Johannes Stopper

Minority Languages in and Carinthia:

A Juxtaposition

MASTER THESIS

submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of

Master of Arts

Programme: Master's programme English and American Studies

Alpen-Adria-Universität Klagenfurt

Evaluator Univ.-Prof. Mag. Dr. Alexander Onysko Alpen-Adria-Universität Klagenfurt Institut für Anglistik und Amerikanistik

Klagenfurt, January 2019

Table of Contents

Affidavit ...... 3 Abstract ...... 4 Acknowledgements ...... 5 Introduction ...... 6 1. Minority languages ...... 10 1.1. Examples for minority languages ...... 11 1.2. Additional examples and their respective situations ...... 14 2. Language situations ...... 17 2.1. Welsh in the UK ...... 17 2.2. Slovenian in Carinthia ...... 28 3. Repressive measures towards both languages ...... 33 3.1. Carinthia ...... 33 3.2. Wales ...... 37 4. Bilingualism ...... 42 5. Loss of minority languages, language maintenance, and linguistic shifts ...... 48 6. Reversing Language Shift...... 58 6.1. Failed and successful examples of RLS ...... 67 6.2. Outlook on RLS ...... 72 7. Empirical Research ...... 74 7.1. Methodological overview ...... 75 7.2. Questionnaire ...... 76 8. Results ...... 77 8.1. Carinthia ...... 78 8.2. Wales ...... 84 9. Conclusion ...... 91 10. Used sources ...... 94 11. Appendix ...... 101 12.1. Overall Results ...... 101 12.1. Questionnaire A ...... 102 12.2. Questionnaire B ...... 105

Affidavit

I hereby declare in lieu of an oath that - the submitted academic paper is entirely my own work and that no auxiliary materials have been used other than those indicated,

- I have fully disclosed all assistance received from third parties during the process of writing the thesis, including any significant advice from supervisors,

- any contents taken from the works of third parties or my own works that have been included either literally or in spirit have been appropriately marked and the respective source of the information has been clearly identified with precise bibliographical references (e.g. in footnotes),

- to date, I have not submitted this paper to an examining authority either in Austria or abroad and that

- when passing on copies of the academic thesis (e.g. in bound, printed or digital form), I will ensure that each copy is fully consistent with the submitted digital version.

I understand that the digital version of the academic thesis submitted will be used for the purpose of conducting a plagiarism assessment.

I am aware that a declaration contrary to the facts will have legal consequences.

Johannes Stopper m.p. Klagenfurt, 18th January 2019

3 Abstract

This thesis deals with the topic of minority languages and the comparison of two examples that qualify as such languages. It attempts to shed light onto the topic of threatened languages and their characteristics. The two example languages are Slovenian in Carinthia and Welsh in the UK. They are vital parts of their nation’s identities. However, it is uncertain if they can be compared to each other and if they actually can be characterised as minority and threatened languages. The thesis at hand answers these questions with the help of theoretical background information and empirical research in the geographical areas named above. The methods mentioned above include detailed information on the cultural and linguistic characteristics of both languages. Additionally, the empirical research was done with the help of questionnaires that have been answered by a number of participants for each language respectively. The answers given have been used to create graphs that show the opinions on each question. Results of the theoretical and empirical parts of this thesis show that both languages can be characterised as minority languages. They can even be seen as fitting examples of threatened languages. However, defining them as such was only possible with the help of a dense theoretical section. The results of the empirical research give the opinions on self-awareness of the participants in each language respectively. The answers given to each question have been juxtaposed in order to identify similarities as well as major differences. Slovenian in Carinthia and Welsh in the UK are outstanding examples for a historical development that has major influence on the current status of the languages. To recapitulate, their comparison gives detailed insight into culture as well as mentality, and their historical development serves as additional information for an improved understanding of the situation.

4 Acknowledgements

I would like express my enormous gratitude to Univ.-Prof. Dr. Alexander Onysko for his perseverance in his role as my supervisor. Moreover, I would like to thank my family and friends for their support during the writing process of this thesis.

5 Introduction

In my Master’s Thesis the main focus is on minority languages and their respective situations, which offer a great variety of research areas that include their history, relations to other languages, the overall topic of minority languages, and how such languages can be saved from extinction. Countless examples show how minority languages need protection in situations in which their existence is threatened by either an ongoing globalisation or measures that aim at their elimination. Issues like these demonstrate the value of both, for instance, the research and the questions asked in this field of study. Languages as a cultural virtue can be seen as one of the most important individualising factors of a group. Two better known examples for a situation in which a language group is threatened, can be found in the southern regions of Carinthia and in the western parts of the United Kingdom, namely Wales. This area of research, accompanied by the two example languages, will prove to be of great interest due to its connections to both linguistic as well as cultural fields of research. As far as the problematic situation of saving minority and threatened languages is concerned, the research conducted in this paper will attempt to answer the questions of how far these two examples can be applied to the topic of threatened languages and how they can be saved or supported.

This Master’s Thesis will deal with the previously mentioned two languages in great detail. However, it is not sufficient to simply describe their situation and history, but also to go into depth as far as their current situation is concerned. The problems and simultaneously the most interesting factors in this paper will be the questions of how Welsh and Slovenian can be characterised as both minority and threatened languages and how they fit into the models erected by linguists such as Fishman, who did extensive research on the topic of threatened languages. The problem of Slovenian rose to attention during the discussion, whether Slovenian was an additional in Carinthia. In the case of Welsh, the topic offered a variety of different research fields. The Celtic language was always present, despite its struggles with the English-speaking majority and its steady decline until recent times, when it was reanimated at the hands of the Welsh parliament. This profound background knowledge shows that the two examples have several factors in common, which qualify them as ideal subjects for comparison.

6 Thus, the field of minority languages has produced several publications which will serve as groundwork for this paper. The literature concerned with threatened languages and bilingual areas as such is extensive. Perhaps, the most important researcher in this branch is Joshua Fishman, who published his works on how threatened languages can be saved. Additionally, in the case of Carinthia, several works by Carinthian researchers will serve as the first meaningful sources in order to grasp the concept of the struggle between German, Slovenian, and “Windisch” in the areas of southern Carinthia. The researchers follow a rather interesting concept in their academic articles. This is due to the fact that questions are asked which surround the linguistic integrity of the minority and the struggle linked to this topic. In the case of Wales, the research of Janet Davies will prove to be of great use due to its detailed insight into the system and the educational system in Wales. An additional topic will be the historical repressions both languages had to endure. In Carinthia, an important source will be a historical essay from the 1920s. It is written in a rather nationalistic tone and should represent the measures to suppress the language minority. In the Welsh case, historical representations of John Davies and others will be sufficient. Although repressive measures had their effects, it can be stated that the Welsh educational system and the language development underwent a positive development. Literature covering the linguistic elements is plentiful and will play an evident role in the course of this thesis.

Therefore, this paper makes an attempt to tackle the problem of ethnic and linguistic minorities in southern Carinthia and in Wales. Not only is the topic surrounding these two languages seen from a contemporary standpoint, it also aims at discovering the backgrounds and the historical development of both languages. The main question in need of an answer is hereby, whether these two examples can be categorised as threatened languages and if it is possible to compare them in their respective situations. Although the problem has not been ignored by researchers, as the study of threatened and minority languages demonstrates quite promisingly, however, the categorisation of Slovenian in the southern regions of Carinthia is still a topic that is not sufficiently tackled by linguists. In combination with the current situation of Welsh as a minority language, it is of great interest to culture-study scholars and linguists alike. The main reason for this rather scarce pursuit of novelty insights are the difficulties which arise while dealing with a minority language. Statistics can be outdated or falsified. The latter can prove to be a severe problem when connecting the topic with historical developments of minority languages and how they were treated. As already mentioned, a focus will lie on the historical development of both chosen languages. This is

7 due to the fact that without such background information, it would be impossible to grasp the concepts and theories which arose in recent times. The term historical in this context means the 19th and 20th century in both Carinthia and in Wales, since in these countries severe repressions took place.

Characterizing a minority language and the consideration of both its historical and cultural background, is an endeavour that will prove to be of great difficulty. Mainly, this is due to the large number of available historical and contemporary sources. This thesis will make an attempt to strengthen the understanding for the concept of threatened languages by following a set of key-points. The main methodology will compromise literature as well as empirical research. The latter is necessary to gain insight into the current situation in the bilingual areas of Carinthia and Wales. There is a high possibility that the findings about southern Carinthia and the results of this research will be a surprise. This is due to the fact that such a research in this area has not been done in a lengthy time period and results of earlier censuses can no longer be used due to their inaccurate nature. The survey will be accomplished with the help of a questionnaire in which participants are asked to provide answers to questions regarding their language use, their language acquisition, their cultural language backgrounds, and how they feel about the struggle with the majority languages. It was mentioned earlier that the Carinthian example has a higher probability to gain new insights into the topic. The reason for this can also be found in their recent history. The repressions of the majority language is more recent than in the Welsh case, which in turn guarantees a different result. The second method used in this paper will be extensive literature research and analyses of earlier studies surrounding the topic of minority languages. Such an approach can guarantee the most recent insight into the topic via the results of scholars, who dealt with it for several years. It can therefore be concluded that the revival of minority languages is a major task for representatives of the respective example languages, which puts them under a great deal of pressure and might create an image of seclusion. The term of a threatened language is inextricably linked with the concept of language revitalisation, which will be an additional topic, extensively covered in the following thesis. The question in need of answer is, therefore, the already known concept of threatened languages added with the kind of way of revitalisation in the concerned areas.

The thesis will consist of eight chapters covering different aspects. In the first chapter, the concepts of threatened and minority languages as well as language revitalisation will be

8 explained at length. Additionally, it will be linked to both examples to generate an insight into how they apply to it. The topic of minority languages will be of great importance. Thus, the characteristics of such languages will be explained in order to ultimately put the gained knowledge to use with the examples chosen for this thesis. In the second chapter, the two examples will be demonstrated, analysed, and their historical development will be presented. Their respective situations and their status as both minority and threatened languages will be taken into consideration. In the third chapter, the focus will be on the most recent means of oppression in order to validate the results, which are, especially in Carinthia, expected to be rather one-sided. The fourth chapter will extensively deal with the topics of bilingualism. All this is followed by a range of linguistic subtopics such as loss of minority languages, language maintenance, and linguistic shifts. The additionally chosen examples are of great importance as they give further insight into the topic. Also, it will provide an insight into the languages of Welsh and Carinthian-Slovene. In the sixth chapter, the topic of reversing language shift will be addressed. It serves as additional information that can be linked to the overall topic of the thesis. Last but not least, the final two content-chapters of the paper will contain the empirical research methodology, the results, the evaluation of the collected data, and the outlook on possible future research in this field.

9 1. Minority languages

Linguistic or ethnic groups, speaking an individual language that differs from the one spoken by the majority of inhabitants in a geographical area, offer great possibilities to investigate the characteristics and individualities of linguistic minorities worldwide. Therefore, it is necessary to define the basic structures of a minority language to ensure comprehension. Perhaps the most basic definition of a minority language, written in Article 1, letter a of the European Charter for Regional or Minority languages, states the following:

“Regional or minority languages” means languages that are: 1. Traditionally used within a given territory of a State by nationals of that State who form a group numerically smaller than the rest of the State’s population; and 2. Different from the official language(s) of that State (European Charter for Regional or Minority languages, 1992)

Considering this definition, it is possible to get a rough image of what such a language actually is. Although it may seem rather straightforward, the situation in Europe and the European Union is somewhat complicated due to the fact that there are a total of 23 official languages that can be used when “entering into contact with the main EU bodies” (Hilpold 2011, 53). However, English is seen as the main language with French in a diminished position. Plurilingualism has always been a defining trait of the EU and the organisation struggled to keep this system installed. This is despite the fact that they had to face a great number of difficulties such as an ever-growing demand for resources of monetary nature. Minority languages can therefore be seen as a challenge for the unity of this organisation. Additionally, with the rise of stronger, independent regions within EU-states, the occurrence of an urge for a separate linguistic identity can be detected. An increased number of languages within the EU can also be seen as an obstacle for the completion of a functioning inner market. The political institutions within EU and ECJ must come together in order to find a solution for this dilemma (Hilpold 2011, 53f). If one considers the development of the Welsh language, there is no doubt about its status as a minority language. This is due to the fact that it is a recognised minority language both within the United Kingdom and the European Union. The Slovenian language, and especially the troublesome topic of the “Windische” dialect is more complex. The Slovenian spoken by the minority in Carinthia is a recognised minority language in Austria, whereas “Windisch” is proven to be a dialect of Slovenian. The speakers of this dialect are no individual group. Thus the language they speak is a part of the Slovenian variety in Carinthia (Valentin 2011, 22).

10 1.1.Examples for minority languages

Minority languages have seen a fluctuating number of speakers within Europe. This is either due to a rise in nationalism or in a desire to be separate from a member state of the EU. Scotland is probably a better known example for both aforementioned treats is Scotland because Gaelic-Scots is spoken in this country. Others include the Catalonian, Basque, and . Minority languages together with languages that are not the official languages of the states in which their speakers live, can be categorised into three main categories. Around twelve million are immigrants or the offspring of immigrants to the area in which they live. These people can have different ethnic and geographical backgrounds. While some of them can be from non-European countries like the Arabic speakers of France or the Urdu speakers in the UK, others are so-called “trans-frontier migrants” such as the Portuguese speakers in Germany or the Italian speakers in Germany (Davies 1993, 103). Of the 500 million people in Europe, 455 million speak as their mother tongue a major language of their own state. Of the 45 million remaining people, twelve million fall into the above mentioned category, while another twelve million are “members of old-established communities and speak languages which have full status elsewhere but are minority languages within the state in which they live.” Examples for these are the Swedish speakers in Finland, the Hungarian speakers of Romania, the Albanian speakers of Serbia, and the Slovenian speakers of Austria (Davies 1993, 103). The remaining 20 million have as their mother tongue a language, which is nowhere the major language of a sovereign state. Examples for this are numerous and Davies (1993) suggests that the twenty most important non-state languages are complicated in their categorisation. This is due to their unclear number of speakers and nature as such. The list includes Catalan in Spain, France, and Italy, Galician in Spain, Occitan in France, Italy and Spain, and Romany in most European countries. These examples include the four languages with the most speakers in Europe, reigning from 7.5 million to 1 million speakers (Davies 1993, 105). The list also encompasses all four of the living Celtic languages of Irish, Welsh, Scots Gaelic, and Breton. However, it leaves out Cornish and Manx. The reason for this is that the reviving measures of those two languages are rather recent and cannot yet be found in statistical data.

