DOCSLIB.ORG

Monolingualism, Bilingualism and Multilingualism: the Human Rights Perspective

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Monolingualism, Bilingualism and Multilingualism: the Human Rights Perspective 1 Monolingualism, bilingualism and multilingualism: The human rights perspective Nirmala Chandrahasan Identity – whether on an individual, social or institutional scale – is something we are constantly building and negotiating throughout our lives, through our interaction with others. Human interaction requires communication and language provides the means of communication. Hence the link between identity, language and social cohesion becomes evident. However, some identities – notably ethnicity and caste – are imposed. Language defines ethnicity; for example, Sinhalese or Tamil language speakers identify themselves as Sinhalese or Tamil respectively. But individu- als can also manipulate a flexible system of identities based on the use of a common language or adherence to a common religion. Hence we can have multiple identities. Political and legal structures have grown around language communities and so tribal units and states have evolved. Within these entities, language has been used to forge homogeneity or promote language hierarchies by more dominant groups. Historically, conquerors and invading tribes have tried to impose their hegemony over subject people by suppressing their language, as it was realised that language carries with it the history and culture of a people and in it is encoded the identity of a people. An early example is Britain, where invaders from the mainland of Europe pushed the languages of the Celtic- speaking people to the fringes of the island and made English the dominant language. Similarly, during the Colonial era, the English, French, Spanish and Portuguese languages were at the top of the hierarchy in the colonial empires. It was also thought that homogeneity was a requirement for the development of nation states. Today it is recognised that the melting pot concept is not viable in multi- ethnic states and recognition has to be given to the separate identity of minorities. This is best safeguarded through linguistic rights. The concept of linguistic rights has been developed within international law and encom- passes educational and cultural rights. Linguistic rights are the human and civil rights concerning the individual and the collective right to choose the 15 16 Nirmala Chandrahasan language or languages of communication in the private or public domain. Linguistic rights can be based on the territoriality principle or the principle of personality. Switzerland is an example of a country which implements the terri toriality principle whereas Canada is an example of a state which recog- nises the personality principle. These developments in legal thinking can be traced to the concept of Human Rights which was advanced by eighteenth century writers such as Thomas Paine, John Stuart Mill and Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. These theories emphasised the inherent dignity and worth of the human person and gave rise to the ideals of the American and French Revolutions as set out in, respectively, the Declaration of Independence of 17761 and the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen of 1789.2 By extension of the concept, the identity of linguistic minorities came to be regarded as something that needed to be protected, just as individual rights had come to be protected under the law. Official recognition of these rights came after the First World War (1914– 1918) in the ‘Minorities Treaties’. The new states which had been created by the disintegration of three great empires – the Austro-Hungarian Empire, the Ottoman Empire and Tsarist Russia – were required under specific treaties to guarantee equal rights to the minorities within their populations; special provisions were made for primary education in the minority languages and use of the minority languages in the courts and official records. With the Universal Declaration of Human Rights passed by the General Assembly of the United Nations Organisation in 1948,3 we see the start of a new era where human rights norms are part of general international law. This Declaration is now regarded as forming part of customary international law and its provisions have been incorporated into the fundamental rights provi- sions of the constitutions of most countries, including India and Sri Lanka. Subsequently other conventions and international treaties, under the auspices of the United Nations, have been promulgated, including, most notably, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) of 19664 and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights5 of the same year. Article 27 of the ICCPR sets out specifically the right of ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities within states to enjoy their own culture, practise their own religion and to use their own language. Another significant inter- national instrument is the Declaration of the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities of 1992.6 This Declaration builds upon Article 27 of the ICCPR and imposes obligations on states to take measures to promote and protect the identity of minorities. The Declaration focuses on language rights, education rights and the right to a certain degree of control over development activities within the area where the Minority lives. Other conventions are concerned with specific rights of minorities. These include the UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation) Convention against Discrimination in Education of 1960,7 the The human rights perspective 17 UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions of 20058 and the Convention on the Rights of the Child of 1989.9 There are also regional treaties, such as the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights of 1981,10 the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages of 199211 and the European Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities of 1995.12 It will be seen that some of these conventions deal specifically with the subjects