Western Washington University Western CEDAR

Modern & Classical Humanities

2001 Paraguayan Policy and the Future of Guaraní Shaw N. Gynan Western Washington University, [email protected]

Follow this and additional works at: https://cedar.wwu.edu/mcl_facpubs Part of the Other Spanish and and Literature Commons

Recommended Citation Gynan, Shaw N., "Paraguayan Language Policy and the Future of Guaraní" (2001). Modern & Classical Languages. 59. https://cedar.wwu.edu/mcl_facpubs/59

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Humanities at Western CEDAR. It has been accepted for inclusion in Modern & Classical Languages by an authorized administrator of Western CEDAR. For more information, please contact [email protected]. P a r a g u a y a n L a n g u a g e P o l i c y a n d

T h e F u t u r e o f G u a r a n i

Shaw N. Gynan Western Washington University

A b stract. is unique among countries of the Americas in that a substantial majority of the population speaks an indigenous language, Guarani. Socioeconomic and demographic dimensions of Paraguay Guaranf- Spanish bilingualism appear to favor the vitality of Guarani, especially in the rural sector, well into the 21st century. The early nineties saw significant advances in language policy. Guarani is now co-official with Spanish and bilingual education has been implemented in compliance with the standards for linguistic human rights of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights of the Organization of American States. Despite these positive signs, education for literacy in Guarani is limited mainly to urban areas. Large num­ bers of speakers of Paraguayan Guarani and other indigenous languages live in economiczones of exclusion.The challenge facing Paraguay is how to find the political will and economic resource to provide language education and other basic needs to all children in the country.*

Introduction. Paraguay has been of interest to sociolinguists because of its unique situation of national bilingualism, but outside of Paraguay much less at­ tention has been paid to the language policy that has been developed to manage Spanish and Guarani. If the situation of language contact itself is worthy of atten­ tion, surely official reaction to these two languages merits analysis. The macro- sociohnguistic perspective provided by linguistic demography is particularly useful for this examination of the important events in language planning that have oc­ curred in Paraguay. The standard against which Paraguay’s language policy is measured in this study is the Proposed American D eclaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples,

* This report was made possible by a Fulbright Scholar Award and by a professional leave granted to the author by Western Washington University. 1 52 SOUTHWEST JOURNAL OF LINGUISTICS, VOLUME 20, NUMBER 1 (2001) drafted in 1996 and published in 1997 by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (lACHR), a principal organ of the Organization of American States (OAS). Paraguay’s response to the challenge of has been mainly through the Paraguayan Ministerio de Educacion y Culto (MEC), which has pro­ duced a considerable number of policy documents and demographic analyses. This information, along with language data from Paraguay’s census bureau, on-site visits by the author to elementary schools throughout the country, and interviews with individuals directly involved in language policy, is used to assess the kind of lan­ guage planningthat has emerged and the demographic dimensions of Paragnay’s bilingualism.

1. The Evolution of Language Policy in Paraguay.The application of the OAS draft standard to the situation of Guarani is not straightforward. The provi­ sions of the declaration are applied to those peoples who self-identify as indigenous (OAS 1997:635). Although Guarani is indisputably an indigenous language with such non-Romance characteristics as post-positions and morphological, as opposed to intonational interrogative, markers, speakers of Guarani' are not classified by the government as indigenous. MEC (Paraguay PR-MEC 1994c:5) argues that Para­ guayan Guarani is distinct from ethnic Guarani, of which are still spoken by peoples who live in traditional tribal societies and keep alive numerous aspects of their autochthonous culture. Meli^ (1992:107) documents the early and success­ ful Europeanization and Christianization of the Guarani by Franciscans and Jesu­ its, explaining how the current population descended from them. Whether the OAS standard would apply to the case of Paraguayan Guarani is therefore not clear. The lACHR declaration includes significant statements on language rights consonant with those in UNESCO’s historic 1953 declaration on vernacular lit­ eracy education. Although the lACHR declaration was made subsequent to the policy documents analyzed here, the UNESCO document, referred to by Para­ guayan language planners (Paraguay PR-MEC-CARE 1991:25), establishes as axiomatic that the best medium for teaching a child literacy is her or his mother tongue (UNESCO 1953:11). The lACHR declares that indigenous peoples have the right to use their languages (OAS 1997:635), and are to be free from forced assimilation. The states must recognize and respect indigenous use of languages, and are called upon to support indigenous language television broadcasting and the creation of indigenous radio stations. Specifically, in ‘areas where indigenous languages are predominant, states shall endeavor to establish the pertinent lan­ guages as official languages and to give them the same status that is given to non- indigenous official languages’ (OAS 1997:637). The lACHR declaration also pro­ vides important support for indigenous and bilingual literacy programs: ‘When indigenous peoples so decide, educational systems shall be conducted in the in­ digenous languages and incorporate indigenous context, and they shall also be provided with the necessary training and means for complete mastery of the offi- PARAGUAYAN LANGUAGE POLICY AND THE FUTURE OF GUARANI 153 cial language or languages’ (OAS 1997:638). Finally, in Article IX, the states are called upon to take measures to guarantee access to education at all levels at least equal in quality to that of the general population (OAS 1997:638).