The twenty languages, of which seventeen are mentioned to have a stronger and more significant impact in Europe, and are especially important to Davies (1993, 105), differ greatly in their strength. He mentions Catalan to be the strongest and most influential minority language in Europe. This example is quite interesting as Catalan has reached a special status

11 of full normalisation within Catalonia. It is intensely used in press organisations, schools, and broadcasting. Moreover, it is the major language and spoken by over nine million people within Catalonia. Also, the language is used as a symbol of autonomist and nationalist movements. The difference between languages such as Catalan and Galician is that the latter is spoken in Portugal. These two languages are members of the Romance language group, and they are situated in countries with state-languages that are also Romance languages. The difference between them and the majority is not as great as it is in other examples. “Newcomers” can be assimilated without greater problems. Moreover, there are a few language barriers to the social inclusion of Catalan and Galician speakers by Castilian- speaking, or in the Catalan example of France, by French-speaking groups and communities. Romance minority languages include languages such as Occitan, Sard, and Friulan. These three are also examples for minority languages that are part of the Romance language group and that exist within states that have an official language that is also a Romance language. The three languages are widely spoken, yet their circumstances are rather different to Catalan and Galician. The problems of Occitan and Sard are numerous and include a missing unified system of spelling. Occitan was a universal language of Europe and the major language of southern France. This status, however, decreased immensely and the area is now fragmented and scattered. The same applies to Sard, which has less speakers but a much more centred, less fragmented speech area. All three languages score fairly high as far as their density is concerned, yet they do not have real statuses in their respective nation. According to Davies (1993, 106), “they have virtually no recognition, hardly more than a toehold in the education system and the state broadcasting systems pay them scant attention”. Nevertheless, speakers of these minority languages seek to improve their sutaiton. Several important concessions have been achieved. Full independence is the acclaimed goal of Occitan and Sard activists, but not Friulan, who do not seem to be overly nationalistic (Davies 1993, 106). For instance, the Friulan example is especially interesting due to its nature. It is very close to Italian and there are large groups of Italians who consider it to be a dialect of it. Nonetheless, this assumption is not right due to the fact that Friulan has an own spelling system as well as unique grammatical rules.

As far as numbers are concerned, the linguistic groups which are nearest to Welsh are undoubtedly Basque, Breton, and Frisian. When analysing their language connections, it can be seen that Frisian has close bonds to German and Dutch, while Breton as a Celtic language is entirely different from French. This fact connects it to Welsh, which can never be put next

12 to English in terms of language families. Basque is perhaps the most interesting of these three languages. It is an isolated language, which is entirely different from any other language spoken in Europe (Davies 1993, 107). There have been numerous attempts to investigate and analyse the origins of this language, but none has brought satisfying results so far. According to Davies (1993, 107), it may be a remaining language of those which existed in Europe before the Indo-European languages. Geographically, they cover larger areas on both sides of the border between France and Spain on the verge to the Iberian Peninsula. Approximately 696,000 people live in the autonomous province of Euskadi, while 53,000 live in Navarre. Both of these provinces are located in Spain. As far as France is concerned, there are about 78,000 people in the north Basque Provinces in the south-west of France. Language statuses are problematic in respect of Basque. The language possesses a certain status in Navarre and ongoing restoration programs in Euskadi, there are literally none In France. The aforementioned programs in Euskadi aim at an intensive restoration of the language. They include schemes to learn the language in schools and the Basque broadcasting networks, which should air television in Basque for 64 hours per week. It can be seen as a symbol of renaissance for Basque. Davies (1993, 108), mentions that the Basque language together with the Breton language are perfect examples for French absolutism in linguistic matters. The French government holds a kind of traditional hostility towards these languages. Although this standpoint has been modified slightly in recent years, the damage is already done and especially in the case of Breton, it is hard to reverse its consequences. It has no official status and its role in education and broadcasting is almost non-existent. One of the rather serious consequences is the steady decline of speakers of Breton by age group. An important reason for this is that the number of parents who transmit the language to their children is small and, similar to the total number of speakers, it declines. Although the outlook on most of these minority languages is rather grim, the sense for culture in them is extremely high. Breton can be seen as a language of music and poetry. It proved to be extremely resilient (Davies 1993, 108). These In conclusion, these language examples are close to Welsh as far as their numbers are concerned and are suitable for an analysis as well as a comparison in minority languages.

Non-state languages can be seen as a challenging factor for linguists due to their unclear and imprecise nature. The rest of Davies’ groups hold less than 100,000 speakers. Faroese is the strongest of them, with all inhabitants of the Faroese islands being native speakers. Sorb, as a Slavic language is still existent today, although they suffered greatly under the Nazi regime. After the Second World War, they received much better treatment

13 from the communist regime in East Germany. According to Davies (1993, 108), its future in the unified German Bundesrepublik is uncertain. Linguistic relatives to Welsh are Irish and Scots-Gaelic, with the first one being, as mentioned already, a linguistic and political anomaly. It is the first and official state-language in Ireland, yet it is only spoken by a small minority of people living mostly in the western parts of the island. Additionally, it is a curious case due to the fact that the Irish state officially supports Irish and its advance, but reality speaks a different language. Only two percent of state television and five percent of the national radio stations are in Irish. Numerous enthusiasts of the Irish language are concerned by this development. In their eyes, the country’s independence has not been beneficial for the language. However, they do not remember the horrible situation of Irish, when the state finally received the status of independence. Thus, the current situation compared to this time has immensely improved (Hindley 1990, 23).

1.2.Additional examples and their respective situations

The case of Scots Gaelic as the sister language of Irish is equally important and bears numerous opportunities for an analysis of its situation and problems. Scots Gaelic was the dominant language of nearly all of Scotland one millennia ago. The situation changed in the 16th century, when it retrieved to the Highlands and Islands. On the mainland its decline is visible, since the above mentioned time and it is only spoken by a majority in parts of Skye and the Western Isles. These regions are to some extent comparable to the Gaeltachts in Ireland and in 1973, when the Western Isles authority was established, the language benefitted greatly from the reviving measures. Its position and role in local government became increasingly important and several initiatives to re-establish it as a language of education showed positive effects. Finally, an expansion of this language in broadcasting stations is an ongoing current program (Davies 1993, 108).

Minority languages and their analysis are extremely complex and a detailed observation of them shows that each situation is unique. They can be compared and put into groups, but their individualities are of utmost importance for the speakers and the overall situation. Considering them together, however, can be of great value. Also, finding areas of useful differences can perhaps be of great interest. Cooperation of these languages in a European frame is also a way to give attention to these languages. The European Bureau of Lesser-Used Languages is the best known example for this matter. It was established in 1983 and incorporates the above mentioned languages and more. Davies (1993, 109) suggests that a

14 listing of the languages gives way to a hierarchy which is led by the Catalan language as far as numbers and statuses are concerned. This hierarchy, however, can be deceitful due to the fact that Catalan is technically a lesser-used language but has far more speakers than some state-languages in Europe. In terms of density, the Faroese language is the number one. Welsh in this frame fits in the middle. Both in numbers and density it is in the centre (1993, 109). Although its number of speakers is average, Welsh has a far higher status than other languages which are more widely spoken. “Welsh-speakers live in a country, the other inhabitants of which recognize their kinship with the language” (1993, 109). This can be seen as great bonus for the language. Welsh centrality in itself is a stimulating topic. This is due to the assumption that if this language can solve its own linguistic, societal, and political problems, then Welsh can serve as an inspiration for other lesser-used languages (Davies 1993, 109).

Equally important to the definition and characteristics of minority languages are the different forms of maintaining minority languages and how they influence social change or even form social networks. The term ‘language maintenance’, according to John Edwards (2010, 31), is not defined in a sufficient manner. Some languages are only preserved in written form, but only spoken by very few people on a regular basis. This raises the question of whether such a language can be called ‘maintained’ (2010, 31). Maintaining a minority language can function in different ways. Most of these imply a “continuity of the ordinary spoken medium and this, in turn, highlights the importance of uninterrupted domestic language transmission from one generation to the next (2010, 31). Not only Fishman (1990, 1991), but also researchers such as Slomanson (1996) have quoted the Gaelic aphorism bho ghlùin gu glùin, which means ‘from knee to knee’ and implies the passing of language from one generation to another without considering the status of the language as far as literature or scripted communication is concerned (Edwards 2010, 31). These different ways include certain activities and methods such as a strong connection to folklore or choir groups who sing or perform in the minority language. Examples for this are evident in the Austrian case as the Carinthian Slovenes keep their choral singing very much alive. Moreover, the Welsh example includes cultural activities that are mentioned in the chapter on the language situations. is perhaps one of the better known, if not the best known example for Welsh cultural activities (Dinkelaker 2002, 89f). Established social networks can be found in the Gail valley of Carinthia. This example proves how such established bilingual communities influence the society as such. The study was conducted by Gumperz (1982) and focused on a

15 social network analysis in rural communities in Carinthia. These people have traditionally been rather poor and autochthonous as well as dependant on each other in areas, where vicinity and friendship is important. The level of monolingualism proved to be intense in the early 20th century. However, it changed with the establishment of a proper road system and the introduction of a tourist-oriented service economy. This shift encouraged the independency from social networks, and farmers focused on things such as accommodation of tourists as well as the social exchange with outsiders. As a result, the intensity of using Slovenian as an everyday language decreased rapidly (Milroy 2001, 44). Such studies show the immensely important position of languages within a community. Additionally, they demonstrate how minority languages can be influenced in a negative way. Tourism and an increased level of societal interaction are only two factors. Gumperz pattern will be further analysed in the paragraph below.

Together with the regional pattern of minority languages and the task of language maintenance goes the importance of ‘home’ as a vital factor for the status of a minority language as a spoken and alive one. However, not only this domestic factor must be in the focus. Next to the ‘home’ and the connected generational passage of language are extra- domestic settings necessary.

Milroy suggests that this pattern is a rather general one in Western Europe, but also points out the fact of local conditions which give rise to variations. One of these varieties is Ireland in which the better known examples of poverty and industrially undeveloped society as well as the famine have been catastrophic for the rural communities and the Irish language. Ireland proves to be a rewarding example for the near-loss of an entire language. Thus, it is obsolete to mention that the Irish language has been a rural one for most of its existence. This factor has been the root of its problems. Besides industrial and natural causes, which can be seen as the deciding factors for the decline, there were political ones such as the language policy in Ireland since 1922, which has tried to maintain the language. Gumperz research in the Gail valley can be very well compared to a series of studies between 1973 and 1993. In this regard, the effects of industrial and societal changes are looked upon in a similar way to that of Gumperz. The shift from bilingual communities to monolingual communities speaking the language of the majority is caused by the above mentioned structural change within personal social networks.

16 2. Language situations

Welsh and Slovenian as two rather fitting examples for minority languages have had an exciting historical development in the respective histories of their countries. Their status as minority languages has been installed over the course of centuries. Both the contemporary and the historical situation will be the topic of the following chapter. The focus on the development of the languages in respect of the background of Welsh and Carinthian history will serve for a greater understanding as a reader. Additionally, the comparability of the chosen examples will be a major factor within the following paragraphs. The situations of both languages in terms of contemporary history can be fittingly described by using the word ‘problematic’. However, one must keep in mind that the above mentioned detrimental situation can only be applied to the entire course of the 20th century within Wales and Carinthia. Repression, discrimination, political ideologies, but also organisations that helped by supporting their rights, are all inextricably linked to the past of the Carinthian Slovenes and the speakers of Welsh. Thus, their cultures, their languages, their traditions, and their identities have left an imprint on this topic in a way that cannot and must not be underestimated.

2.1.Welsh in the UK

Welsh as a Celtic language is one of the official languages of Wales and has gone through a colourful and often worrisome development in its history. It is a remnant of the once vast language family of the Celtic people in Europe. As part of a group of six languages, the others being Irish, Gaelic-Scots, Manx, Cornish, and Breton, it has seen an attempt of revivification and change in its status within the UK. According to Bärbel Dinkelaker, Welsh can be put into a category of threatened languages. It has around 500.000 speakers today and is therefore in categories three to four, which contains potentially endangered languages (2002, 72). Celtic languages were once spoken in large parts of continental Europe. In the Roman times, Cesar called the Celts “Gauls”, while the Greeks called them “Keltoi”. It is well known today, that this term meant the same group of people. The Celtic groups of people spread over Europe from the Iberian Peninsula to the Balkan in a curve which also covered parts of what is today southern Germany. Even “Asia Minor”, which means modern day Turkey, was affected. “The Celtic-speaking populations of Spain, Gaul, and Northern Italy came under the sway of Rome before the fall of the Republic and eventually assimilated to Latin.” (Fife 1993, 4). With this change of language use, the Celtic people gave up an immensely important part of their culture (1993, 4). Dinkelaker also erected different models

17 to differ between Celtic languages. The first one separates the Insular Celtic and the Continental Celtic languages from one another. Breton, which is spoken in the northwest of France, was taken as a part of the Insular Celtic languages due to the fact that it is closely related to Welsh and Cornish. The Continental Celtic languages, which include Gaulish, Celtiberian, Lepontic, and Galatian, can be seen as extinct (Dinkelaker 2002, 72). They were spoken in Gaul, northern and eastern Spain, northeast-Piedmont, and around the town of Ankara (Fife 1993, 6). The entire Continental Celtic language group is extinct today (Pilch 2007, 40).

