200000 of bilingualism in Wales 2 in Wales 1 50 1000000
40 800000 ers
30 600000 bb %% Num 20 400000
10 200000
% 0 0 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 1981 1991 2001 no. Bilingualism & diglossia DiglossiaDiglossia:: high vs low bilingualism: “The capacity to make alternate (and sometimes mixed) use “The varieties are called H and L, the first being of two languages .” (Concise Ox ford Companion to the English Langu age 1998) generally a standard variety used for ‘high’ purposes “Bilingualism is the use of two (or more) languages in one’s everyday […] life and not knowing two or more languages equally well and and the second often a ‘low’ spoken vernacular.
optimally.” (Grosjean 2002: 2) L is typically acquired at home as a mother tongue […] diglossia: in some speech communities there is “one particular kind of H, on the other hand, is learned through schooling and standardization where two varieties of a language exist side by side never at home, and is related to institutions outside the througgy,gpyhout the community, with each having a definite role to play” home.” (Ferguson 2000 [1959]: 65), one of which is a superposed variety, that is, not a primary “native” variety, but one learnt in addition to the native (Concise Oxford Companion to the English Language 1998, my highlighting) variety.
Ferguson’s nine criteria for Ferguson’s four prototypical cases of determining diglossia (2000 [1959]) diglossia (2000 [1959])
1. function 2. prestige Situation 'high' variety 'low' variety 3. literaryyg heritage Arabic Classic Arabic Variou s regional 4. acquisition colloquial varieties 5. standardisation Swiss German Standard German Swiss German Haitian Standard French Haiti Creole 6. stability Greek Katharévousa Dhimotiki 7. grammar 8. lexicon 9. phonology The case of Arabic diglossia Fishman’s extension of diglossia (Ferguson 2000 [1959]: 68) (2000 [1967])
Situation H L
Sermon in church or mosque x Instructions to servants, waiters, worksmen, clerks x Personal letterletter x Speeches in parliament, political speeches x Universit y lecture x Conversations with family, friends, colleagues x News broadcasts x Radio 'soap operaopera ' x Newspaper editorial, new story, caption on picture x Caption on political cartoon x Poetry x Folk literature x
Diglossia vs bilingualism 1 Diglossia vs bilingualism 2 (Fishman 2000 [1967]) (Fishman 2000 [1967])
Both diglossia and bilingualism - clearly defined or separate Diglossia without bilingualism - two or more speech functions communities “united religiously, politically or economically e.g. Spanish (H) and Guaraní (a typologically unrelated into a single functioning unit” (84) indigenous language) in Paraguay “where almost the entire - typically an impermeable group boundary between a small population speaks both” (83) H-speaking élite and the L -speaking masses , i. e. bilingualism Bilingualism without diglossia - the two languages or varieties is not widespread. lack clearly defined or separate functions e.g. French-speaking élites in a number of otherwise non- - may be indicative of “rapid social change, of great social French-speaking European countries prior to World War I. unrest, of widespread abandonment of prior norms before the Neither diglossia nor bilingualism - theoretically possible, but consolidation of new ones” (85) pronetobeunstableandprone to be unstable and perhaps only in small , isolated and undifferentiated speech transitional (87) communities. e.g. industrialisation in the Western world with means of - but since “[a]ll communities seem to have certain prodifduction from one speech communi i(H)dlbfty (H) and labour force ceremoniihihiliid”hiies or pursuits to which access is limited”, this from another (L) language shift from L to H category “tends to be self liquidating.” (87) A broad definition of diglossia Diglossia vs bilingualism 3
Broad diglossia is the reservation of higgyhly valued seg ments Problems (Musk 2006b: 74 -77) of a community’s linguistic repertoire (which are not the first to Rather than resorting to an apolitical consensus model, conflict and be learned,,y,y but are learned later and more consciously, usually power relations need to be taken seriously through formal education), for situations perceived as more formal and gg;uarded; and the reservation of less hig gyhly valued Fishman’s portrayal of bilingualism with diglossia as an inherently segments (which are learned first with little or no conscious stable and ideal state is a misconceived political statement. Any effort), of anyyg degree of ling uistic relatedness to the hig her model of diglossia needs to acknowledge the political reality of valued segments, from stylistic differences to separate tensions that may arise from an inequitable compartmentalisation of
langgguages, for situations perceived as more informal and functions for langgg(uage (or variety) L and H.