2. Educational Policy in Paraguay.In 1992, well before the publication of the OAS declaration, and shortly following the fall of Stroessner’s 35 year dicta­ torship, Paraguay’s government declared Guarani an official language of Paraguay for the first time (Paraguay PR-MEC 1994c:20,29). What has emerged since is a proposal for full-fledged mother-tongue literacy and bilingual education (Para­ guay PR-MEC 1995a). The initial plan, first presented in 1991, called for a com­ pletely balanced two-way system in which each Paraguayan child would be trained in literacy in his or her own language, with the second language being taugbt 15% of the time in first grade and increasing by five percent a year until reaching total parity in the ninth grade. The program was initiated in March of 1994 (fall semes­ ter) in 118 schools (Paraguay PR-MEC 1994b). In November of that same year, the National Bilingualism Commission was created by presidential decree and charged with developing language policy for the country (Paraguay PR-MEC 1994a). MEC (Paraguay PR-MEC 1994b) reports that the new bilingual program re­ quired the training of 174 teachers and involved 7,058 children, a ratio of one trained teacher for about 40 children. In 1994, according to MEC figures, 1,568 schools reported being essentially monolingual in Guarani, and of those, 1,098 requested inclusion in the Guaranf modality. MEC figures show that the demand by schools for Guaranf literacy education represented 35,425 students of a total of 45,470 identified as attending schools in which the student population was entirely monolingual in Guaranf. The 1,098 schools were allowed to implement the Guaranf program without Guaranf materials in what wascob termed ertu ra BLANDA. The locations of the 118 programs by department are shown on the map in Figure 1. Despite the modest size of this initial project, several challenges emerged. A newspaper report (ABC 1994:37) detailed internal MEC opposition to expansion of the program, citing lack of evaluation, budget, and texts. Parental opposition to Guarani literacy education had been anticipated, but despite the implementation of a massive program sensibilizacionof of over 10,000 parents of children attending programs in the 118 schools (Paraguay PR-MEC 1994d), parental opposition to the Guarani modality was cited by MEC (Paraguay PR-MEC 1995b: 3) as a justi­ fication for a significant modification ofdiseno the unico, suggesting one referred to by critics as adiseno diferencial. The technical team pointed out that with this new plan, MEC was ‘turning its back on the sociolinguistic reality of the country’ (Paraguay PR-MEC 1995c:24). The technical team notes that the proposed ehanges, which would affect the third through sixth grades, would produce an especially abrupt transition from third 1 54 SOUTHWEST JOURNAL OF LINGUISTICS, VOLUME 20, NUMBER 1 pOOl)

Figure 1. With Numbers of schools involved in 1994 Guaram Literacy Program

to fourth grade. Whereas following the original balanced design, after a 65% Guaraniy35% Spanish third year program, Guaram-speaking children would re­ ceive 70% mother tongue instruction and 30% in Spanish during the fourth year, with the new plan those children would receive 33.5% in their native language and 66.5% in Spanish, effectively reversing the originally proposed proportions of Guarani and Spanish instruction (Paraguay PR-MEC 1995c:7-15). This move, along with a reversal of percentages for native Spanish speakers, who in the fourth grade would receive 68.5% of their instruction in Spanish and the balance in Guaram', amounted to reformulating the proposed program from two-way main­ tenance to transitional bilingual education.