The Insular Celtic language family is divided into the two branches of Gaelic and British. Irish and Gaelic-Scots are part of the first group, while Welsh and Breton are part of the second group (Dinkelaker 2002, 73). Manx, which was seen as extinct until recently, experienced a revival attempt in the last years. A census in 2001 showed a total number of 1,689 people with knowledge of Manx (Sallabank 2013, 54). Sallabank described the situation on the Isle of Man as being uniquely different from the rest of the British Isles. This is due to the small number of speakers and the method of learning a language and using it as a means to receive governmental funding. The individuals who underwent this learning procedure are described by Sallabank as activists (2013, 54). The Cornish and Cumbric languages belong to the British group, while Manx is part of the Gaelic. Pictish on the other hand is controversial. Lewis suggests that the differences between the two branches are the results of their arrival on the British Islands with great temporary distance. The first wave was made up of the Gaelic speakers, whereas the second one, during the third and fourth century BC, was made up of the British group. In conclusion, the difference between the Celtic languages continues with a linguistic set of criteria.

The linguistic differentiation between the Celtic languages is transverse to the geographical separation and equally important to the development of the Welsh language. The two branches are the p-Celtic and the q-Celtic and refer to the Indo-European *kw, which in the p-Celtic group, represents a voiceless labial plosive, while it is velar in the q-Celtic group. The British group from the paragraph above would serve as the first group, while the Gaelic is made up of the second (Fife 1993, 6f). The Welsh language is Insular Celtic and part of the British, whereas the p-Celtic languages and the term for itself is Cymraeg. This name correlates to the country’s name of Cymru. The English names Wales and Welsh go back to the term Wealas, which mean stranger (Löffler 1997, 20). Moreover, the same theory is

18 advocated by Khleif. He describes the origin of Wales and Welsh as the result of the intolerant spirit of their conquerors. The Old English terms Waelise, which became ‘Welsh’, and Wealnas, which became ‘Wales’, originally meant foreigners. While the English origins of these words mostly possess a negative connotation, the Celtic origin bears a positive message. Cymru is the Welsh name of Wales and it is derived from Cumbroges, which means “fellow countrymen”. This name was adopted by the Celts during the Anglo-Saxon Invasion. The Latinised variation Cambria has survived until today (1980, 24f). Britannic is one of the ancestors of the language and is said to have been on the same stage as Latin. Its grammatical system was more complex than Latin, had three cases, a dual (grammatical number), and three genders in the adjective. The Britannic language was a medium to express an elevated social position. It was used as a means of expression and to convey power and culture (Lewis 1989, 28). The Roman period in Britannia was a prosperous one and left a well-ordered country with roads and laws (Sager 1992, 85). After the Roman period, the Celtic language, which had lost its importance during their reign, returned to regain its once great position. The Romans had conquered the Welsh entirely in 78 AD and ruled for about 300 years. After the Romans had left, the languages were not taken care of and the distinct geographical areas of the country only experienced a slow development. The Welsh area was separated from the Cornish in 577 after a battle against the Anglo-Saxons (Lewis 1989, 69). The beginning of the 7th century faced the same development in the north of Wales and the Britannic could evolve into a distinct language in modern day Wales (Löffler 1997, 20).

The Welsh language itself can be separated into different eras, which possess distinct characteristics and lead up to today’s version of this language. The first one is known as Ancient Cymric, the second is Middle Cymric, and the current one is New Cymric. The translation of the Bible in 1588 is seen as a border between Early- and Later New Cymric (Watkins 1992, 13ff). A description of modern Welsh needs a separation between the language used in literature and the vernacular. Especially in the latter it is remarkable that there is no sociolinguistic difference in language use. There is no such thing as high-Welsh or low-Welsh and a farmer speaks in the same manner as a professor. There are only dialectic differences which can be traced back to the geographical areas and the differences that arose with them (Sager 1992, 20). The geographical and dialectical areas of Wales are the north- western dialects of Gwynedd, Powys in the north-east, the former county of Dyfed in the south-west, and Gwent in the south-east (Watkins 1992, 15f). Opposing Watkins, Thomas

19 suggests a rather broad distinction, differentiating only between the northern and the southern dialects, which in turn can be further divided on a lexical level (Thomas 1992, 60).

However, a very distinct difference can be noticed between the vernacular and the written Welsh language. Thomas suggests that the main reason for this might be the fact that the vernacular is broadened by English terms. This process is called relexification and almost always applies to the spoken version of Welsh. For instance, people use jwmpo instead of neidio, which means “jumping”, bilifo instead of credo, which means “believe”, and drimo instead of breuddwydio, which means “dream”. Welsh nationalists and language enthusiasts condemn such practices and see them “as being ‘corruptions’ of the Welsh usage. They are however, a fact of life for the Welsh language, and must in some way be accommodated if the language is to survive as other than an elitist phenomenon” (Thomas 1992, 267). Welsh is presented as “largely phonetic; that is, the words are pronounced as they are written, with none of the confusion which arises in English over such words as cough, bough, through, though and thorough” (Davies 1993, 110).

The topic of Welsh bears a great number of interesting endeavours such as an own distinctive set of grammatical rules, a deteriorating quantity of speakers, and a number of historical reasons for the negative development of speakers. It can be said that the language possesses certain grammatical elements. Morphology and Syntax are examples for the fact that it is rather problematic to classify Welsh in a typological way (Dinkelaker 2002, 80). The language contains flectional prepositions when it is combined with personal pronouns (King 1996, 56ff). These prepositions are highly frequent because prepositional phrases replace missing constructions such as “have”. In the south there is (gy)da for “with”, and in the north there is gan (King 1996, 62). The Welsh language possesses a rather open syntax structure with a large number of possible options for structuring a sentence. It is structured in a verb- subject-complement-adjunct order. Thomas (1992) suggests that a sentence in which no element can be topicalised, as the following example shows:

Gwelodd y bachgen ddyn ddoe. Saw the boy man yesterday. The boy saw the man yesterday. (272)

Random sentence constituents can be topicalised by placing them before the flectional verb (Thomas 1992, 286f). Therefore, the example shows that the syntax structure of this language is rather unique and very open-minded.

20

Welsh vocabulary is an additional topic that needs to be mentioned due to its special characteristics and possessions of loan words. The Welsh have been, and to some extent still are under foreign rule throughout their history. As a result, the topic of foreign rule plays a role for Khleif, who separates Welsh history in pre- and post-1872. In this year, the Ballot Act was passed “which enfranchised the farming and industrial working class in Wales and integrated Wales into British national politics” (Khleif 1980, 24). It marked the end of a feudalistic system in Wales because tenants were able to object their landlords (Morgan 1971, 158). changed its nature from cultural to political (Khleif 1980, 24). This fact of foreign rule is the reason for the language to encompass a vast number of foreign words which have been included in Welsh vocabulary. It can be said that the ongoing presence of foreign powers have changed the language to the extent that it is extremely complex to redesign the pure language which arose from the Celtic and Britannic languages. Statistics suggest that the Roman rule left over 1000 loan words. During the Renaissance period, Latin was a source for terms which could not be named in Welsh. Lewis (1989) suggests that perhaps the entire corpus of medical terms in Welsh is taken from Latin. Examples for this include corff (corpus) for “body” or braich (bracchium) for “arm”. Other non-medical Latin loan words include maneg (manica) for glove, pais (pexa) for underskirt, post (postis) for post, colofn (columna) for pillar or column, porth (porta) for door, cannwyll (candela) for candle, flamm (flamma) for flame, ysgol (schola) for school or eglwys (ecclesia) for church. This selection shows the great level of variety of loan words and the full integration of the language, when taking pronunciation into account.

The rate of Latin loan words in Welsh is higher than in other languages. English as perhaps the geographically closest language has had a strong influence on Welsh. Interestingly, the relations to the Irish language have led to a mutual exchange of words in which Welsh has taken fewer words from Irish than vice versa. Despite the strained historical relationship to the English, which has left its traces on Welsh, and since the Old-English and Old-Welsh times, there have been linguistic exchanges. The exchange reached a peak during the Anglo-Norman time. The rate rose quickly after this (Watkins 1992, 113). Early English loan words include berfa (bearwe) for barrow, crefft (cræft) for craft or punt (pūnd) for pound. It is therefore a given fact that the was an important source of words for the Welsh despite their violent conflicts in history.

21 The geographical distribution of Welsh is a topic which carries useful information to gain insight into the current language situation. Thus, the historical distribution of the language greatly differs from the current due to different factors and developments, which had a negative impact on the language. The distribution during the 6th century AD was at its peak and spread across the borders of modern Wales. It reached the Scottish lowlands, Lancashire, and Yorkshire. Since the 5th and 7th century in which the Welsh lost battles against the Anglo- Saxons, the language was on a steady decline and covered what is known as Wales today. The current situation as opposed to the historical peaks of the language is a rather grim one. This is due to the limited geographical area covered by the language. The Welsh heartlands are found in the counties of Gwynedd and the former Dyfed in which 61.0% and 43.7% of people spoke the language in 1996 (Dinkelaker 2002, 83). Moreover, the current situation differs to a great extent due to an ongoing reduction. Dyfed was changed into the three Principal areas of Camarthenshire, Ceredigion, and Pembrokeshire in 1996. According to StatsWales, 43.9% of people in Camarthen, 47.3% in Ceredigion, and 19.2% in Pembrokeshire speak Welsh today. In Gwynedd the percentage of Welsh speakers is 65.4 (2011). The former Dyfed and Gwynedd still cover half of all Welsh-speakers today. Thus, an increasing geographical proximity to the English border is the reason for the rapid decline of Welsh-speakers.

Equally important to the geographical distribution is the statistical evolution of Welsh- speakers, which underpins the steady decline of the language. In 1801, Wales had a population of 587,245 with 470,000 speakers of Welsh. In 1971, the Welsh population rose to 2,725,000 with only 542,000 Welsh speakers. The percentage of speakers dropped from 80 to only 20 percent. According to Khleif, reasons such as working migration and unemployment are the triggering factors for this negative process (1980, 55). It is visible that the above mentioned numbers are not recent. However, they show a negative trend which continues in the following numbers below. The UK government hosts a decennial census since the late 19th century which also covers the language use. Also, the census shows two statistical series which have to be looked at individually. The first one is the absolute number of Welsh- speakers, while the second is the number of speakers in relation to the total population of Wales. The peak of Welsh-speakers was about 1.5 million people. The first numbers reach back from 1891 to 1931 and show numbers above 900.000. The decline is visible since 1911 and in 1981, the number sank to 503.549 (Jones 1993, 539). Rather recent numbers from 1991 show two different figures. Aitchison and Carter (1994) suggest 496.530, while Census Information reveals 508.098 speakers of Welsh. The number of speakers in relation to the

22 total population in Wales shows an even larger decrease of Welsh. While in 1801, there were 80% of Welsh speakers in Wales, the number diminished quite steadily and in the 1870s, there were only 70% left. The first census, which was explained above, showed 54.5% of speakers with knowledge of Welsh and 29% of Welsh monolinguals. In 1981, the number sank to 18.9% and only 4.2% were monolingual, which meant that there were only 0.8% of people who spoke the language. In 1991, the census did not include the number of monolinguals because officials did not ask the question about knowledge of English anymore (Dinkelaker 2002, 84).

However, the distribution of Welsh in its history was much broader than it is today, and the language, according to Jones (1993, 536) was “not only safe but flourishing”. It possessed characteristics which made it invulnerable in a linguistic sense. Furthermore, the language was spoken by the great majority of people, which included “peasants, farmers, landowners, craftsmen, clergy, lawyers, administrators and the gentry” (Jones 1993, 536). Welsh reached a status of popularity amongst poets, storytellers, and literati. Therefore, it was seen as a medium of high-brow culture. In the 10th century, language was a way to communicate in circles of law, medicine, and other sciences. This has to be mentioned before the background of Europe which, to an overwhelming extent, used Latin as the language of choice for these areas. In Wales, Latin was solely the language of the church. The most important religious texts, however, were translated into Welsh rather swiftly. Despite the loss of political independence, the period of Middle Welsh is seen as the “Golden Age” (Jones 1993, 537f). After this prosperity, there were centuries with fluctuating relevance for Welsh. Around the High Middle Ages, internal struggles for power from 1070 to 1282 split the country in two parts. One being dominated by the Anglo-Normans and the other one ruled by native princes such as Llywelyn II. This was known as “Pure Wales”. Llywelyn II. became known as “Llywelyn ap Gruffydd”, since he was the last ruler of an independent Wales. When he was defeated by Edward I. in 1282, Welsh independency ceased to exist and the north of Wales became the Principality of the English Throne. This status was later applied to the total area of Wales.

Bilingualism and language cultivation has not been an issue during the High Middle Ages, when the two language groups were mostly monolingual. Exceptions to this could be found in closer proximity to the language borders in which it was necessary to speak both languages. During the 13th century AD, Welsh and English nobility were bilingual and Latin

23 as well as French were additional official languages. There was, however, no language policy that would have diminished the influence or importance of Welsh or English. During the 14th century, famine and the great plague epidemic swiftly changed the equilibrium of languages and made it turn against the Welsh. In the north, the Welsh put up markets, while the English had programs installed which attempted to forbid the Welsh to enter the larger towns. This led to an uprising of Owain Glyn DŴr, who made himself the Prince of Wales, around the year 1400. The English monarch Henry IV. initially started campaigns against the Welsh pretender, but failed miserably. Owain’s program included the founding of universities and the calling of parliaments. The Welsh population was on his side (Dinkelaker 2002, 86). After 1407, however, the movement came to a halt and lost most of its strength. Owain disappeared and the episode was declared to be over. The Welsh had to endure repressive measures and the installation of military governments. Also, laws were passed in order to put pressure on the Welsh language and culture (Dinkelaker 2002, 86).