intimate. (Fasold 1990 [1984]: 53, my highlighting)
Diglossia vs bilingualism 4 Diglossia vs bilingualism 5
Problems (Musk 2006b: 74-77) The genetic (relatedness) question – do the languages need to be typologically related for diglossia to pertain? Domain analysis needs to accommodate more parameters in order to Arguments for: acknowledge the real choices that bilinguals make and can make in Diglossia is one kind of societal bilingualism not vice versa (Coulmas 2005: talk-in-interaction (including code-switching and code-mixing). 133)
The simple binary distinction H vs L cannot capture either the range Broad diglossia focusses heavily on the complementary distribution of codes (d(Hudson 2002: 39) of possible situations or domains, nor in many cases the languages or Language shift can only normally be H L, since H is learnt as an language varieties. additional (non-native) variety
But a formality/intimacy continuum (Fasold 1990 [1984]: 53) is at least one Arguments against:
contributory factor which can influence the choice of language(s) or narrow definition runs the risk of concealing the inevitable connections l(language variety(-ies)bll) in bilingual or mul lltilingual societies. between ‘classic’ diglossia and the other two broad categories Bilingualism & diglossiain Wales 1 ((MuskMusk 2006b: 79) Bilingualism & diglossia in Wales 2
vernacular: Galle’ nw at least hala could they send literary: Gallent (hwy) o leiaf anfon could ((y)they) the y of least send They could at least send
pltlant nw i ysgo lCâl Cymrâg. children their to school Welsh eu pp(y)ygyglant (hwy) i ysgol Gymraeg. their children (their) to school Welsh their children to a Welsh school
Bilingualism & diglossia in Wales 3 (Musk 2006: 368) Language shift
1 Cornilov: a fi’n ┌meddwl┐ ┌siarad┐ cymraeg nawr naturally yn and I part. think speak Welsh now part. and I think speaking Welsh now naturally Early model: 2 Batman: └a- ┘ │ │ ? 3 A Man: └ie ┘ Haugen on Norwegian in N. American context (1953: 370ff): yeah 4 Cornilov: golygu ((points towards himself with both hands & mean A > Ab > AB > aB > B means 5 smiles)) naturally yn gol ygu ca ’ l geirie s aesneg part. mean get words English A = language of monolingual (Norwegian) minority speech community naturally means having English words 6 ynddo ┌fe he┐fyd ┌ie?┐= Ab = A-dominant bilingualism in him him too yeah in it too yeah? AB = balanced bilingualism 7 A Man: └ie ┘ │ │ aB = B-dominant bilingualism yeah 8 Batman: └ie ┘= B = langgguage of monoling ual (Eng lish) maj ority speech community yeah Accounting for language shift/ language maintenance MacroMacro--societalsocietal factors 1
Three categories of accounts (Hylt enst am & St rou d 1996: 568-73) Examples of macro -societal factors: migration, industrialisation ,
language policy and planning, urbanisation (Fasold 1984: 217) 1. Studies focussing on macro-societal framing conditions Giles, Bourhis & Taylor (1977) divide contributory factors into three 2. Studies focussing on the connections between societal main areas: factors, speaker perceptions & actual language practices 1. status 3. Studies focussing on speakers’ language competence & the 2. demographic factors ethnolinguistic vitality structural (linguistic) consequences 3. institutional support ”that which makes a group behave as a distinctive and active collective entity in intergroup situations” (308)
The case of Breton 1 The case of Breton 2 ItInterconnecti ons b btetween soci itletal MacroMacro--societalsocietal factors 2 factors and language practices 1
Critiquevariables of macro-societal such as the importance models of social networks, individual Micro-interactionist ppperspective describes bilinggpual speakers’ use of
They fail to account for the dynamic processes operating between their linguistic repertoire as one aspect of their communicative
macrocontact, and and micro the levels: communication interactions of participants.” competence (Martin-Jones 1989: 107)
“Socio-structural approaches, however useful for defining macro- sees speakers as active interlocutors, who are free to make factors of of change change fail, to fail account to account for the influence for the influence of intervening of intervening language choices to express particular social and cultural
meanings perceptionsof of the the relative relative ethnolinguistic ethnolinguistic vitality vitality of groups of ingroups in may involve attention to minute detail, including code-mixing
(Hamers & Blanc 2000: 298-299) and code-switching
ItInterconnecti ons b btetween soci itletal factors and language practices 2
Susan Gal’s (()1979) studyygg of language shift in Oberwart/Felsőőr Choice of (on Austrian-Hungarian border) combining three complementary language approaches: in 1. Examining historical (generational) pattern of language shift to Oberwart/ German Felsőőr 2. Observing and audio-recording everyday language practices of (()Gal 1979: 135) limited number of bilingual individuals
3. Interviewing same individuals to uncover values & associations
underlying their language practices ItInterconnecti ons b btetween soci itletal ItInterconnecti ons b btetween soci itletal factors and language practices 3 factors and language practices 4
Critiqqyue of Gal’s study Critiqqy()ue of Gal’s study (cont.)