3. Assessing the Impact of Educational Poucy: Methodology. How well did these proposals meet the needs of Paraguayans involved with the school system? Did MEC identify accurately the scope of the task facing the nation? The begin- PARAGUAYAN LANGUAGE POLICY AND THE FUTURE OF GUARANf 155

ning of an answer to these questions can be found within the data banks of the Para­ guayan census of 1992, but not without some digging. In 1992, Paraguay included on its census form a question about language, as it has for the last 40 years. Spe­ cifically, households were identified as being monolingual in one of three lan­ guages, Spanish, Portuguese, or Guarani, bilingual in Spanish and Guaranf, or speakers of other languages. The published report of the census was divided into two sections, one on household information (e.g., detailed data on the type of dwelling and language), and one on population (that included details on individuals such as sex, age, literacy, education, and economic activity). What this meant, most unfor­ tunately for those who would desire that the very detailed information on education be broken down by language, was that language was cross-tabulated only by type of dwelling. In response to this situation, I submitted a proposal to the census bureau to rerun the population analysis, identifying each individual by language of household and then cross-tabulating that information with the detailed demographic data. The re­ sulting report was produced as thirty megabytes of computer files. This analysis is based on two tables from that study (Paraguay PR-MEC 1995d, Paraguay PR- STP-DGE-EC 1995). One (Paraguay PR-MEC 1995d) contains population counts for area, sex, literacy, schooling, and economic activity for five language catego­ ries in approximately 200 census districts divided among 18 departmental group­ ings. This array, containing roughly 16,000 cells of population counts, had to be transformed into one in which a single column contained all numerical counts and the other 6 columns categorical data in character form. The second table (Para­ guay PR-STP-DGE-EC 1995), containing far more detailed data on educational attainment by age and department, was consulted briefly for this study. Transposition and transformation of the data were essential for further analy­ sis and allowed for tests of independence to determine the ways in which language and demographic variables interact. Standardization of the data, a procedure nec­ essary for comparison of counts in different categories also, allowed for the drawing of statistical maps that facilitate greatly the development of a geography of Paraguay.' The macro-sociolinguistic profile that emerges from this analysis allows us to place the challenge of bilingualism to language policy formulation in proper perspective, but in the final analysis, simple counts by language detail most clearly the degree to which Paraguay provides for the language rights of its Guaram'- speaking citizens.

4. Assessing the Impact of Policy: Results.In the bottom row of Table 1, we see the distribution of population by language with which most students of Para-

‘Maps were made using boundary files digitized by Schlosser Geographies, Inc., Seattle, Washington, fiom census district maps (Paraguay PR-STP-DGE-EC 1993). Drawing of maps was accomplished using Systat Graphics (1992). Digitizing was funded by the Bureau of Fac­ ulty Research at Western Washington University. 156 SOUTHWEST JOURNAL OF LINGUISTICS, VOLUME 20, NUMBER 1 pOOl)

guayan bilingualism are familiar. By adding bilinguals and Guarani or Spanish speakers, we find that over 88% speak Guarani, whereas 54% speak Spanish. These simple statistics have been badly misinterpreted by Joshua Fishman (1967:2), who in his well-known article on bilingualism with or without diglossia, declared that nearly the entire population was bilingual. Guillermina Engelbrecht and Leroy