Towards the end of the Middle Ages and the beginning of the modern era, Welsh culture was repeatedly given false hopes of an improving situation. The Wars of the Roses came to an end with the Battle of Bosworth in 1485, and Henry VII. became king. Due to the Tudors being a Welsh family, their people had hopes that the monarch would support their claims. This expectation was also nourished by the fact that Henry’s uncle was a patron of Welsh culture. These hopes were not fulfilled, but in 1505, a small number of repressive laws were lifted. The Welsh gained access to English cities and offices (Löffler 1997, 22ff). During the 16th century, the Acts of Union of 1536 and 1543 promoted the anglicisation of Wales and their political unity with England. For the first time, the acts contained laws concerning the language to be used in the country.

Also be it enacted by the Authority aforesaid, That all Justices Commissioners Sheriffs Coroners Escheators Stewards and their Lieutenants, and all other Officers and Ministers of the Law, shall proclaim and keep the Sessions Courts Hundreds Leets, Sheriffs Courts, and all other Courts in the English Tongue; and all Oaths of Officers Juries and Inquests, and all other Affidavits Verdicts and Wagners of Law, to be given and done in the English Tongue; and also that from henceforth no Person or Persons that use the Welsh Speech or Language shall have or enjoy any Manner Office of Fees within this Realm of England, Wales, or other the King’s Dominion, upon Pain of forfeiting the same Offices or Fees, unless he or they use and exercise the English Speech or Language. (Bowen, I. (ed.) (1908), The Statutes of Wales).

The statute was not the first action to diminish the worth of Welsh. The local nobility had their children educated in English schools for some time and had also switched to English as a

24 vernacular. However, it was the first time that the Welsh language was seen as less important and inferior to English (Jones 1993, 539). English was linked to success in life, politics, education, economy, and the nobility. Additionally, the bards lost their importance as the bearers of Welsh poetry and culture. This factor meant the additional loss of a medium to spread the language (Löffler 1997, 40). Regardless, these diminishing factors were not linked to a reduction of the geographical distribution of Welsh.

In the later period of the modern era, the language was severely suffering under the diminishing influence and the worker’s immigration to the industrial areas of Wales. Jones characterises the rise in English monolingual workers in Wales and suggests that “the English monoglots did not become bilingual, but bilingualism amongst speakers of Welsh led to an intergenerational language switch to English in these mixed language areas” (Jones 1993, 546). The situation for the Welsh was rather grim and the language shift towards English began to have serious effects on the country. During the 19th century, education was most affected by this change. The fact that it survived the English measures has to be credited to the Church and the Eisteddfod (Dinkelaker 2002, 89f). Religion was conveyed via the vernacular language. Also, the Lutheran concept was obeyed by almost everyone during this time. The translation of the Bible was equally important to the Welsh language as it was to other vernaculars in Europe. The Church of England was introduced in Wales in 1549 and English was supposed to replace Latin as the language of liturgy. This, however, failed after a few years because the Catholic Church was reinstalled and Latin was reintroduced. The Welsh translation of the Bible was a tedious process, which was first mentioned in 1547 and was finalised in 1588. The first full translation was made by Bishop William Morgan. His work was revised and used from 1620 to 1988. Sager suggests that it was Bishop Morgan’s merit that God did not speak English but Welsh (Sager 1992, 15). In 1620, the Bible was made accessible to private persons in a Beibl Bach, which was a smaller Bible. Until then, only priests and clerics were in possession of it (Löffler 1997, 48). To recapitulate, it can be said that the Bible translation was one of the most important deeds in Welsh history.

Naturally, the Welsh Bible is linked to the advancement of the language and the installation of Sunday schools, which in turn meant an ongoing feeling of self-awareness for the Welsh-speaking community. Jones suggests that:

The main importance and contribution of the Bible to is that it served as a standard variety of the language. In a land which did not possess a university, nor any other

25 cultural establishment which could give guidance on linguistic and literary matters, the Bible translation was taken as an example of the standard variety. (Jones 1993, 542).

Welsh had become the language of literature, religion, biology, linguistics, and archaeology. During the 18th and 19th century, these schools were a medium of political discussion for adults and a way to receive Welsh-language education for pupils. During the week, children learnt English in regular schools, while Welsh was taught in religious schools at the weekends. In 1881, over 30% of the population attended these schools. According to Löffler, it was a way to maintain an independent culture of Welsh-speakers (Löffler 1997, 80). The Welsh were strict and religious people at that time, and the influence of the nonconformist confession caused a dominance of the Welsh language in the area of religion. It helped to keep the language alive (Dinkelaker 2002, 90).

Apart from the church, the Eisteddfod was a possibility for the Welsh language to stay alive and thriving. According to Sager (1992, 20), it was and still is a pillar of support to the language as well as a celebration of the Welsh soul. Its origins lie in medieval times in the year 1176, when it was first mentioned in a document (23). It was a typically medieval competition between singers. In the 16th century, it served as a type of exam for poets. Imposers were supposed to be sorted out of a pool of real bards. During the 19th century, it became a national institution of Welsh culture and poetry (Löffler 1997, 86). The festival grew larger and was soon made into a countrywide competition of poets and singers. In 1858, participants from all parts of Wales contributed and in 1861, it was held in Aberdare and was made into a National Eisteddfod. During the 19th and 20th century, the nature of Eisteddfod changed again and it was made into a platform of political discussion. Valuable prices were given to the best poets in order to spread the language and to gain greater attention. The political branch of the festival was soon made into the Plaid Cymru, the national party of Wales. Also, was sung on this occasion. This happened before it was announced as the national anthem of Wales (Sager 1992, 26). In the early 20th century, English was increasingly prevalent in the festival and during the 1920s and 1930s the festival’s popularity sank due to the great depression. In 1949, the festival was redesigned to raise awareness of the Welsh character of the event. The new Eisteddfod should be an event of the Welsh language and all contributions as well as speeches were to be held in Welsh. In recent times, the festival regained its Celtic character and attracts an average of 146.000 people annually, as well as 2000 participants. In the early 2000s, the aspect of language

26 learning and information stood in the centre of attention. Besides this, the festival itself is still a central attraction and meeting point for Welsh-speaking communities (Löffler 1997, 138).

The current situation of Welsh in Wales is inextricably linked to its history and relation to English. Centuries of pressure and foreign rule have left the country linguistically scarred. The repressive measures against Welsh show the extent of hatred carried out by the English. It can be seen as quite surprising that in the 1960s and 1970s, the standpoint towards the indigenous language changed. In the heartlands, a participation in the normal life is hardly possible without rudimentary knowledge of Welsh. Despite this development, the language was and is still not seen as equally important to English (Löffler 1997, 120). Peter Sager suggests that the reason for the problematic bilingual situation in Welsh society can be found in the Act of Union. His assumption was that English was the language of the empire, the law, bureaucracy, wealth, prosperity, and of success, while Welsh was seen as the language of family, farmers, blue-collar-, and slate-workers. It was also the language of the Church and of Eisteddfod, the festival of literature, music, and chants that is described above (Sager 1992, 44ff). However, the Welsh language is advancing into significant areas of everyday life such as schooling, public life, politics, and business (Dinkelaker 2002, 92). The density of speakers within the counties of Wales is rather diverse. As previously mentioned, the highest rates can be found in the north, with Gwynedd having the most speakers in all of Wales. In the southwest, the former county of Dyfed takes the second place. The lowest rate can be found in Gwent, with 5% people possessing knowledge of the language. Nevertheless, in the former Clwyd, which encompasses Conwy, Denbigshire, Flintshire, and Wrexham. In Powys, regions can be found in which the population is conversing in Welsh to a large extent. The western regions and the rural areas have a higher density due to their isolated situation (Baker 1985, 14). A positive development can be seen in Gwynedd in which “the number of persons able to either speak, read or write Welsh” has risen to over 140.000. This means that in the decade from 1981 to 1991, there was an increase by 0.2% of Welsh-speakers. The overall number in Wales although has sunk from 63% to 61.5% in that time period (Dinkelaker 2002, 92).

The Welsh language has to deal with certain problems that are able to diminish its status or its range of distribution. Probably, the most important one is the fact that Celtic cities are missing entirely. Even Caernarfon, which is a residency of 10.000 Welsh speakers, and therefore possesses a larger number of Welsh speakers in comparison to English speakers, is second to Bangor, a metropolis and university town in the north. Modern-Celtic families and

27 communities are still rural and familiar, without urban centres to facilitate their needs (Greene 1981, 4f). It is legitimate to say that the Welsh language is struggling, yet has managed to stay alive during grim periods of its history. Although, the current situation has improved when juxtaposed with the language-situation in the late 19th and early 20th century, there are still measures to be taken in order to reinforce Welsh-language education and culture. These include mandatory instead of optional Welsh-language classes in schools or language certifications for working-immigrants who wish to live and work in Wales.

2.2.Slovenian in Carinthia

The current situation and historical development of Slovenian in Carinthia is a topic that comprises several defining factors. Slovenian is a part of the Slavic language family and the official language of the Republic of Slovenia. It possesses a minority status in Austria, Hungary, and Italy and there are approximately 2.25 million native speakers of Slovenian, of which 1.85 million live within the borders of the Republic of Slovenia. 140,000 live in the neighbouring states and 250,000 live in the Diaspora in Germany, Canada, USA, Argentina, Australia, and others (Dular 2002, 281). Perhaps, the best-known example for an area outside of Slovenia that is covered by the language are the regions in the south of the Austrian county of Carinthia. Here, we have the language minority of the Carinthian-Slovenes, which are a historically developed group of Slavs inside the Austrian state. They have been settling in Carinthia since the 6th century (Priestly 2000, 222). Historically speaking, the group has been located in this area since the early Middle Ages and was severely affected by the land- acquisition of the Bavarian and Frank nobility (Fischer 1980, 65f). From the 20s in the 8th century until the beginning of the 11th century, small groups of Slovenian nobility survived. After the turn towards the 11th century however, they assimilated to the German-speaking majority, took over the , and made the Slovenians into a group of farmers and lower-class workers without a complete social profile (Fischer 1980, 65f).

The situation of Slovenian as an assumed underclass language, without any literature or poetry, is rather old and several factors contributed to the lengthening of this status. Nobility, knighthood, the higher hierarchy, and the aristocracy in the ethnic Slovenian regions were almost entirely non-Slovenian. Also, the vernacular language as well as the language of literature in the society was either Latin or German. Slovenian was seen as a language without culture and literary background. It was a vulgar tongue. During the later period of the Middle Ages, a psychological feeling of animosity towards the language became visible.

28 Nevertheless, the language had the same requirements as the Old High German language in the 11th century. With the time of Christianisation came the need to set the course for the acquisition of the ancient Roman cultural and intellectual world. This caesura was a challenge for both the Germanic and the Slavic language and it determined the fixation of the language through literature. The capitularies of Charlemagne were perhaps the most important religious papers, which were relevant in the entire Holy Roman Empire. This included the Slavic regions of modern Carinthia. In the second half of the 9th century, Slovenian was influenced by religious literatureby Cyrill and Method. Additional pieces of writing were the Freising manuscripts, which were a set of texts with a part being written in Slovenian. This is one of the most important pieces of evidence for an early literary tradition in this language (Fischer 1980, 66).

The historical development of the Slovenes is inextricably linked to the principality of Carantania. The Slavs lived in an area in which there were no real centres of education in their language. The regions north of the river Drave were operated by Salzburg while the south was controlled by Aquileia. The feudal aristocracy recognised the Slavic character of the region. They did however, not do anything to make a time of prosperity possible. The name of “Carantania” soon became synonymous for “Slovenes” and the aristocracy allowed the ritual of enthroning a new prince to be held in Slovenian. During the High and Late Middle Ages, the situation changed and the region was permeated with Bavarian colonists. This process was completed in the 15th century and the Slavic language suffered greatly under this enormous pressure (Dular 2002, 282). As a result, the language border was set in the middle of Carinthia and was maintained until the 19th century.

Slovenian as a language of scripture and literature is a topic that includes the language perception as well as social status. The foundation of the diocese of Ljubljana in 1461 did not improve the situation of Slovenian as a language of literature. However, the social status of Slovenian is a confusing topic. This is due to the fact that although the language suffered under the pressure of the German majority, it did not possess negative reputations. Fischer (1980) suggests that the Carinthian nobility did not reject the language as such and even spoke it in rituals and ceremonies. Slovenian is a literary language evolved from the 16th century onwards. During the protestant movement, the language received its translation of religious texts in 1550. Primož Trubar was the one who wrote these translations anonymously. The concept of “cuius regio – eius religio”, which was determined in the religious peace of

29 Augsburg, led to a time of prosperity for this language. The Slovenian language flourished in spoken and, especially, in written form. Although Trubar possessed knowledge of an overwhelmingly large geographical and dialectic area, he decided to use the variety of colloquial Slovenian in Ljubljana. He improved Slovenian orthography and introduced it in schools in the city of Ljubljana. Trubar’s method guaranteed supra-regional understanding of the language (Dular 2002, 282). In 1557, Trubar translated the New Testament and dedicated it to the people who spoke Slovenian. The regions he mentioned included Carniola, Lower Styria, Carantania, Karst, Austria, and the “Windische Mark” (Fischer 1980, 69).