of education and cultural diversity. Language is important in the maintenance of cultural identity while education in the minority language is the mode of transmission of identity and language between generations. These subjects have to do with the human rights of communities and hence are the subject of international conventions and treaties. We will now consider to what extent these international norms are being applied or are impacting on the language policies of different states, including monolingual, bilingual and multilingual nations. The United Kingdom may be taken as an example of a monolingual country as English is spoken by all the inhabitants and it is the language of administration. But even here in recent times an awareness of the need to protect and nurture the ancient regional languages is evident. In Wales the Welsh Language Act of 199313 and the Government of Wales Act of 199814 were passed to protect and give recognition to the Welsh language. Then in 2012 the National Assembly for Wales (Official Languages) Act15 was passed with the aim of further encouraging the use of the Welsh language. Today English and Welsh have equal status in Wales. In Scotland, meanwhile, the Gaelic Language (Scotland) Act16 was passed in 2005; this is the first piece of legislation to give formal recognition to the Scottish Gaelic language. The Act seeks to secure Gaelic as an official language of Scotland, commanding equal respect with English. It is interesting to recall that in 1616, an Act of the Privy Council ruled that Gaelic should be ‘abolishit and removit’ from the land.17 In some states discriminatory policies which did not give recognition to minority languages have led to separatist movements and insurgencies. In Spain during the Franco era the Basque language was prohibited and this led to the ETA (Euskadi Ta Askatasuna, Basque Homeland and Freedom) movement in Spain. Today, while the official language of the nation is Spanish, the Spanish Constitution of 197818 permits autonomous communities to grant co-official language status to the other languages of the country. The Basque Autonomous Region has therefore given such status to the Basque language. In Turkey, however, under the indivisibility principle set out in the Preamble to the Constitution of 1982,19 Turkish is the only official language. The minority Kurdish language is not given any official recognition and is not taught in government schools, although private courses in the language may be offered. Turning to bilingual states, Canada may be cited as a good example. Between 1963 and 1969, the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Bi- culturalism20 investigated this matter. Its final report rejected the idea of creating two unilingual regions in the country; this proposal would have 18 Nirmala Chandrahasan made French the primary language of Quebec, while the rest of the country would have used English as its primary language. Instead, the Commission recommended a bilingual strategy that would promote both languages across the country. As a result, the Official Languages Act of 1969, amended in 1988,21 makes both English and French the official languages, so that federal institutions are required to provide services in both languages. Under the Official Languages in Education programme, started in 1970, bilingualism in education is provided for. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms – in- corporated in the Constitution Act of 198222 – also enshrines language rights. This policy has largely contained the demand for separation of Quebec, advocated by the separatist parties in Quebec. Finland is another example of a bilingual state. The Constitution provides Finnish and Swedish as the national languages of the country. Services have to be provided in both languages and the rights of both citizens promoted on an identical basis.23 The Åland Islands is an autonomous region of Finland which is entirely Swedish speaking and is administered in that language. The Åland Islands was one of the first examples of internal self-determination; this was granted by the Autonomy Act of 1920 (revised in 1951 and 1993).24 Self-determination has led to demands for secession from Finland and amal- gamation with Sweden to be dropped.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Language Projections: 2010 to 2020 Presented at the Federal Forecasters Conference, Washington, DC, April 21, 2011 Hyon B
    Language Projections: 2010 to 2020 Presented at the Federal Forecasters Conference, Washington, DC, April 21, 2011 Hyon B. Shin, Social, Economic, and Housing Statistics Division, U.S. Census Bureau Jennifer M. Ortman, Population Division, U.S. Census Bureau This paper is released to inform interested parties of BACKGROUND ongoing research and to encourage discussion of work in progress. Any views expressed on statistical, The United States has always been a country noted for methodological, technical, or operational issues are its linguistic diversity. Information on language use and those of the authors and not necessarily those of the proficiency collected from decennial censuses shows U.S. Census Bureau. that there have been striking changes in the linguistic landscape. These changes have been driven in large ABSTRACT part by a shift in the origins of immigration to the United States. During the late 19th and early 20th Language diversity in the United States has changed centuries, the majority of U.S. immigrants spoke either rapidly over the past three decades. The use of a English or a European language such as German, Polish, language other than English at home increased by 148 or Italian (Stevens, 1999). Beginning in the middle of percent between 1980 and 2009 and this increase was the 20th century, patterns of immigration shifted to not evenly distributed among languages. Polish, countries in Latin America, the Caribbean, and Asia German, and Italian actually had fewer speakers in 2009 (Bean and Stevens, 2005). As a result, the use of compared to 1980. Other languages, such as Spanish, Spanish and Asian or Pacific Island languages began to Vietnamese, and Russian, had considerable increases in grow.