Bilingual GUARANf O ther P ortuguese Spanish T otal Alto ParaguayN 3,376 6,620 1,312 25 151 11,484 % 29.40 57.65 11.42 0.22 1.31 100.00 Alto Parand N 1,91165 115,383 8,239 68,973 20,840 404,600 % 47.25 28.52 2.04 17.05 5.15 100.00 Amambay N 39,340 46,572 431 7,724 5,266 99,333 % 39.60 46.88 0.43 7.78 5.30 100.00 Asuncidn N 357,785 11,623 12,257 1,051 104,225 486,941 % 73.48 2.39 2.52 0.22 21.40 100.00 Boquerdn N 3,459 3,868 18,631 87 1,082 27,127 % 12.75 14.26 68.68 0.32 3.99 100.00 Caaguazu N 105,668 259,027 7,886 7,429 4,213 384,223 % 27.50 67.42 2.05 1.93 1.10 100.00 Caazapa N 25,460 97,884 590 4,232 724 128,890 % 19.75 75.94 0.46 3.28 0.56 100.00 Canindeyu N 17,296 44,648 4,591 34,376 1,909 102,820 % 16.82 43.42 4.47 33.43 1.86 100.00 Central N 683,682 104,081 3,823 216 69,893 861,695 % 79.34 12.08 0.44 0.03 8.11 100.00 Concepcidn N 44,458 114,242 839 3,266 3,028 165,833 % .26.81 68.89 0.51 1.97 1.83 100.00 Cordillera N 86,629 107,558 541 15 3,059 197,802 % 43.80 54.38 0.27 0.01 1.55 100.00 Guaira N 53,188 103,028 1,054 213 3,076 160,559 % 33.13 64.17 0.66 0.13 1.92 100.00 Itapda N 159,898 165,508 9,647 6,740 32,953 374,746 % 42.67 44.17 2.57 1.80 8.79 KXl.OO Misiones N 47,523 36,871 269 37 3,024 87,724 % 54.17 42.03 0.31 0.04 3.45 100.00 Neembucu N 38,728 28,337 67 10 2,184 69,326 % 55.86 40.87 0.10 0.01 3.15 100.00 Paraguari N 76,659 128,230 305 27 1,992 207,213 % 37.00 61.88 0.15 0.01 0.96 100.00 Pres. Hayes N 29,294 15,835 15,395 20 1,793 62,337 % 46.99 25.40 24.70 0.03 2.88 100.00 San Pedro N 47,245 224,790 5,399 198 1,706 279,338 % 16.91 80.47 1.93 0.07 0.61 100.00 Total N 2,010,853 1,614,105 91,276 134,639 261,118 4,111,991 % 48.90 39.25 2.22 3.27 6.35 100.00 N 2,010,853 1,614,105 91,276 134,639 261,118 4,111,991 T a b le 1. Population of Paraguay by Department and Language with Row Percents PARAGUAYAN LANGUAGE POLICY AND THE FUTURE OF GUARANf 157

Ortiz (1983:54) committed precisely this same inaccuracy years later. Joan Rubin (1962:52, 1968:14) alone interpreted them correctly. The proportional distribution of languages at the national level is not found in individual departments. The two categories interact; simply put, some departments, such as San Pedro, are predominantly monolingual in Guarani, others, such as Central and Asuncidn, are predominantly bilingual, and Portuguese has made sig­ nificant inroads in certain eastern census districts. The division of Paraguay into departments has been provided in Figure 1, but while departments are convenient units for the development of a sociolinguistic profile, they obscure the complex­ ity of geographical patterns of distribution. For this reason, in Figures 2 and 3,

Figure 2. Guarani Monolingualism in Paraguay With Magnification ofAsuncidn and (Shading of Census Districts Intended as an Approximate Representation of Percentage Monolingualism) 158 SOUTHWEST JOURNAL OF LINGUISTICS, VOLUME 20, NUMBER 1 C2001) distribution of language use is showncensus by district raihei than by department. As the reader examines the maps, she or he should keep in mind that the large provinces of Boquerdn, Alto Paraguay, and Presidente Hayes, all to the west of the Rio Paraguay, represent a mere three percent of the population of the coun­ try. The Chaco census districts are very large as well, so one must be careful not to form the impression that speakers of any category are spread evenly through­ out this vast, largely inhospitable and sparsely settled area. The census districts of the east, on the other hand, are far smaller and enable a more detailed and sensi­ tive analysis.

Figure 3. Guaram-Spanish Bilingualism in Paraguay With Magnification ofAsuncidn and Central Department (Shading of Census Districts Intended as an Approximate Representation of Percentage Bilingualism) PARAGUAYAN LANGUAGE POLICY AND THE FUTURE OF GUARANf 159