In the modern period, the development of a written Slovenian language comprises a number of stages that lead to its installation as a traditional language of service. The protestant Jurij Dalmatin translated the entire Bible in 1584. The resultant work was allowed to be the official Bible translation for the Protestants in the Slovenian geographic area. The Protestants were able to focus on their written traditions, and the situation between the language areas of German and Slovenian was at peace. However, the situation did change again in the 18th century with the rise of Catholic tendencies that questioned the authority of the above mentioned translation. Furthermore, the Catholic Bible of the late 18th century was written before the background of the 16th century Bible and its language. This process of a unifying language was a threat to the regional languages and translations. The preservation of the written tradition helped to overcome the language sectionalism and to determine one written Slovenian language (Fischer 1980, 70f).

Concerning the dialectal situation of Slovenian, it can be stated that the dialects of this language, both in Slovenia and beyond its borders, are of great linguistic interest to scholars. Dialects in the Italian-Slovenian border region differ immensely from the standard Slovene, spoken in Ljubljana or Maribor. However, the latter example is not a rather fitting one as the dialects in these two cities differ from each other. Nonetheless, the dialects are different from one another in all the border regions of Slovenia. In the case of Carinthia, there are four different dialects. These are the Ziljsko, Rožansko, Obirsko, and Podjunsko, and they belong to the pandialectal group. Priestly pointed some Slovene-speakers out who claimed that there is mutual unintelligibility, but suggests that these cases are extremely rare. The Koroško dialects can be seen as both innovative and conservative. This implies that some retain original Slavic nasal vowels, while others have a new consonantal palatalization. Others did not maintain the phonemic pitch and length, which is a key feature of standard Slovene. The

30 general case in Carinthia is one of idiosyncrasies. This means that some valleys and villages in Carinthia partly possess their own vocabulary. Additionally, it signifies that its inhabitants can easily be deduced by their usage of the language (2000, 226). Although they use an individual vocabulary, they can still be understood by speakers of standard Slovene (Hunter 2000, 55). One unique fact in the Carinthian case needs to be mentioned as well. The influence of bilingualism is immense for the affected languages. Both German and Slovene have undergone great changes during their co-existence for many centuries. They sound rather similar at a shorter distance and German has incorporated certain Slavic elements (Priestly 2000, 226). Another example is the dialectal dual count in Carinthia. The Slovene word here would be midva, while in Carinthia it is wir zwa, which means “we two” as a term that is describing a number of people. Priestly describes another example of the close proximity between German and Slovene in the area. The Carinthian phrase wir mit Hanzi, which means “Hanzi and I” is translated into Slovenian as midva z Janezom. The Slovene functions like a direct influence for German. Vice versa, the dialectal Slovene phrase ustanem hor, “I get up” is translated into German as ich stehe auf, while the standard Slovene word would simply be vstanem. These examples represent some grammatical borrowings, the Slovene dialects took from German. The majority of these borrowings are of a cultural nature (Priestly 2000, 228). Also, the dialects of German and Slovene in this area are phonetically and lexically rather similar. This has been the reason for the fact that in the early 20th century, people started to consider the two languages as a unified language which was mixed together of Slovene and German. However, the term “mixed language” lacks linguistic meaning and is utterly meaningless in this context. Either way, the mythos led to a problematic political situation as Carinthian nationalists used it in order to segregate ethnic minorities.

Equally problematic to the dialectal and the historical situation of the Carinthian Slovenes is the sociolinguistic aspect, which also covers censuses and the actual number of Carinthian Slovenes. During the late 19th and early 20th century, there have been several attempts to count the minority, but the emerging problems have always been of a rather similar nature. Members of the minority group during the 19th and the second half of the 20th century had a similar problem with being counted. Their feelings were of an idealistic and isolating nature. The results show a decline from 1880 to 1981. Censuses were held in 1880, 1951, 1961, 1971, and 1981. In 1951, there were 42,095 Slovene speakers. The number dropped to 25,470 in 1961 and to 20,928 in 1971. In 1981, the number was 16,552. These numbers do not show the real image of ethnic conditions in Carinthia. This is due to a high

31 assimilation-pressure. Moreover, the minority could not opt for a native language in these censuses but only for a vernacular (Inzko 1988, 204). When looking at the statistics, one must notice that the numbers do not fit the overall image regarding the actual size of the minority group. The problems that arose with the implemented censuses are also linked to the repressive measures towards the language. Due to the fact that this will be the topic of the following chapter, the focus must be on the development and the continuation of Slovenian in Carinthia. The language has completed a shift from the negative towards a more positive development. Linguistically, the language was supported with the national treaty of Austria in 1955. Moreover, the article seven of this treaty was supposed to guarantee the rights of the Slovenian and Croatian minorities in Austria. However, promises about bilingual schooling and bilingual town-boundary signs were fulfilled in a manner that can only be described as hesitant. Members of the minority were struggling to negotiate appropriate statutes for their needs (Inzko 1988, 184).

In general, it can be said that the historical development of the minority after the First World War, which will be discussed in the following chapter on the repressive measures towards the Slovene population, is coined by the ongoing struggle with several defining issues that were in the centres of attention for both, the minority and the majority population. Especially, after the Second World War, the focus was on the struggle for the equal treatment of their language and culture as well as bilingual schooling and bilingual town-boundary signs. Bilingual schooling is an intrinsic topic that dominated the way of thinking in both, the minority and the majority group. To recapitulate, all of these topics are of high importance to comprehend the situation of the minority in Carinthia.

32 3. Repressive measures towards both languages

3.1.Carinthia

Throughout the past 150 years different ways of repression towards the Slovenian language group in southern Carinthia have emerged. They have left their marks on the group as such due to the fierce nature of their treatment. Since the late 19th century, the rise of nationalism in Europe has led to a series of problems between language groups. The language was now seen as a medium of identity, which would additionally make a claim about someone’s nationalistic intentions. This background would lead to the exclusion of the Slovene-speaking language group, which in turn would react with a thriving outburst of literature, clerics, cultural organisations, and fighting for the retention of their language (Bogataj 2008, 71). However, the situation in these regions in question deteriorated after the plebiscite of 1920. During the two years before this event, Yugoslavia occupied the bilingual regions in the hope of annexing them for their new founded state. Resistance arose and the Carinthian troops were able to push Yugoslavs back. After the plebiscite, which had an outcome of almost 60% in favour of remaining with Austria, a difference was made between those members of the minority who voted in favour of Austria and those who voted for the Yugoslav side (Moritsch 1996, 64). Perhaps, this episode was the most crucial time in the recent history of the minority. It would lead to an ongoing exclusion and even ostracism of the group. False accusations were made about the language they spoke and it was claimed that they were a mixture of German-Carinthians and Slovenians rather than an individual group with a distinct culture (Wutte 1918, 1). The fact that Wutte was a nationalistic German- Carinthian would become evident when he declared that the so-called “Abwehrkampf” was a struggle to keep Carinthia purely German (Danglmaier/Koroschitz 2015, 73).

Slur words were being created to identify those who voted for the Yugoslav side in 1920. Several of those terms are still being used today. The most prominent is perhaps “Windisch”. Originally, it was a neutral term used by the German speaking people to identify the Slovenian minority without it having a condescending meaning. After the plebiscite and with the help of historians such as Martin Wutte, the term gained a new meaning to demonise the minority and to split them up into subgroups. Apparently, this was effective, as even amongst the minority, new words such as “Nemčur” arose to identify those who voted for Austria in 1920. This had catastrophic consequences for the Carinthian-Slovenes. Many migrated to Yugoslavia or assimilated to the German language and culture (Moritsch 1996,

33 65). After the First World War, the separation amongst the minority was one of several detrimental factors which would eventually lead to a downfall of the language. However, the darkest period of the minority was still ahead of them.

During the 1930s and especially in 1938, when Germany annexed Austria, a new political view arose which saw the German language and culture ahead of other languages. Carinthia was planned to be formed into a “Mustergau” with a pure German speaking population. A census held in 1934 was done in a discriminating fashion. The people were asked to which cultural environment they felt closest. This put them in a problematic situation. If they chose the Slovenian one, they were seen as irredentists. The results showed a diminishing number of minority members. In this period, the repressive measures reached a level of cruelty never seen before. The minority was forbidden to use their language in school, public, and in private environments. Additionally, in school, pupils who dared to speak their respective Slovenian dialects were at the risk of physical punishment at the hands of the teachers. A specific example can be found in Kukovica (2008). In the autobiography, the author explains the situation in the south of Carinthia during the Second World War and during the education in German-speaking schools. When the Headmaster asked the pupils which language they used at home, he wanted to filter out the Slovenian (in this example the “Windische”) speakers. Together with the author, two others were escorted out of the classroom so that they could be taught separately, not to use this language (Kukovica 2008, 10). For the author, this event was imprinted in his memory. This is because of the fact that the system was very repressive. Due to the prohibition of the language, they had to speak it in a very secretive nature and only with people, of whom they knew, would not betray them or deliver them to the regime. A fitting example for the close proximity of the language to standard Slovenian is, when the author met a partisan fighter from Yugoslavia. They were able to understand each other’s words perfectly. However, the boy’s dialect made it hard to reach perfect understanding (Kukovica 2008, 66). Therefore, it is comprehensible that many people might have thought the language of the Carinthian Slovenes to be a different one than the one spoken in former Yugoslavia.

It can be said that the history of repression in Carinthia is a rather drastic one. This has to do with several issues. One of them is the fact that the NS-regime and its police organs had the most active members in Austria. Statistics reveal that around 12% of Carinthians in 1933 voted for the NSDAP, and the number of party members was significantly higher in Carinthia

34 than in the other counties of Austria (Danglmaier/Koroschitz 2015, 35f). These individuals believed in the ideals of national-socialism and carried out every order. An exceptional example for this is perhaps the fact that police forces under the regime did not hesitate to denounce their friends and neighbours, of whom they knew, were members of the minority. As of now, the expulsion of minority families was not yet discussed. Such acts happened in villages in which the largest numbers of Slovene-speakers could be found. Villagers and farmers alike could be hit by atrocious policies like these. The NSDAP had plans for much larger numbers of people to be relocated. Originally, their intention was to move 20.000 to 50.000 Slovenes to Lublin, a district in Poland, in which a Carinthian SS-officer would be responsible for them. However, these plans were abandoned due to the fact that Himmler, one of the initiators of this program, was heavily criticised by fellow party members. Instead, about 200 Carinthian-Slovene families were pushed out of their farms to make space for German-speaking families from the Val Canale in Italy, a region which belonged to the Austro-Hungarian monarchy until the end of the First World War (Danglmaier/Koroschitz 2015, 200). In total, 1075 people were deported from their homes in Carinthia (Schaschl 2012). Resettling entire ethnic groups was commonly during the time of national-socialist and fascist regimes. Another example can be found in the South-Tyrol region, which belonged to Austria until the 10th October 1920, when the geographic area was annexed by the Kingdom of Italy. The people living in South-Tyrol were mainly German-speaking. In 1910, around 7000 Italians lived in this region. Until 1939, their number had risen to 80.000. However, German-speaking Tyroleans were making up the majority with a quantity of around 220.000. In Mussolini’s and Hitler’s point of view, this fact turned out to be a problem as the two dictators wanted their respective empires to be monolingual. The solution was the “Option” in which south-Tyroleans were forced to choose either their home-country with an ongoing linguistic repression by the Italians, or the German Empire (Forcher 2012, 224).

When the war ended, Kukovica was still a young boy, confronted with the horrors of the fighting as well as the bloodshed. The Slovenian language was allowed again. The events in post-war Carinthia, however, smoothed the way towards a new time of problematic relations with the German speaking majority. In 1955, Austria ratified a new constitution, which made it possible for the second republic to come into existence. This constitution contained an article which secured the rights of linguistic minorities such as the Slovenes in Carinthia or the Croats in the Burgenland. Additionally, the permission to erect bilingual town-boundary signs was announced as well. This was not done immediately after the

35 ratification, which led to the massive problems of the 1970s and the “Ortstafelkonflikt”. Thus, a time of great hostility towards the minority was the result of these problems (Bogataj 2008, 176). When the bilingual signs were put up, nationalistic German-speaking Carinthians roamed through the country to tear them down again. However, this did not happen until after a long political debate which included chancellor Kreisky and governor Sima. The problematic relations occurred due to the fact that these signs were seen as a great threat to the integrity of the land. Consequently, the on such signs was understood as a message that this territory would soon be part of Yugoslavia.

The fact that this assumption was preposterous did not play a role in the heads of the German-speaking majority. At least in the memories of some Carinthian-Slovenes, this tragic time did not lead to severe trauma. The best example for this is Zell/Sele in which the NS- regime caused drastic and long-lasting damage due to the fact that 13 people from this village were beheaded. Their death is still an issue today and will stay imprinted on the villagers’ memory for much longer than the 1970s (Baum 2012, 75). The “Ortstafelstreit” could not be solved until the early 2000s. Carinthian politics were put under pressure at the hands of the federal government and the other states. In the decades leading up to the solution of this issue, the minority was again stigmatised (Bogataj 2008, 291). On the other hand, the minority was able to keep their identity and cultural integrity until today. The bilingual school in Klagenfurt/Celovec, which was founded in 1957, remained a central educational institution for the language group. It can be said that the later developments surrounding this group helped to create a distinct self-awareness in the individuals. The struggles should ultimately lead to the installation of Slovenian as an official language in Carinthia.