    [Show full text]
  • Language Assimilation Today: Bilingualism Persists More Than in the Past, but English Still Dominates
    Language Assimilation Today: Bilingualism Persists More Than in the Past, But English Still Dominates Richard Alba Lewis Mumford Center for Comparative Urban and Regional Research University at Albany December, 2004 Research Assistants Karen Marotz and Jacob Stowell contributed toward the preparation and analysis of the data reported here. Summary Because of renewed immigration, fears about the status of English as the linguistic glue holding America together are common today. In a very different vein, multiculturalists have expressed hopes of profound change to American culture brought on by the persistence across generations of the mother tongues of contemporary immigrants. In either case, the underlying claim is that the past pattern of rapid acceptance of English by the children and grandchildren of the immigrants may be breaking down. Using 2000 Census data, the Mumford Center has undertaken an analysis of the languages spoken at home by school-age children in newcomer families in order to examine the validity of the claim. We find that, although some changes have occurred, it greatly exaggerates them. English is almost universally accepted by the children and grandchildren of the immigrants who have come to the U.S. in great numbers since the 1960s. Moreover, by the third generation, i.e., the grandchildren of immigrants, bilingualism is maintained only by minorities of almost all groups. Among Asian groups, these minorities are so small that the levels of linguistic assimilation are scarcely different from those of the past. Among the Spanish-speaking groups, the bilingual minorities are larger than was the case among most European immigrant groups. Nevertheless, English monolingualism is the predominant pattern by the third generation, except for Dominicans, a group known to maintain levels of back-and-forth travel to its homeland.
    [Show full text]
  • Toward a Comprehensive Model For
    Toward a Comprehensive Model for Nahuatl Language Research and Revitalization JUSTYNA OLKO,a JOHN SULLIVANa, b, c University of Warsaw;a Instituto de Docencia e Investigación Etnológica de Zacatecas;b Universidad Autonóma de Zacatecasc 1 Introduction Nahuatl, a Uto-Aztecan language, enjoyed great political and cultural importance in the pre-Hispanic and colonial world over a long stretch of time and has survived to the present day.1 With an estimated 1.376 million speakers currently inhabiting several regions of Mexico,2 it would not seem to be in danger of extinction, but in fact it is. Formerly the language of the Aztec empire and a lingua franca across Mesoamerica, after the Spanish conquest Nahuatl thrived in the new colonial contexts and was widely used for administrative and religious purposes across New Spain, including areas where other native languages prevailed. Although the colonial language policy and prolonged Hispanicization are often blamed today as the main cause of language shift and the gradual displacement of Nahuatl, legal steps reinforced its importance in Spanish Mesoamerica; these include the decision by the king Philip II in 1570 to make Nahuatl the linguistic medium for religious conversion and for the training of ecclesiastics working with the native people in different regions. Members of the nobility belonging to other ethnic groups, as well as numerous non-elite figures of different backgrounds, including Spaniards, and especially friars and priests, used spoken and written Nahuatl to facilitate communication in different aspects of colonial life and religious instruction (Yannanakis 2012:669-670; Nesvig 2012:739-758; Schwaller 2012:678-687).