Focusing on the magnified view of Asuncidn and Central Department in Fig­ ure 2, note that as one leaves the capital of Asuncidn and enters the outer edges of Central Department, the incidence of Guarani monolingualism escalates very considerably, and does not diminish until one approaches to the east or to the south. The distribution of bilinguals shown in Figure 3 should dispel once and for all the misconception that the countrybilingual is largely Exactly where rates of Guarani monolingualism are low, bilingualism is high. High rates of bilingualism are confined to urban areas, with extremely low rates pre­ dominating inla campana. As shown by the magnified view of Asuncidn and Central Department in Figure 3, the capital and surrounding cities are very heavily bilingual, but the rate of bilingualism drops off notably as one approaches the borders of Central Department. We revisit the importance of the rural-urban di­ mension in our discussion of the data in Table 2. As for Spanish speakers, a na­ tional map of departments or census districts is of little use, since, as Table 1 in­ dicates, the incidence of Spanish monolingualism throughout Paraguay is very low. Only in Asuncidn does the rate of Spanish monolingualism exceed 20%. These data demonstrate the importance of geographical distance as a sociolinguistic fac­ tor, documented by Bills, Hemandez-Chavez and Hudson (1995), although here distance is better related to language spread than to language maintenance. Men­ tion should also be made of Portuguese, monolingualism in which surpasses that in Spanish throughout several census districts bordering on Brazil. We have noted the importance of the rural-urban dimension, one well known to students of this situation. The figures in Table 2 show how this factor interacts with language. The totals indicate that the population is roughly equally distrib­ uted between rural and urban; this 50-50 ratio is not seen among any of the lan­ guage sub-populations. Indeed, the vast majority of speakers of Guarani, Portu­ guese, and other languages live in the countryside; equally high majorities of bilinguals and Spanish monolinguals live in the cities. These relationships obtain in the tiniest census districts, where urban areas always have some bilinguals or monolingual Spanish speakers.

Rural U rban Total N % N % N Bilingual 502,724 25.00 1,508,129 75.00 2,010,853 Guarani 1,338,027 82.90 276,078 17.10 1,614,105 Other 64,244 70.38 27,032 29.62 91,276 Portuguese 116,573 86.58 18,066 13.42 134,639 Spanish 28,887 11.06 232,231 88.94 261,118 Total 2,050,455 49.87 2,061,536 50.13 4,111,991 Table 2. Population of Paraguay by Language and Area with Row Percents 1 60 SOUTHWEST JOURNAL OF LINGUISTICS, VOLUME 20, NUMBER 1 (2001)

Data for gender and language are provided in Table 3. Using language as a strati­ fication variable, we can test the independence of the rural-urhan and female-male binary variables. The factors indeed are not independent; there are more women in the city and more men in the country. This interaction obtains regardless of lan­ guage, but since we have already seen that language interacts with the rural-urhan dimension, the area-sex interaction is diminished in the case of Guaram, enhanced in the case of bilingualism, and notably increased in the case of urban Spanish, where females speak only Spanish at a rate 20% higher than males.

Female M ale Total N % N % N % Rural 245,868 48.91 256,856 51.09 502,724 100.00 Bilingual Urban 787,531 52.22 720,598 47.78 1,508,129 100.00 Total 1,033,399 51.39 977,454 48.61 2,010,853 100.00 Rural 636,805 47.59 701,222 52.41 1,338,027 100.00 Guaranf Urban 136,440 49.42 139,638 50.58 276,078 100.00 Total 773,245 47.91 840,860 52.09 1,614,105 100.00 Rural 31,069 48.36 33,175 51.64 64,244 100.00 Other Urban 13,662 50.54 13,370 49.46 27,032 100.00 Total 44,731 49.01 46,545 50.99 91,276 100.00 Rural 53,900 46.24 62,673 53.76 116,573 100.00 PortugueseUrban 9,072 50.22 8,994 49.78 18,066 100.00 Total 62,972 46.77 71,667 53.23 134,639 100.00 Rural 14,455 50.04 14,432 49.96 28,887 100.00 Spanish Urban 128,119 55.17 104,112 44.83 232,231 100.00 Total 142,574 54.60 118,544 45.40 261,118 100.00 Rural 982,097 47.75 1,068,358 51.99 2,050,455 49.87 Total Urban 1,074,824 52.25 986,712 48.01 2,061,536 50.13 Total 2,056,921 100.00 2,055,070 100.00 4,111,991 100.00 Table 3 Population of Paraguay by Language, Area, and Sex With Row Percents (Column Percents for Last Three Rows)

Women are often identified as being at the cutting edge of assimilation, and the census data confirm a frequently given explanation: jobs. As shown in Table 4, sex and employment indeed interact. While the population of males and females is divided roughly 50-50, distribution of sex by employment is not at all predict­ able from these data. Instead, most men are employed and most women are not. This relationship obtains across languages, but language either diminishes or en­ hances the interaction. The most stark contrast is seen between Spanish and Guaranf. In the case of Spanish, 44.26% of women work, twice the national rate, while the rate of employment for males is 76.28%, the lowest for any of the lan­ guage sub-populations. The rate of employment for Guarani-speaking males, on PARAGUAYAN LANGUAGE POLICY AND THE FUTURE OF GUARANf 161

the other hand, is 81.84%, whereas less than nine percent of Guaram-speaking women are employed. Recall that language and area interact. Men findla work in campana. Rates of employment for men are noticeably lower in urban areas con­ tiguous to Asuncion and Central Department. Worksector in theagropecuario results in far higher rural rates of employment. The situation of men contrasts impressively with that of women, who do find work at modest levels in the widely dispersed urban areas.