The evolution of Slovenian up until this point was a complex and problematic one. Even after the Second World War, during the 1950s, the minority was heavily criticised and ostracised due to speaking a different language. The bilingual school was under threat, when on the 19th March 1959 the national council ratified a law which allowed parents to take their children out of bilingual classes in the concerned areas. An overwhelming majority did so as they were afraid of public stigmatisation and exclusion. Members of the minority were now ashamed of their own language and culture and they distanced themselves from it (Bogataj 2008, 174). The above mentioned law stated that bilingual schooling was no longer mandatory. Parents had to register their children for bilingual classes. In the first three years of schooling, German and Slovenian were taught in an equal fashion. From the fourth year

36 onwards, however, Slovenian was only taught four hours a week in Grammar- and Secondary Modern schools. Religious education was an extra topic. The new principle stated a mandatory religious education in both languages for the pupils in bilingual classes. Slovenian- speaking children, who were taken out of bilingual classes, had mandatory religious education in German language (Inzko 1980, 197f). Such regulations can be seen as subtle ways to diminish the influence of Slovenian. Religious education in the affected areas was unofficially changed by the “Synodalgesetz” in 1972. It stated that religious education had to be offered in the children’s mother tongue. This was arranged even if the child was Slovene-speaking, but did not visit bilingual classes. There are several initiatives who seek to change the law from 1959 in order to improve the situation in bilingual schools (Inzko 1980, 198). A milestone for bilingual education in Carinthia was the founding of the “BG und BRG für Slowenen/ZG in ZRG za Slovence” in 1957. This act was a result of the 1955 treaty and its seventh article. This scripture stated that the Slovenian and Croatian minorities were entitled to bilingual education and to bilingual secondary schools (Inzko 1980, 198). The founding of this school represented a great improvement of the situation in Carinthia.

Officially, installing Slovenian still captures attention amongst the media in Carinthia. The issue is rather recent and has led to a demonstration at the hands of several Carinthian- Slovene organisations on the 14th February 2017. Their motto was “Koroška je dvojezična”, which means that “Carinthia is bilingual”. Moreover, the event had an additional goal of spreading awareness about the fact that politics refused agreement to the installation of Slovenian as an official language in the country. This can be read in an article of the “Kleine Zeitung” by Robert Benedikt on the 14th February 2017. Although the nature of this protest is different to the highly problematic events in the second half of the 20th century, this was the most recent action in the history of this topic. It is apparent that there is still a heated debate going on about this group.

3.2.Wales

During the late 19th century, the government in London took note of an increased number of riots and uprisings across Wales. The attempt was made to find a cause for this troublesome development in the western part of the kingdom. Politics did not simply accept the fact that the Welsh were sympathetic to anomy of all kinds and after some time, the topic of language arose and became increasingly important in the explanation of the detrimental development. The ongoing existence of this Celtic language soon turned into a problem for

37 the English.Therefore, a commission was formed in order to investigate into the language and its environment. The outcome became known as the “Treachery of the Blue Books”. Its name was derived from the blue colour of the three volumes. Essentially, the report dealt with the state of education in Wales. William Williams, a Welsh MP, who represented Coventry, was the trigger for this report. After its release in 1847, it sparked utter speechlessness in Welsh circles due to the fact that the three authors exceeded their task and made derogatory remarks not only about the Welsh language, but the Welsh culture and morals in general. Therefore, it was an early step into the direction of English pretension for the Welsh language (BBC Cymru 2014).

Repressive acts, directed at the Welsh education and language, occurred primarily in the 19th and early 20th century, when it was attempted to forbid the language in schools and the general public. Perhaps, the best-known example is the so-called “Welsh Not”, an oppressive device used in Welsh schools. It was a piece of wood with an attached threat to put it around a child’s neck. On the wood, there were the letters “W” and “N” engraved, which were the initial letters of the above mentioned words. It served as a reminder for children, not to use such a brute language in a place of education. English was the sole language to be spoken in schools. A BBC Cymru article in 2014 stated that the above mentioned report from 1847 declared the Welsh education system to be very poor. “The commissioners saw the Welsh language as a drawback and noted that the moral and material condition of the people would only improve with the introduction of English” (BBC Cymru 2014). The most asked question during this time was, whether the authors of this report, three English lawyers, who only spoke English, were the adequate people to investigate in any Welsh matter. The hatred towards the majority language was at the rise during these earlier times.

As mentioned above, the “Welsh Not” was the best-known repressive instrument for the English educational system in Wales. It quickly became the most hated symbol and stood for English arrogance as well as English selfishness. It prohibited the children from using Welsh in school and was given from one child to the next one, depending on who spoke the language next. When the lesson was finished, the pupil wearing it was punished. This can be seen as accurate. However, the importance of this instrument could be overrated. According to historian John Davis, the “Welsh Not” during the 19th and 20th century was not as heavily used as suggested by the of the 20th century. It still represents a dark time of linguistic oppression for the Welsh, who, like other minorities, think their language to be a

38 crucial part of their identity. The instrument is verifiable in Camarthen, Cardigan, and other parts of Wales before 1870, where it was used in school establishments of the Anglicans and British schools likewise. It was never an official policy, yet still permitted by the children’s parents and the headmasters of such schools (Khleif 1980, 114).

The usage of Welsh in school was not forbidden by the law, but there was also no sign of support or recognition for it. The language was neither an institutionalised nor an official language. Never was it seen as being suitable to educate children. Conventions in the Victorian era had practically the same power as laws and so the convention to use English was seen as unimpeachable (BBC Cymru 2014). In recent history, an English MP claimed to have found evidence which states that the “Welsh Not” was a myth. It was said to simply have been an instrument to stir hatred towards the English amongst the . David Davies, MP for Monmouth and the above mentioned MP, declared to have done considerable research in this issue. He claims, not to have found any evidence supporting the authenticity of a “Welsh Not”. Davies supports his argument by quoting the “Blue Books”, which have already been mentioned. The language of the Welsh, according to the authors of the three volumes, hinders people to achieve progress or to engage in verbal conversation with the rest of the kingdom. Additionally, the Welsh language would bear no noteworthy literature and can in no way be compared to the superiority of the English language. The use of the “Welsh Not”, however, according to the findings of Davies, was exaggerated and it was mostly used by Welsh teachers. Davies also believes to have debunked the widespread myth of the “Welsh Not” having been in use until recent times. The MP has learned the language himself and his investigations show that Welsh in schools has gained an important position in the 1890s and the teaching of this language was financially rewarded by the Privy Council. The use of the device is, therefore, a rather complicated issue in the history of the relation between the Welsh and English (Wales Online 2012).

From the position of linguists, it can be said that threatened languages are subject to numerous research projects that investigate into the surroundings and the historical roots of the problem. Minority communities and their languages are under considerable stress due to their situation. Future predictions that are painted by conservative estimates show a grim devolution for them. Although this topic will be treated again in a chapter below, the numbers show the truth of the prediction above (Pine and Turin 2017). It is expected that half of the languages that are spoken today will cease to exist as active and used vernaculars by the end

39 of the 21st century (Krauss, 1992). Endangered languages face severe pressure. This can be compared to those pressures that have been recorded by conservation biologists for flora and fauna. In some cases, this can turn out as fatal in the future (Sutherland 2003). Historical roots for this problem can be found in colonisation and the accompanying policies that actively attempted to ostracise other cultures as well as ethnic groups. These measures include educational attempts to filter out minority languages but also juridical strategies to suppress unwanted competition in the search for linguistic dominance (Pine and Turin 2017). Pine and Turin suggest that the methods of colonialism include language as a kind of weapon to suppress the minorities or the native inhabitants of the colonised countries. The methods of monolingual boarding schools, disparaging seemingly lesser important languages, and the motivation that one’s own language is most important and ultimately superior to others, can be very well compared to the ones we already met in the cases of Slovenian in Austria and Welsh in the United Kingdom. Therefore, the following paragraph will deal with the further circumstances that can be consequences of such developments (Pine and Turin 2017).

Believing in the superiority of a group, culture, ethnicity, or language is a highly problematic topic that has been present in the larger part of the entire human history and is, to some extent, still present today. Morris (2003, 97) formulates the problem in its entity in the trenchant phrase that “language is the perfect instrument of empire”. Colonial authorities are known to have used the power of language to enforce their own belief of a pure society. They even forced the dislocation of Indigenous people from their homes, lands, territories, and “systems of traditional knowledge and governance” (Pine and Turin 2017). Colonisation is not only a method to suppress languages and culture from the outside, but it is also possible to influence minorities and their methods of communication from the inside. This is given in the case of Nepal, in which a “single state-sponsored language and religion in the name of unification and nation building” was developed from internal coteries. However, the case of Nepal can hardly be compared to the case of the Welsh and their struggle with repression.

Welsh has had a problematic historical development but holds a future that is less grim than it was expected half a century ago. Furthermore, the language is not only spoken in Wales, but also in a small part of South America. This has to do with a group of settlers who moved to Patagonia 150 years ago. They spoke their language and built a settlement. The descendants of these people still speak the language today (BBC Cymru 2014). Although this is simply a background information on the spread of the language beyond the borders of

40 Wales, it still shows that even a minority language can win grounds in other cultures. The Welsh-speakers in Argentina, however, can be seen as the result of colonialism. The negative effects have already been described above. Welsh itself has had an increasingly positive development during the second half of the 20th century. There have been programs and government resolutions to protect the language and to secure its existence and ongoing teaching in schools. Crucial years in the history of Welsh are 2010 and 2011. In 2010, the Welsh national assembly approved of a set of measures that served the case of a positive language development. In 2011, the Welsh Language Measure 2011 was passed and managed to receive royal assent. From that moment on, Welsh was an officially recognised language within Wales (Wales Online 2011).

41 4. Bilingualism

The concept of Bilingualism is of utmost importance, when dealing with the situation of minority languages within the larger frame of a national language. The chosen examples show how bilingualism can function, yet they do not show what bilingualism and the surrounding information actually is. Neither do they show how bilingualism works on the level of language processing. Immediately, the keyword “code-switching” comes to mind. This chapter aims at shedding light onto the most important factors of bilingualism, while keeping the focus on the greater topic of bilingualism, minority languages, and the situation of the two chosen languages.

Basically, bilingualism means that an individual is capable of speaking two languages. There is, however, the question of whether this individual learned the second language later in life or if the language was one of two languages that are spoken in the geographical area of this individual person. Edwards (1994) suggests that competence in more than one language can be dealt with at an individual or social level. Bi- and Multilingualism on a societal level deals with the difference between countries that can be defined as multilingual, yet recognise only one or two varieties, and countries that are multilingual, but its inhabitants can speak only one or two dialects (55). This status can be defined as something less than multilingual. Explanations for this include the necessity to be multilingual on a global scale. Bilingualism also plays an extraordinary role in the numerous states of Africa that were freed from the shackles of colonialism. In most cases, they are bilingual. The languages in these countries are made up of the former European colonial nation and a strong indigenous language. Populations in the chosen example of African states are heterogeneous and able to speak more than one language. For instance, a European state that shows large heterogeneity is Switzerland. There, they have four languages that are recognised, benefitted, and supported by the state. Canada is another country that officially sanctions two languages. Both examples can hardly be compared to the linguistic wealth of the African continent. An important fact in this context is that a deeper analysis of bilingualism, which is not the point in this chapter, requires linguistic as well as psycholinguistic approaches. Edwards makes a bold assumption, when he claims that no one in the entire world is monolingual (1994, 55f). He suggests that a person cannot be denounced ‘monolingual’ if he at least knows some phrases in a language that is not his maternal variety. In reality, one must only take a look at indigenous people or individuals that live in remote areas of their respective countries. Statements like these make

42 it necessary to consider the different types of bilingualism and the levels of fluency in both languages that will play a role in the following paragraph.

Complicating this matter are questions that ask for the actual start of bilingualism and how the different typologies fit onto the individual user of two languages. The four basic language skills are reading, writing, speaking, and listening. Next to the general language dimension, they are also in need of an inquiry when dealing with the skill of a bilingual. Additionally, very basic information is needed when acquiring knowledge about this group of people. This information includes age, attitude, sex, intelligence, memory, and linguistic distance between the two languages. Due to these categories, it is legitimate to assume that in the entirety of bilingual-speakers, there will never be two identical speakers of two languages. The opinion is also reflected in Grosjean, who speaks of the differing levels of fluency in bilinguals (Grosjean 2010, 18). The terminology for those speakers that have near-equal knowledge is diverging in nature. Those individuals can be called ‘ambilinguals’ or ‘equilinguals’, while the other group does not have equal knowledge of the languages. They can be designated as ‘non-fluent’ bilinguals. This term can be applied to most bilinguals. The vast number of bilinguals can further be divided into receptive and productive bilinguals (Edwards 1994, 56-58). Regardless, the difference between these two types of bilinguals is their way of language use. Receptive bilinguals have knowledge in the second language, are literate, and can generally understand spoken as well as written language. However, they are not able to orally produce the language themselves. This is the productive bilingual’s domain. He is both literate and able to speak the language that he has acquired. For the receptive competence, the term ‘semibilingualism’ has been coined. The aforementioned term, however, must not be confused with ‘semilingualism’. This term means those who lack complete fluency and competence in either language. Edwards suggests that the problems that arise from labelling are manifold. They are political and societal in nature. This is because of differing claims, dealing with the assumption that bilingual schooling in minority language groups produce levels of semilinguals that are simply not tolerable. This has been linked to political as well as ideological spheres which connect the knowledge of a language to a certain political preference (1994, 58). Semilingualism as a societal problem is an immense problem for minority language groups as well. Speakers, who lack knowledge in both their mother tongue as well as the language of the state they live in, are prone to lose connection to either language group. In the case of Welsh, this cannot be said about bilingual schooling or the Welsh society in general. The British schooling system and high literacy in Wales and the

43 UK are the triggering factors for this. Shedding light onto southern Carinthia, the system has faced great improvement over the last decades and is a topic of subordinate significance.

Bilingual development and the process of how individuals become bilingual in the course of their life is a topic that bears great potential as well as great importance for minority languages. First and foremost, bilingual development, according to Suzanne Romaine, can be divided into six types. This enumeration is characterised by different types of language use and community support. For instance, the fourth type of bringing up a bilingual child is the ‘double non-dominant home language without community support’. Here we have the parents with their respective native language. Neither of which is the dominant language in the country the family lives in, yet the parents use their language to speak to the child (Romaine 1989, 45). Additionally, another example to show the progressing level of difficulty in bilingual upbringing is type six. In this example, the parents have the same language, yet speak in a language that is not the dominant one in their environment. Edwards explains Romaine’s approach by saying that the parents are English-speakers. The father, however, is a professional linguist and chooses to speak German to his child. The family altogether lives in Australia (Edwards 1994, 62f). All six types are:

one person – one language, non-dominant home language, non-dominant home language without community support, double non-dominant home language without community support, non-native parents, and mixed languages (Edwards 1994, 63).