    [Show full text]
  • Language Planning and Education of Adult Immigrants in Canada
    London Review of Education DOI:10.18546/LRE.14.2.10 Volume14,Number2,September2016 Language planning and education of adult immigrants in Canada: Contrasting the provinces of Quebec and British Columbia, and the cities of Montreal and Vancouver CatherineEllyson Bem & Co. CarolineAndrewandRichardClément* University of Ottawa Combiningpolicyanalysiswithlanguagepolicyandplanninganalysis,ourarticlecomparatively assessestwomodelsofadultimmigrants’languageeducationintwoverydifferentprovinces ofthesamefederalcountry.Inordertodoso,wefocusspecificallyontwoquestions:‘Whydo governmentsprovidelanguageeducationtoadults?’and‘Howisitprovidedintheconcrete settingoftwoofthebiggestcitiesinCanada?’Beyonddescribingthetwomodelsofadult immigrants’ language education in Quebec, British Columbia, and their respective largest cities,ourarticleponderswhetherandinwhatsensedemography,languagehistory,andthe commonfederalframeworkcanexplainthesimilaritiesanddifferencesbetweenthetwo.These contextualelementscanexplainwhycitiescontinuetohavesofewresponsibilitiesregarding thesettlement,integration,andlanguageeducationofnewcomers.Onlysuchunderstandingwill eventuallyallowforproperreformsintermsofcities’responsibilitiesregardingimmigration. Keywords: multilingualcities;multiculturalism;adulteducation;immigration;languagelaws Introduction Canada is a very large country with much variation between provinces and cities in many dimensions.Onesuchaspect,whichremainsacurrenthottopicfordemographicandhistorical reasons,islanguage;morespecifically,whyandhowlanguageplanningandpolicyareenacted
    [Show full text]
  • Mapping Monolingualism Within a Language/Race Cartography: Reflections and Lessons Learned from ‘World Languages and Cultures Day’
    L2 Journal, Volume 9 Issue 1 (2017), pp. 1-20 http://repositories.cdlib.org/uccllt/l2/vol9/iss1/art1 Mapping Monolingualism within a Language/Race Cartography: Reflections and Lessons Learned from ‘World Languages and Cultures Day’ ADAM SCHWARTZ Oregon State University E-mail: [email protected] BRADLEY BOOVY Oregon State University E-mail: [email protected] An interactive exhibit at a university’s ‘World Language Day’ challenges systems of privilege that organize the study of ‘foreign’ and ‘world’ languages. Through discursive framing, participants’ written responses reveal an alignment with hegemonic ideologies of race and nation that elevate English monolingualism as a proxy for a White, virtuous cultural order within which ‘World language’ education safely—and additively—finds its place. _______________ INTRODUCTION In her seminal paper “Language and Borders,” anthropologist Bonnie Urciuoli (1995) introduces the semiotic complexity, fluidity, and interconnectedness of the title’s two key terms: “Border-making elements take on their social reality as ‘languages,’ ‘accents,’ ‘mixing,’ or ‘words’” (p. 525). Similarly, when languages act as borders, they “… take on sharp edges… they are mapped onto people and therefore onto ethnic nationality (which may or may not map onto a nation-state).” Considering that, as Urciuoli writes, “ethnicity has become nonlocalized as people move into ‘global ethnoscapes,’ much of what the ‘border’ represents is in effect deterritorialized, as is, for example, the case with foreign languages, especially Spanish in the United States” (p. 533). Over a decade later, anthropolitical linguist Ana Celia Zentella (2007) applied Urciuoli’s words to the role ‘linguistic capital’ plays in locating linguistic insecurity among Latin@ populations.
    [Show full text]
  • Monolingualism and Its Meaning in Two Kwazulu-Natal High Schools
    Monolingualism and its Meaning in Two KwaZulu-Natal High Schools A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of Master of Arts of Rhodes University by Jacqui Carlyle May 2016 Abstract This study reports on the identity and attitudes of monolingual English speakers (MES) at two high schools in Durban, South Africa, in relation particularly to the role and meaning of monolingualism. Two bodies of data are used to investigate the attitudes of MES and are oriented towards four variables: English, African languages (particularly Zulu), monolingualism and plurilingualism. The attitudes to these variables reveal the impact on identity of language usage in Durban, and negotiations of the participants in trying to mitigate or justify attitudes that are counter to the embracing of diversity encouraged in modern South Africa. First, an attitude questionnaire provides quantitative data that is subjected to analysis, including a chi-squared test. Second, a narrative elicitation interview provides qualitative narrative data that is analysed in relation to APPRAISAL theory. Both analysis types are used to ascertain the presence of a monolingual mindset in the scholars’ responses, as well as to capture the ideological forces to which they are subjected as monolingual English speakers in the unique multilingual setting of Durban. In essence, the data points to a discourse of compromise and unease on the part of the participants - as they juggle with the effects of an English-centric monolingual mindset, and a more pervasive pluralism that embraces the Rainbowism of ‘the new South Africa’. This discourse of compromise is characterized on one side by insecurity and dissatisfaction with the language in education policy, and well as the monolingual upbringing of MES in Durban, and a lack of Language other than English (LOTE), in particular, Zulu.