Employed N ot Employed Total N % N % N % Female 225,728 31.53 490,079 68.47 715,807 100.00 Bilingual Male 503,656 77.00 150,449 23.00 654,105 100.00 Total 729,384 53.24 640,528 46.76 1,369,912 100.00 Female 40,886 8.78 424,616 91.22 465,502 100.00 Guarani Male 421,291 81.84 93,498 18.16 514,789 100.00 Total 462,177 47.15 518,114 52.85 980,291 100.00 Female 5,905 18.55 25,922 81.45 31,827 100.00 Other Male 26,481 80.76 6,309 19.24 32,790 100.00 Total 32,386 50.12 32,231 49.88 64,617 100.00 Female 4,125 10.03 36,995 89.97 41,120 100.00 PortugueseMale 44,433 91.00 4,393 9.00 48,826 100.00 Total 48,558 53.99 41,388 46.01 89,946 100.00 Female 45,528 44.26 57,333 55.74 102,861 100.00 Spanish Male 60,206 76.28 18,725 23.72 78,931 100.00 Total 105,734 58.16 76,058 41.84 181,792 100.00 Female 322,172 23.38 1,034,945 79.10 1,357,117 50.52 Total Male 1056,067 76.62 273,374 20.90 1,329,441 49.48 Total 1,378,239 100.00 1,308,319 100.00 2,686,558 100.00 Table 4. Population of Paraguay 12 Years and Older by Language, Sex, and Employment With Row Percents (Column Percents for Last Three Rows)

5. Implications for Education.Having painted a demographic/linguistic por­ trait of Guarani, I examine how education fares. One measure of importance is literacy, precisely because it is defined as being at least ten years old and having completed second grade. This is a modest standard at best, considering the vast number of monolingual Guarani speakers who are educated by means of nothing more thansubmersion, that is, monolingual literacy instruction in Spanish, in many respects a foreign and largely incomprehensible language. As Table 5 illustrates, literacy interacts with the urban sector. The column percents at the bottom of the page show that the rural to urban ratio of this sub-population is 46.10% to 53.90%. But this ratio does not predict the acmal distribution of literate and illiterate people 1 6 2 SOUTHWEST JOURNAL OF LTOGUISTTCS, VOLUME 20, NUMBER 1 (2001) by area. Two-thirds of illiterate people live in the rural sector, and 43.78% of lit­ erate people live in that sector. This significant interaction holds across all lan­ guages and is influenced by them. Bilinguals and Spanish speakers show roughly the same levels of literacy and illiteracy, while illiteracy in Guarani is twice as high as in bilinguals and Spanish speakers. The rate of illiteracy in Portuguese is four times that of Spanish speakers and bihnguals.

N ot Literate Literate Total N % N % N % Rural 21,892 7.77 259,935 92.23 281,827 100.00 Bilingual Urban 47,049 4.95 903,461 95.05 950,510 100.00 Total 68,941 5.59 1,163,396 94.41 1,232,337 100.00 Rural 106,515 15.32 588,620 84.68 695,135 100.00 Guarani Urban 26,612 16.71 132,639 83.29 159,251 100.00 Total 133,127 15.58 721,259 84.42 854,386 100.00 Rural 10,962 27.66 28,669 72.34 39,631 100.00 Other Urban 1,217 06.36 17,907 93.64 19,124 100.00 Total 12,179 20.73 46,576 79.27 58,755 100.00 Rural 20,571 29.73 48,622 70.27 69,193 100.00 PortugueseUrban 2,079 18.92 8,911 81.08 10,990 100.00 Total 22,650 28.25 57,533 71.75 80,183 100.00 Rural 1,149 7.01 15,234 92.99 16,383 100.00 Spanish Urban 3,438 2.31 145,306 97.69 148,744 100.00 Total 4,587 2.78 160,540 97.22 165,127 100.00 Rural 161,089 66.71 941,080 43.78 1,102,169 46.10 Total Urban 80,395 33.29 1,208,224 56.22 1,288,619 53.90 Total 241,484 100.0 2,149,304 100.0 2,390,788 100.00 T able 5. Population of Paraguay 15 Years and Older by Language, Area, and Literacy With Row Percents (Column Percents for Last Three Rows)