The last type might also be interesting to this because of the fact that the parents are bilingual. Also, the community may be bilingual. The most important factor is the random switching of languages by both parents. This equals bilingual communities in Carinthia and Wales (Edwards 1994, 63).

Bilingual education bears no great risk on the level of education as a means of transferring knowledge. However, negative consequences or general unhappiness may be the result of personal, cultural, and social factors in the learner’s environment (Edwards 1994, 63). Bilingualism, in the eyes of most, is seen as something very practical in a world that is increasingly globalised (Matter 2012). The issue however, implies the question of when it is ideal to start working on children’s bilingualism. Researchers and also those affected by bilingualism agree that an early start may be the best chance for a child to reach higher fluency and competence in spoken and written form for both languages (Edwards 1994, 63).

44 The lookout for the factors that cause such a development to be beneficial to the language competence is short-lived. Living in a society with two languages, consistently speaking two languages in a permanent switch, and feeling a certain type of belonging to a group is highly educational for a child’s learning skills in both languages. Bilingual education also goes together with the striking phenomenon of code-switching.

We have an ideal situation in which a bilingual switches from one language to another in terms of code-switching. However, there are processes at work that can be identified as highly complex bilingual skills at the hands of the speaker. The alternating use of several languages happens, while using two or more languages in the same conversation. It can be said that different forms of bilingual behaviour are subsumed under this term (Milroy and Muysken 1995, 7). Switching within a conversation occurs in several differing manners. Sometimes, it happens between the turns of different speakers, within utterances within a single turn, and sometimes between within a single utterance. Code-switching is a central issue in bilingualism research (Milroy and Muysken 1995, 7). It is a topic within linguistics that can be subdivided into many levels. However, not the phenomenon itself, but the way it appears in spoken language is the topic of discussion on most of the aforementioned sublevels. Terms such as ‘intra-sentential’ and ‘inter-sentential’ serve as a good first impression of how code-switching appears within spoken language. The first term defines the phenomenon as it happens within sentences, while the second term defines how it happens between sentences. Additionally, “the terms ‘tag-switching’, ‘emblematic switching’, or ‘extra-sentential switching’ are used to refer to a switching between an utterance and the tag or interjection attached to it” (Milroy and Muysken 1995, 8). Research on code-switching often faced serious problems and obstacles during its pioneer days. A gradual start to a new research field, according to Weinreich (1953) and Haugen (1950), can have several reasons. There are, however, four main reasons that can be identified when dealing with this topic. In the first, the focus lies ultimately on a bilingual language system, rather than bilingual language use. The second one is about a structuralist bent in the direction of integrity of the grammatical system. Code-switching and code-mixing are simply measures of disturbance. The third one is a practical problem for code-switching research. It deals with a lack of recording equipment for the original researches. This made it impossible to record naturalistic bilingual conversations. Insufficient recording for matters of research makes flawed data possible. The fourth and final reason deals with language shift in immigrant communities.

45 This change in language progresses too fast to analyse the phenomenon of switching (Milroy and Muysken 1995, 8f).

Code-switching is a phenomenon that is rather simple to describe on a superficial level, yet demands a certain commitment for an individual to delve into the material. The analysis happens both on the above mentioned levels within spoken language, but also within the research sublevels that include certain differing definitions of code-switching. Researchers such as Gumperz (1982, 20) have studied interactive strategies in bilingualism. His work, however, shows an image of code-switching that can be called the complete opposite of the standard depiction at the time. Code-switching, up until Gumperz’ work, was simply seen as a random mixture of two languages. Additionally, the factor of grammar was entirely taken out of the calculation in earlier research. Also, code-switching was even described as being a simple, grammarless mixture of two-codes. Language alternation, according to Gumperz, is not as simple as these earlier researchers have described it. It must not be seen as an appendix to bilingualism because it is an “additional resource through which a range of social and rhetorical meanings are expressed” (Milroy and Muysken 1995, 9). Gumperz focuses both on discourse and interactional functions. These elements can be performed by code-switching for the speakers. Additional factors of situational manner are added by Gumperz. These include topic, participants, and setting (Gumperz 1982, 20).

Switching languages within a conversation triggers certain societal features which put an additional viewpoint to the conversation of code-switching. The change of one’s language happens in a variety of manners. There is the possibility of it happening in the midst of a single conversation or within an utterance (conversational code-switching). This has already been mentioned above. However, Gumperz (1982, 20) has put the focus on the key moves of language users in fluctuating their language of choice in the midst of a scheme that agrees with both social values and symbols. The new perspective that could be opened allows the deployment of a pattern that is agreed upon by society. Both cues and conventions play a role in conversations. This is due to the fact that they are used to raise awareness for the addressees about the nature of the conversation (1982, 132-152). The many ways in which code-switching can be analysed are rendered in a very limited frame. This is due to the fact that for this thesis the topic is a marginal point at best. However, this should not mean that code-switching is not a topic that is worth researching into as it plays a role within

46 conversations of members of language minorities. The following chapter deals with a different topic that serves to deepen the understanding of problematic language policies.

47 5. Loss of minority languages, language maintenance, and linguistic shifts

Language maintenance and the measures that go with it do not occur in a political and sociostructural vacuum, but rather in an environment that holds specific qualities. Features such as acculturation play an evident role when it comes to such issues. They have strong influence on two different languages that come in contact with one another. It implies a process of adaptation on cultural and linguistic minorities. Graves (1967, 338) suggested the term „psychological acculturation“, which describes the emotions felt by an individual of a linguistic minority, falls victim to the process of acculturation and language shift. Bourhis (2001, 8) suggests that language shift is initiated by a circle of elected people and appointed administrators, which are responsible for public policies concerning linguistic minorities within a state (Cooper 1989; Tollefson, 1995). Both, the majority and the minority language can have an impact on language policies „adopted by government decision makers” (Bourhis 2001, 8). These individuals additionally create state agencies whose main purpose is to conduct research and collect the data necessary to form these policies. The data is used in statistics on language issues in the state as well as to inform the public about such topics. Also, they attempt to find consensus on which language must be affected by „state enforced language policies” (Bourhis 2001, 8). They cooperate with research institutes and universities in order to have the optimal background in research and science. These in turn can „play a role in formulating and implementing the language policies of a given state” (8).

Related to this topic is the fact that saving minority languages under such difficult conditions is a task that is hard to realise in everyday society. According to Fishman (2001, 6), one of the problems connected to the task are the interlingual relations between the speakers of these languages. Monolingual education can be a way to counteract the negative development of language loss in rural areas. This means acting against the danger of losing an important part of their cultural heritage. As far as the identification of the so called “enemy” is concerned, Fishman (2001, 6) argues that the minority languages and cultures as such have “met” their “persona non grata” within their own ranks. Such a development is both positive and negative. On the one hand, it can be stated that connections to non-minority languages speakers are beneficial to the language due to real interest on the side of the majority. On the other hand, the development is highly problematic because this intercultural exchange can lead to a further loss of language and culture at the hands of the minority. Fishman explains that the problem with this is that the contrary measures of the minority seems to be directed

48 backwards and rather antiquated. A possible solution lies within an increased isolation from the majority.

They want to be able to tame globalisation somewhat, to counterbalance it with more of their own language-and-culture institutions, processes and outcomes. They would like to ‚call more of their own cultural shots‘, so to speak, and to make sure that globalisation’s unification of the market (both in production and in consumption) is counterbalanced to a larger extent by an even greater emphasis on differential cultural values, skills, attitudes and beliefs that stem from and reinforce their own identity (Fishman 2001, 6).

The difficulties with such a strategy are apparent. As a result, the outcome of this would be an image of anti-modern traditionalists keeping their culture and language locked away from the rest of the world. This image does not represent the truth. Most supporters of the theory of RLS (Reversing Language Shift) reject the idea of statehood, which is the first address one would usually assume. Their idea of preserving this cultural heritage is via peaceful methods such as “political persuasion, advocacy of democratic cultural autonomy and self-initiated efforts to foster their own intergenerational continuity” (Fishman 2001, 7). Additionally, the RLSers are in strong favour of a reasonable compromise in which they gain much needed autonomy and care about their own language, while at the same time they would encounter modernisation “via controlled interaction with neighbours both near and far” (Fishman 2001, 7). The assumption that globalisation to these representatives is a negative development is somewhat evident, however, it is nowhere near the truth. In conclusion, they do not fight globalisation or other developments of the modern world.

Opposing parties often bring up arguments about the seemingly backward character of the theory of RLS and the competition between languages. Charges of provincialism come to mind. Fishman argues that these are unjustified because the opponents to RLS are mostly in a similar situation as far as language is concerned. They fight for recognition of their cultural values on an international level. Moreover, they often find themselves in the same political borders and face the same dangers as RLS. If they would work together, they would very well be able to counteract some of the negative developments of language shift. Not only would they be able to fight these developments, they would also be able to mitigate the dangers in a more efficient way. Tragically, such a partnership would result in a loss of influence and in power-sharing with the individuals, whom they overruled so far. Additionally, it can be seen as somewhat complicated that these partnerships are not existent, because it creates an image of provincialism of the strong (2001, 7f). Sperlich and Uriarte (2014) argue that states which

49 have two official languages are home to a special form of competition between languages. Also, it seems that language contact is similar to a competition of languages for speakers. This form, according to the two authors, can be seen as the most intense form of competition between languages. Pressure in these situations is particularly felt by the social support of language B, who make up a bilingual minority. The fact that the languages are in contact with each other has an immense influence in the language choice behaviour of this minor group. Not only the language they choose is a factor in this matter, but also their actual use of the minority language, the interactions, their “demand and supply” of this language, and related goods as well as services which are offered in the minority language (Sperlich and Uriarte 2014, 2). Both authors attempt to answer the question brought up by Fishman (2001, 7f) about “Why is it so hard to save a threatened language?” with the help of working tools in economic theory and econometrics. They perceive the bilinguals as the sole factor of survival for a diverse society and the stability of the minority language. The competitive situation is highly problematic and risks the language as well as cultural diversity of entire societies (Sperlich and Uriarte 2014, 2). It can, therefore, be said that the backwards character of RLS can be easily disproven with simple arguments such as the ones given above. Additionally, the topic of RLS will play a major role in a later chapter. As far as the topic of language competition is concerned, a deeper insight is required to make assumptions.

The dynamics of language are manifold and language competition is a situation that has been discussed in academics for a considerable time. A first study on this topic was initiated by Abrams and Strogatz (2003). It showed convincing evidence that a situation in which two languages compete with each other, one of them will inevitably disappear. This study in turn gave inspiration to a large body of research, which was done mainly by physicists and also economists. For the latter, a well-chosen example is perhaps Chiswick and Miller (2007) who investigate in “the relationship between earnings and language skills on markets where several languages coexist” (Sperlich and Uriarte 2014, 2). There are several studies which give different answers to the question of language competition and how it influences topics of everyday life. Studies for the topic in the aforementioned sentence are, inter alia, Selten and Pool (1991), Church and King (1993), Ginsburg et al. (2007), and Gabszewics et al. (2011). All these studies have in common that “the second language acquisition is modelled as a non-cooperative game” (Sperlich and Uriarte 2014, 2). For the topic of economics in language, the example of communication efficiency which shapes human languages and how it gives “rise to certain binary relations that appear in natural

50 languages” is a fitting one (Sperlich and Uriarte 2014, 2). Despite the large body of works that deal with this topic, it can be said that Fishman’s question cannot be answered by examining the above mentioned works and other studies, which have not been mentioned here.

Language contact situations are characterised by interactions as well as borrowings between bilinguals and by a ranking system in languages. The contact between languages is also a decisive factor in the question of why they become endangered (Thomason 2015, 11). The key element in such situations, according to Fishman (2001, 10), is that there are frequent word borrowings from language A. This means that the minority language is taking up words and other linguistic elements from the majority language. Furthermore, Fishman argues that constantly switching from language B to language A is another element. The social use of B is in his opinion a matter of survival, yet it is used more scarcely than what is expected (10). The study by Sperlich and Uriarte creates a scenario in which there is a highly developed economical and democratic society, which has two official languages that are linguistically different. These conditions are fit to satisfy and secure the existence of two languages. The situation mentioned above would lead to a benevolent outcome for the minority language because the factors would sum up to the installation of “resources devoted to schools, teachers, textbooks, editing houses, media, and institutions that support the teaching and transmission” of the minority language (Sperlich and Uriarte 2014, 3). Not only the numerous factors mentioned here, but also the related culture and their markets, which in turn are connected to the goods they trade, are involved in a scenario which would not only save, but ensure a thriving language. The interactions within geographical areas that carry two official languages also lead to democratic processes such as voting. Such a development leads to individuals revealing their linguistic preferences and claiming their rights (Sperlich, Uriarte 2014, 3).