leans heavily towards evolutionism; peasantry has no place in indexicality between social identity and language, between modern-day society and is doomed for extinction and with it ‘peasantness’ and Hungarian, e .g . code -switching among any associated language (here: Hungarian) (Williams 1992: 116) middle-generation bilinguals is a sign of being “committed
plays up the degree of freedom to choose language as rational neither to the peasant nor to the worker way of life” (21)
beings according to their chosen cultural identity and plays states categorically that code-switching mirrors the process of down the operation of inequalities of power (MtiMartin-Jones 1989 : language shift implying that language is normally and ideally 114) monolingual, even in bilingual speech communities (Musk 2006a: 73 -74)
Language compet ence & &ttl structural consequences 1
Models Linggppuistic perspective - how the social pppgrocesses operating in situations of language contact & language shift impact on the linguistic of resources of a minorityygg language analysis convergent innovations – changes analogous with (Martin-Jones 2001) dominant contact language
divergent innovations –changes not analogous with didominant cont ttlact language
But both types may be responsive to the presence of a more dominant language (Woolard 1989: 363) Deviant (“incorrect”) marking of Language compet ence & &ttl structural gender in East Sutherland Gaelic consequences 2 (Dorian 1981: 124124--129)129)
100 100 (()1981) Nancy Dorian’s studyygg of language death in East Sutherland 90 80 (a dialect of Scottish Gaelic) in three coastal fishing villages 71 70 Incorrect m utation after definite Participants divided into three groups according to their language articl e (fem. nouns) ) 60 52.5 Incorrect m utation of attrib. adj. competence (traditional linguistic features present among the older % 50 41 after fem . noun 40 33.5 33. Gaelic speakers): 5 MascMas c. pronoun to to replace replace fem fem. 30 noun 20 1. older fluent speakers 20 10 7 2. younger fluent speakers 0 0 3. semi-speakers (criteria: conditions of transmission, Semi-speakers Younger fluent Older fluent speakers speakers competence & language use) Speaker category
Language compet ence & &ttl structural consequences 3 Bibliography 1
Coulmas, F. (2005) “Diglossia and bilingualism: functional restrictions on language choice.” Conclusions of Dorian’s (1981) study Sociolinguistics. The study of speakers’ choices. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 126-139. Dorian, N. C. (1981) Language Death. The life cycle of a Scottish Gaelic dialect. “There have been no startling departures to report in terms of types Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Fasold, R. W. (1990 [1984]). The Sociolinguistics of Society. Oxford: Blackwell. of change. [[]…] But if the typ es of chang e are not unusual, it seems Fish man, J . A . (2000 [1967]) “Bilingua lism w ith an d w ithou t dig loss ia; dig loss ia w ith an d w ithou t possible that the amount of change is.” (151, my highlighting) bilingualism.” Ed. L. Wei. The Bilingualism Reader. London: Routledge, 89-106. Ferguson, C. A. (2000 [1959]) “Diglossia.” Ed. L. Wei. The Bilingualism Reader. London: Routledge, Thus her crucial ppgpgoint is that “change in six rather prominent categories of 65-80. Gal, S. (1979) Language Shift: Social Determinants of Linguistic Change in Bilingual Austria. New the nominal and verbal grammar” taking place at about the same York: Academic Press. time mayyyp be symptomatic of lang gguage death (152 , my highlighting) Giles, H., R. Bourhis & H. Taylor. (1997) “Towards a Theory of Language in Ethnic Group Relations.” Language, Ethnicity and Intergroup Relations. Ed. H. Giles. London: Academic Press, 307-349. Nevertheless, “sociolinguistic factors, rather than purely linguistic features, Grosjean, F. (2002) An interview of François Grosjean on bilingualism. By J. Navracsics (14 April 2006)
Haugen, E. (1953) The Norwegian Language in America: a Study in Bilingual Behavior. Martin-Jones, M. (2001). Unpublished lecture notes accompanying the course modules: Vol. 1, The Bilingual Community. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. “Bilingual Education: ED30810” & “Bilingualism: ED32220” at the University of Hudson, A. (2002) “Outline of a theory of diglossia.” International Journal of the Wales, Aberystwyth. Sociology of Language 157: 1-48. Musk, N. (2006a, Final Seminar Draft) Performing Bilingualism in Wales with the Hyltenstam, K. & C. Stroud. (1996) “Language maintenance.” Kontaktlinguistik. Contact Spotlight on Welsh. Linköping: Linköping University. Linguistics. Linguistique de contact. Ein internationales Handbuch zeitgenössischer Musk, N. (2006b) Performing Bilingualism in Wales with the Spotlight on Welsh. Forschung. An International Handbook of Contemporary Research. Manuel Linköping: LiU-Tryck.