The relationship between language and school attendance is elearly shown in Table 6. The column percents in the bottom rows are provided to illustrate the significant interaction between literacy and area. There are more children in the rural sector, but proportionately fewer attend school. Since there are more mono­ lingual Guaram children in the rural sector, their rates of attendance are correspond­ ingly lower. There are 382,873 monolingual Guaram children between the ages of 7 and 14. Of these, 67,353 are not in school. While MEC figures on the num­ bers of children in school prove to be in close agreement with census data, they do not account for the children that are not attending. Other agencies have also underestimated the extent of Guarani monolingualism among children. For ex­ ample, the International Development Bank vastly underestimates the percentage of Guaram monolingual children in the rural sector at 30% (IDB 1993:7), when PARAGUAYAN LANGUAGE POLICY AND THE FUTURE OF GUARANI 163

census figures indicate that of 475,244 children in this sector, two-thirds, or 321,983, are being raised in Guarani only (see Table 6). In other words, 67.8% of rural, school-age children are monolingual in Guaranf.

No School School Total N % N % N % Rural 13,633 12.25 97,648 87.75 111,281 100.00 Bilingual Urban 19,615 6.80 268,692 93.20 288,307 100.00 Total 33,248 8.32 366,340 91.68 399,588 100.00

Rural 58,084 18.04 263,899 81.96 321,983 100.00 Guaranf Urban 9,269 15.22 51,621 84.78 60,890 100.00 Total 67,353 17.59 315,520 82.41 382,873 100.00

Rural 3,499 29.02 8,558 70.98 12,057 100.00 Other Urban 369 8.84 3,804 91.16 4,173 100.00 Total 3,868 23.83 12,362 76.17 16,230 100.00

Rural 11,302 47.02 12,735 52.98 24,037 100.00 Portuguese Urban 940 26.77 2,572 73.23 3,512 100.00 Total 12,242 44.44 15,307 55.56 27,549 100.00

Rural 810 13.76 5,076 86.24 5,886 100.00 Spanish Urban 2,090 4.87 40,815 95.13 42,905 100.00 Total 2,900 5.94 45,891 94.06 48,791 100.00

Rural 87,328 73.01 387,916 51.35 475,244 54.31 Total Urban 32,283 26.99 367,504 48.05 399,787 45.69 Total 119,611 100.00 755,420 1100.00 875,031 100.00

T a b l e 6 . Population of Paraguay Ages 7 to 14 by Language, Area, and School With Row Percents (Column Percents for Last Three Rows)

6. C o n c l u sio n. Is Paraguay meeting the needs of its Guarani-speaking citizens as defined by the OAS? The language policies created certainly aim toward that end, but the sociolinguistic reality of the country makes implementation difficult. The work for which most Guaram'-speaking males are qualified is in the country­ side, where the school system is still being developed. Indeed, for reasons of ease of access, the 118 schools that were chosen to begin the Guaraniprogram literacy were located not in heavily monolingual areas but instead in bilingual sectors. Despite the enormous challenges, Paraguay’s language policy is as bold as the lACHR statement. There is very likely no other indigenous language in the Ameri­ cas that has such a bright future as Guaranf (including other indigenous languages of Paraguay, discussed at length in Paraguayan language policy documents but not examined here). The National Bilingualism Commission, at least as it was constituted in 1995-96, was unanimously and unequivocally in support of saving 16 4 SOUTHWEST JOURNAL OF LINGUISTICS, VOLUME 20, NUMBER 1 (2001)

Guarani. Demographics are promising as well. I have omitted mention of the age factor, not included in the census tables under analysis, but if the reader compares the right hand column percents for literacy and school in Tables 5 and 6, respec­ tively, she or he will note that distribution figures for the general sub-population by area are roughly reversed. In Table 5, 46.10% of the population lives in the rural sector and 53.90% is urban, whereas in Table 6 54, 31% of the population is rural and 45.69% is urban. That is because Table 5 figures are for persons 15 and older and Table 6 figures are for persons from 7 to 14. The rural birthrate is higher than that of the urban population. This trend and higher rates of employment for Guarani men favor maintenance of this language for the foreseeable future, and lend greater urgency to the task of appropriate literacy education.