    [Show full text]
  • The Case Against Official Monolingualism: the Idiosyncrasies of Minority Language Rights in Israel and the United States
    THE CASE AGAINST OFFICIAL MONOLINGUALISM: THE IDIOSYNCRASIES OF MINORITY LANGUAGE RIGHTS IN ISRAEL AND THE UNITED STATES Yuval Merin * I. INTRODUCTION ....................................... 1 H. THE NATURE AND HISTORY OF LANGUAGE DIVERSITY IN ISRAEL AND THE UNITED STATES ....................... 3 III. THE LEGAL STATUS OF LANGUAGES IN ISRAEL AND THE UNITED STATES ................................... 9 A. The Status of English and the Absence of an Official Language in the United States ........................ 9 B. FormalBilingualism and the Status of Hebrew, Arabic, and English in Israel .............................. 11 1. The Legal Status of Hebrew ...................... 14 2. The Legal Status of English ...................... 15 3. The Legal Status ofArabic ...................... 15 C. Comparative Observations ......................... 18 IV. "OFFICIAL LANGUAGE:" IMPLICATIONS AND MOVEMENTS .... 20 A. The Implications of "Official Language " .............. 22 B. "Hebrew-Only" Trends in Israel in Comparisonto the "English-Only" Movement in the United States ...... 25 C. Linguistic Requirements and Practicesin the Field of Education ..................................... 30 V. LINGUISTIC MINORITIES AND LANGUAGE RIGHTS AS CONSTITUTIONAL AND HUMAN RIGHTS ................... 34 VI. CONCLUSION ........................................ 48 I. INTRODUCTION Both Israel and the United States are multi-ethnic societies with a large percentage of linguistic minorities. Hebrew and Arabic are the two official languages of Israel whereas the United States lacks an official language at the J.S.D. Candidate, New York University School of Law; LL.M., New York University School of Law, 1997; LL.B., The Hebrew University of Jerusalem School of Law, 1993. The author would like to thank Prof. Rachel Moran of Boalt Hall School of Law, University of California at Berkeley, for her insightful and helpful comments on previous drafts of this Article.
    [Show full text]
  • A New Vision of Language Education, from Monolingualism to Plurilingualism: an In-Depth Analysis of Plurilingualism and Its Theories Relevant to Language Education
    A New Vision of Language Education, from Monolingualism to Plurilingualism: An In-depth Analysis of Plurilingualism and Its Theories Relevant to Language Education Lingyi Xue A dissertation submitted to Auckland University of Technology in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Education (MEd) 2019 School of Education Abstract This dissertation investigates the theoretical premises and pedagogical implications of plurilingualism through an extended analysis of the academic and (where appropriate) policy literature. Firstly the tension between superdiversity, caused by globalisation, at the social and individual levels, is juxtaposed with traditional approaches to language teaching. Two main forces in traditional language teaching, a monolingual ideology and cognitive second language acquisition (SLA) are examined. By exploring the profound influence of monolingual ideology over language classrooms, the research brings to the fore the need for a new theoretical framework in the field of language education. The investigation raises influential recent shifts in the language field, particularly the “social turn” and the “multilingual turn”. Subsequently, the theoretical premises and core concepts of plurilingualism are carefully investigated, aiming to identify the difference between this new lens and traditional language education. When the research explains possible practices of plurilingual education, two different pictures are presented. On the one hand, in many pluralistic language classrooms where this new perspective is embraced, teachers have achieved gratifying results in developing students' plurilingual and intercultural repertoires and cultivating their composite competence. On the other hand, the research also shows that many language teachers lack awareness of the use and further development of students' whole linguistic and cultural repertoires.
    [Show full text]
  • Canadian Bilingualism, Multiculturalism and Neo- Liberal Imperatives
    Scholars Speak Out December 2016 Canadian Bilingualism, Multiculturalism and Neo- Liberal Imperatives By Douglas Fleming, University of Ottawa Canadian second language and immigration policies have often been held up as positive models for Americans on both the right and the left. In particular, both the “English Only” and the “English Plus” movements in the United States have claimed that French Immersion programming in Canada support their own positions (Crawford, 1992; King, 1997). However, in this piece I argue that Canadian immigration and language policies are closely intertwined and have been carefully calculated to subsume linguistic and cultural diversity under what Young (1987) once characterized as a form of “patriarchal Englishness against and under which… all others are subordinated” (pp.10-11). These policies have served neo-liberal economic imperatives and have helped perpetuate inequalities. In fact, I am of the opinion that they are not incompatible with empire building. Bilingualism and Multiculturalism Canada is a nation in which French is the first language for 22% of the total population of 36 million. English is the first language for 59%. The remaining 19% speak a third language as their mother tongue. The size of this third language grouping (the so-called Allophones) is due mainly to immigration (the highest rate in the G8 industrialized nations), self- reported visible minority status (19%) and the relatively high numbers of first nation peoples (4.5%). According to the last census, 17.5 % of the total population is now bilingual and 26.5% born outside of the country. It is a highly diverse population (all figures, Statistics Canada, 2016).