R efer en ces ABC. 1994 (November 24). No aumentara el numero de escuelas bilingues. Asuncidn, Paraguay. B ills, G a r l a n d D., E d u a r d o H e r nA n d e z-C h A v e z andA l a n H u d s o n. 1995. The geography of language shift: Distance from the Mexican border and claiming in the Southwestern U.S. International Journal of the Soci­ ology of Language 114.9-27. E ng elbrech t, G uillerm ina andL er o y O rtiz. 1983. Guaram' literacy in Paraguay. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 42.53-67. F ish m a n, Jo sh u a A. 1967. Bilingualism with and without diglossia; diglossia with and without bilingualism. Journal of Social Issues 23.29-38. Interamerican D evelo pm ent B a n k. 1993. Paraguay: Programa de mejoramiento para la educacidn primaria. Asuncion, Paraguay: Interamerican Development Bank. MeuA, B. 1992. La lengua guarani del Paraguay. Madrid: Editorial Mapfre. O rganization o f A m e r ic a n S tates: In t e r-A m e r ic a n C o m m issio n o n H u m a n R ig h t s. 1997. Annual Report of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights 1996. Washington, DC: General Secretariat, Organization of American States. P a r a g u a y, P r e sid e n c ia d e l a R epiIb l ic a, M inisterio d e E d u c a c i6 n y C ulto, C o m isi6 n a se so r a d e l a r efo rm a e d uc a tiv a, C o m isi6 n d e d ia g n6 stico y poLfTiCASed uc a tiv a s. 1991. Proyecto experimental de educacion bilingue en el Paraguay. Asuncidn, Paraguay: Ministerio de Educacion y Culto. P a r a g u a y, P r e sid e n c ia d e la R e p u b l ic a, M inisterio d e E d u c a c i6 n y C ulto. 1994a. Decreto Numero 6588. Asuncidn, Paraguay: Ministerio de Educacidn y Culto. —. 1994b. Educacidn bilingue. Asuncidn, Paraguay: Ministerio de Educacidn y Culto. —. 1994c. La educacion bilingue: un compromiso de calidad y equidad educativa PARAGUAYAN LANGUAGE POLICY AND THE FUTURE OF GUARANI 165

(Montevideo, octubre de 1994). Asuncidn, Paraguay: Ministerio de Educacidn y Culto. —. 1994d. Reforma educativa: Proyecto de sensibilizacidn a padres para la implementacion de la educacidn bilingiie, diseno guarani-castellano. Asuncion, Paraguay: Ministerio de Educacion y Culto. —. 1995a. Plan Nacional de Educacion Bilingue de Mantenimiento. Asuncion, Paraguay: Ministerio de Educacion y Culto. —. 1995b. Propuestas, Educacion Bilingue: 2o ciclo educacidn escolar basica. Asuncion, Paraguay: Ministerio de Educacidn y Culto. —. 1995c. ^Hacia donde va la educacion bilingue? Asuncidn, Paraguay: Ministerio de Educacion y Culto. —. 1995d. Paraguay total: Cuadro de idioma P7. Censo Nacional de Poblacidn y Viviendas 1992. Asuncion, Paraguay: Direccion General de Estadlstica, Encuestas y Censos. Pa r a g u a y, P residencia d e la R epu blica, S ecretarIa TfiCNiCA d e PLANincAa6N, D irecci6 n G eneral d e E stadIstic a, E n cu estas y C e n so s. 1993. Atlas Censal. Asuncion, Paraguay: Direccion General de Estadlstica, Encuestas y Censos. 11, 19, 27, 35, 41, 51, 59, 67, 75, 83, 91, 97, 105, 113, 121, 129, 135. —. 1995. Paraguay total: Cuadro de idioma P35. Censo Nacional de Poblacidn y Viviendas 1992. Asuncion, Paraguay: Direccion General de Estadlstica, Encuestas y Censos. R u b in, Jo a n. 1962. Bilingualism in Paraguay. Anthropological Linguistics 4.52- 58. —. 1968. National bilingualism in Paraguay. The Hague: Mouton. Systat. 1992. Graphics, Version 5.2 Edition. Evanston, Illinois: Systat, Inc. UNESCO. 1953. The Use of Vernacular Languages in Education. Paris, France: UNESCO.