    [Show full text]
  • Multiculturalism and Language Rights in Canada: Problems and Prospects for Equality and Unity Terrence Meyerhoff
    American University International Law Review Volume 9 | Issue 3 Article 6 1994 Multiculturalism and Language Rights in Canada: Problems and Prospects for Equality and Unity Terrence Meyerhoff Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/auilr Part of the International Law Commons Recommended Citation Meyenhoff, Terrence. "Multiculturalism and Language Rights in Canada: Problems and Prospects for Equality and Unity." American University International Law Review 9, no. 3 (1994): 913-1013. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Washington College of Law Journals & Law Reviews at Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in American University International Law Review by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. MULTICULTURALISM AND LANGUAGE RIGHTS IN CANADA: PROBLEMS AND PROSPECTS FOR EQUALITY AND UNITY Terrence Meyerhoff INTRODUCTION The Parliament of the United Kingdom enacted the Canada Act of 1982' upon request of the Canadian Parliament.2 The Canada Act is Canada's primary constitutional document and, for the first time, em- powered Canada to control its constitutional destiny? With that respon- * J.D., May 1994, Washington College of Law, The American University; M.A. 1989, University of California, Berkeley; B.A. 1986. University of California, Santa Cruz. I would like to thank Thomas 0. Sargentich for his generosity in commenting on earlier drafts of this article and my wife, Monica J. Lowry, for her assistance. 1. CANADA AcT, 1982, ch. 11 (U.K.). 2. See EDWARD MCWHINNEY, CANADA AND THE CONSTITTION 1979-1982: PATRIATION OF THE CHARTER OF RIGHTS 172-73 (1982) (providing text of the final resolution in which Canada requested the Parliament of the United Kingdom Parlia- ment to consent to the passing of the Canada Act).
    [Show full text]
  • Linguistic Diversity and New Minorities in Europe
    LINGUISTIC DIVERSITY AND NEW MINORITIES IN EUROPE Guide for the Development of Language Education Policies in Europe: From Linguistic Diversity to Plurilingual Education Reference Study Ingrid GOGOLIN Universität Hamburg Language Policy Division Directorate of School, Out-of-School and Higher Education DGIV Council of Europe, Strasbourg 2002 The opinions expressed in this work are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy of the Council of Europe. All correspondence concerning this publication or the reproduction or translation of all or part of the document should be addressed to the Director of School, Out of School and Higher Education of the Council of Europe (F-67075 Strasbourg Cedex). The reproduction of extracts is authorised, except for commercial purposes, on condition that the source is quoted. TABLE OF CONTENTS Preface ...............................................................................................................................5 Introduction......................................................................................................................7 Several hundred languages in Europe..........................................................................7 The vitality of immigrant minority languages ............................................................11 Language education for the future..............................................................................17 References.......................................................................................................................22
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of Multilingualism on Global Education and Language Learning ​ Dr Lid King the Languages Company Executive Summary
    Cambridge Assessment English Perspectives The Impact of Multilingualism on Global Education and Language Learning Dr Lid King The Languages Company Executive summary We live in a multilingual world. English serves as the lingua franca for education, trade and employment, and is an essential skill for anyone wanting to succeed professionally or academically in the 21st century. English offers enormous opportunities, and language policy rightly focuses on how to give more equitable access to high levels of English language proficiency so that these opportunities can be inclusive rather than exclusive, open to all socio- economic groups. But English is not enough. Properly managed language policy can help to ensure that English can be taught effectively and incorporated into society without having a negative effect on the first language, culture and local identity of the learners of English. An understanding of English and multilingualism is especially important in an age of increased and rapidly growing international migration. People migrate for many reasons – escaping oppression and war, searching for better opportunities – but it is clear that the languages that they have access to or aspire to use can greatly influence the pattern of migration and the success with which migrants are able to integrate and contribute to their host societies. This underlines the need for a language policy worldwide which provides people with the languages and the language skills that they need both at home and in future global destinations. Education should provide a varied language repertoire and an understanding of which languages we should learn for what purpose. This suggests a language policy that improves the quality of curriculum, teaching, and learning in state education, as well as a policy that helps to position the role of the multiple languages in a more positive and protected context.
    [Show full text]