Reversing language shifts as well as the revitalisation of languages are attempts that do not only strike positive reactions, but also rather negative and critical voices. John McWhorter, a linguist at Columbia University, argues that attempting to save the threatened amongst the roughly 6000 languages that are known today is equal to the attempt of halting ice from melting. He questions, whether language death is something negative. A possible explanation is globalisation. It consumes minority languages. Indigenous language speakers migrate to larger cities and learn global languages. Their offspring only uses their parent’s language at home and speaks the global language much more frequently. “They never know

51 those languages as part of their public life, and will therefore be more comfortable with the official language of the world they grow up in” (McWhorter 2009). Thus, language death is a creeping development of such dimensions in which parents hardly ever use their traditional languages with their children. They actually use it even less. This leads to the extinction of languages all over the globe. McWhorter is criticising the suggestions to install language programs in order to revive these indigenous and threatened languages. This is because the difficulties of these traditional tongues are simply too much and too complex for people used to speaking European languages. McWhorter explains the example of teaching a class of Native Americans in their ancestral language. The first and perhaps one of the most difficult tasks of this is the pronunciation of the language. They require artistic acts of one’s tongue, palate, and throat. The problems that arise are obvious and very visible to someone dealing with the problems. Making the example of the Native American language more visible and relatable, it is sufficient to demonstrate that the word for a person, who sits is 'cˇháw. “The mark at the beginning signifies a catch in the throat” (McWhorter 2009). However, McWhorter argues that an example for a positive outcome of reversing language loss is Hebrew or the modern version of it, called Ivrit. This language was only saved due to a chain reaction of coincidences that involve religion, the birth of a nation, and a very passionate Jewish whose name is Eliezer Ben-Yehuda. He settled in Palestine and set his mind onto the task to only communicate in Hebrew to all Jews. Apart from this modern development of the Hebrew language, it needs mentioning that the language possesses a rich tradition of written materials (McWhorter 2009). Although, Modern Hebrew is a good example for reversing language loss, it is still not comparable to the attempts with Welsh in Wales or Slovenian in Carinthia. The reason for this is obviously the religious and political situation in this part of the Middle East.

Connected to the topics of language death and language revitalisation is the emotional issue of a language that is not used any more. Language is a key aspect of individualism for a group, but does not face the criteria of culture. Additionally, language endangerment occurs in modern linguistics in differing types (Grenoble and Whaley 1998, 45). This is due to its instability when it faces the separation of its speakers. Two groups that originally speak the same language can split up geographically and spend several decades or centuries apart from each other. It is likely that the language they speak will not be the same anymore. This is the specific and unique reason for the existence of different languages around the world. The Latin example augustus turned to agosto in Spanish and août in French. The example of

52 Estonian is representative of the condition in which a group of speakers from an earlier language moved on from other ones. The group that moved changed their language to Finnish, while Estonian kept its characteristics in the original geographical area. Culture, according to McWhorter, is not related to language in the sense that is understood by most (2009). The case is in fact much simpler than one would assume. The relation of culture and language can be underpinned by comparing human behaviour to that of whales. As a species, they behave the same around the globe, but their “language” that is the echolocation they use in order to communicate, is different and depends on their location in the oceans of the world.

Who argues that we must preserve each pod of whales because of the particular songs they happen to have developed? The diversity of human languages is subject to the same evaluation: each one is the result of a roll of the dice (McWhorter 2009).

Language and culture cannot be connected due to the reasons listed above. However, this is not true for culture and language. The vice versa relationship is very well possible. For instance, “when the culture dies, naturally the language dies along with it” (McWhorter 2009). In conclusion, the non-existent link between culture and language is a topic that is unknown to most.

Language loss is also not cultural, but mainly aesthetic. Linguistically and phonetically pleasant as well as interesting sounding languages are of great value for humanity and their loss would presents as devastating to humanity. Examples for this are the click sounds in African languages or the linguistic varieties of many Amazonian languages. The latter can be characterised by the circumstance that “when you say something you have to specify, with a suffix, where you got the information” (McWhorter 2009). Ket, as a further example, is a language spoken in Siberia and is extremely irregular in its grammar, syntax, phonetics, phonology, and other important factors. McWhorter finds that enjoyableness of such language is only present in the minorities of language enthusiasts, linguists, and anthropologists. The case with the large bulk of Western Europe is that the people do not feel the same about the large number of languages. They often do not find them interesting in the same way as experts do. The question here needs to be the actual benefit to humanity that lies within saving languages (2009). Also, people need to be made aware of actual advantages of languages such as Ket, the click languages, Welsh, and Slovenian in Carinthia. Possible language situations in future societies can differ vastly from the present.

53 During history, there have been several linguae francae that were presented as the most important languages, with several languages that are of lesser importance. McWhorter is of the opinion that the current most important language is English. It is also possible that English will take over even further. Global citizenship will consist of speaking this language. Additionally, there will be circa 600 lesser spoken languages that people only speak in their respective surroundings and rural environments. English is moving towards a status in which everyone from the age of 15 speaks it. This is causing great discomfort and stress amongst supporters of linguistic individualism. One major reason for this is the negative connotation with imperialism on the part of the English and the “American behemoth”. English has been presented as a medium of violence, annexation, and cultural extermination for the opponents. The reason for the death of the indigenous languages in these cases is not something as abstract as globalisation, but the above mentioned reasons. The growing universality of English, according to McWhorter (2009), cannot be stopped. The example of the QWERTY keyboard is very fitting to support this argument. Additional languages that might take over the role of a world language are Chinese and Russian. Although, these two already possess an enormous number of speakers, they also face problems as far as their linguistic environment as well as their writing systems are concerned. Both show alphabetical, phonological, phonetic, syntactical, and several more differences from English. This can be dissuasive for possible learners. Chinese demands the knowledge of 2000 characters in order to read books or newspapers. English is the opposite of this. It is very “user-friendly” in its usability. “English verb conjugation is spare compared to, say, that of Italian – just the third-person singular s in the present, for example” (McWhorter 2009). English possesses neither genders nor sounds that require special pronunciation like the “notorious trilly rˇ in Czech. Although, each language is hard to learn in its own way, English is definitely the easier option than Russian for example, with its “fiercely subtle and irregular verb marking, and numbers so hard to express properly that Russians themselves have trouble with them” (McWhorter 2009). Theories that support the idea that English will consume all of the other languages around the world are in the realm of fantasy. This is due to the high status of native languages and languages of other states that are under protection such as Japanese or French (2009). English as a global language as well as other major languages and their respective relationships with minor languages are topics of great interest and different opinion. In conclusion, it can be mentioned that the future is unsure as far as the dominance of one single language around the globe is concerned.

54 Language death is a phenomenon that has a great number of aspects which are in need of reflection as well as consideration. According to McWhorter (2009), the irony lies within the fact that language death is the result of people migrating into bigger cities and changing their habits as well as their linguistic medium. Globalisation, as mentioned in an earlier chapter, is the root of evil in this problem. Measures against this are extreme and can be found in strict self-isolation as well as brutal segregation. For example, the Amish are known for their isolation and the Jews, who speak Yiddish, lived in a society that is very close to apartheid. African Americans are, realistically speaking, the group that possesses the greatest distinction to mainstream English. They are also more likely to separate themselves from whites in terms of spirituality and geography. The surroundings are different in these examples for certain linguistic downfalls such as native and minimally spoken languages and possess certain, individual elements to their respective outcomes and future situations (Brenzinger 1992, 6).

Language policies in Europe are a topic that is challenged by a great number of linguists due to differing reasons. “Laissez faire” language policies bring great risks to the development of a functioning linguistic environment in Europe. Numerous opinions on the topic exist. “The most serious problem for the European Union is that it has so many languages, this preventing the real integration and development of the Union” (The ambassador of the USA in Denmark, Edward Elliot Elson, 1997). The rather grim opinion on the European language pool is supported by the Ombudsperson for Human Rights in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Gret Haller in 1999, who states “no-one pays attention to what you say unless you speak English, because English is the language of power” (Phillipson 2003, 5). This is opposed by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. “The Union shall respect cultural, religious and linguistic diversity” (Article 22, Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, 2000). A rather humorous description for the problem of English as the dominating language came from James Boswell, who said

I asked Voltaire whether he still spoke English. He replied, ‘No. To speak English one must place the tongue between the teeth, and I have lost my teeth’ … When he talked our language he was animated with the soul of a Briton. He had bold flights. He had humour. He had extravagance … He swore bloodily, as was the fashion when he was in England (James Boswell, 1764).

To conclude, the policies surrounding the different language are manifold and show a high level of disagreement.

55

Having looked upon the above mentioned quotations that show a diverse situation of the problem, it is rather obvious that unifying languages can have both advantages and disadvantages. Both these factors show themselves in the realm of the European Union (Phillipson 2003, 6). In 2006, we had eleven official languages for the then fifteen member states. Currently, there are 24 official languages for 28 states. Three of them (English, French, German) possess the higher status and are called “procedural languages”. The languages and their speakers are connected to each other in Brussels. The European Parliament possesses one of the most complex translation and interpretation services in the world. “So as to facilitate communication between speakers of the different official languages” (Phillipson 2003, 8). These services represent an instrument of great importance and of strong as well as intense connections of the shared concerns between the member states. Although, the connection is existent, there are certain regulations as far as the usage of language in documents within the EU institutions is concerned. Multilingualism and its management, however, are not as properly treated and gives the image of lacking clarity. “The principle of complete equality is affected by constraints of time and funding” (Phillipson 2003, 6).

Linguistically, the world is characterised by an extraordinary level of linguistic diversity and by the threat of language loss that is a key factor amongst modern linguistic research. Approximately 7000 spoken languages testify this development. The thriving environment is influenced by a combination of mono-lingualism as well as global trade networks with an increased factor of technology. This has led to the fact that over the half of the world’s population is speaking one of only 13 languages. The above mentioned elevated level of linguistic diversity is highly threatened by this development (Pine and Turin 2017). It is easily comprehensible that such a development has a great number of reasons of which some are cultural, while others are historical. The greater number of factors has been mentioned in the paragraphs above. However, the salient point in this topic is the prefix “re”. The prefix is the fruit of the combined factors that are written and thoroughly described above. Without factors such as colonialism, war, imperialism, and forced migration, there would not even be a need for a word such as “language revitalisation”. The multidisciplinary character of language revitalisation includes politics, cultural, and social goals “that extend beyond the immediate task of generating more speakers” (Pine and Turin 2017).

56 Methods of language revitalisation stem from years of developing nuanced techniques that evaluate progress and success of such programs. It can be said that these methods are the result of a deeper understanding for the actual desired outcome of individual revitalisation projects. These methods include

quantitative scales backed by international non-governmental organizations, tracking and status reports on linguistic vitality and speaker numbers from governmental organizations as well as broader social scientific investigations into correlations between community health, well-being, and language vitality (Pine and Turin 2017).

Taking their research into consideration, Pine and Turin make attempts to demonstrate the desired goals with the examples of case studies from British Columbia, Hawai’i, and Aotearoa. The last example is located in New Zealand and deals with the language of the Māori. Their methodology includes strategies that are related to the empirical research that is done in this thesis. It is comprised of developing evaluative criteria which are based on a profound conception of locality within the geographical areas that are investigated. Furthermore, the indigenous roots are looked at together with the experiences and aspirations of indigenous communities. Pine and Turin (2017) believe that the field of language revitalisation in the specific environment of language endangerment is rapidly growing. Additionally, the roles and responsibilities of different involved groups are in constant and considerable motion.

57 6. Reversing Language Shift

Saving languages is a problematic undertaking due to several factors that include seemingly easy suggestions of differing kinds in the realm of linguistics. Analysing past examples of successfully reversing the shift of languages towards an improved situation is relatively easy. Additionally, it may seem as a minor task to describe these cases and their measures that lead to their success. In the stages of RLS, initiating a stronger language support, establish institutions whose goal it is to strongly point out the staggering number of problems and dangers that are faced by the different language minorities all over the world is honourably. In the end, it is too little to have an actual effect. Such advice is self-explanatory and not helping in the case of those affected by this worrying development. Speakers of threatened languages often have little resources available. Often, there is no outside support of any operational significance. The ones they have can even be called “meagre and constantly fewer than those available to their Big Brother rivals and competitors” (Fishman 2001, 13). In the case of the Slovenes in Carinthia, it needs to be said that the status, which has been described above, is only partially true and linked to historical contexts. The supporting status of the regional government in Carinthia has been more than sparse in the seventies and eighties. Although, it has risen in the past ten to fifteen years, it can still be said that numerable measures are in need of realisation (Fishman 1991, 35). The ‘saving’ factor in Carinthia is only partially present. Fishman (1991, 35) describes a situation of support that can be compared to the local situation in the south of Austria

If they [supporting factors] are withdrawn, at the decision of the outside supporters, they can leave behind a void and a sense of defeat and betrayal which is worse than the initial threat that such assistance had initially promised to assuage. Thus, an initial policy decision that may be warranted is not to accept (or, at least, not to depend upon) outside support and to undertake only the most crucial efforts that can be independently conducted and maintained (Fishman 1991, 35).

The recognisability of the quotation above is rather relatable to the case in Carinthia. Moreover, the language group has received considerable attention in the media and this has led to support in the midst of political campaigns. The misuse of the minority group in Carinthia during election campaigns has been highly problematic in the past several years and is still present in contemporary campaigns. To a large extent, promises that are made to the group are never really kept. This leaves the representatives in anger and leads to further isolation of culture as well as language. Crucial stages of reversing language shift include educational efforts on several levels. Partially, this encompasses the learning of the threatened

58 languages in schools not only as a second, assisting language, but as the main medium of communication in classrooms. Additionally, pupils are being exposed to the language before they go to school. A goal here needs to be a “revitalised home-family-neighbourhood- community function” (Fishman 2001, 15) that both, rewards and satisfies the members of the minority. However, the set of educational stations in the minority language needs to be continued until school has been finished. Institutions such as sport teams, study groups, and hobby groups are only a few examples for a further and thorough usage of the minority language. If these tasks of language inclusion are not fulfilled, then the persons affected are in danger of forgetting their language. This is due to a complete and total lack of areas in which the language can be used (Fishman 1990, 35).

Additionally, the above mentioned representatives are encouraged to pass on their knowledge of the language, once they have kids. Therefore, it is understandably much easier to learn a language as a child and within an environment that is already utilised with a specific language. It is not important how large or small the environment is. The opposite would be a language “that remains unutilised outside of the easily compartmentalised school-experience” (Fishman 2001, 15). Fishman suggests as a further step for reversing language shift in the form of a linkage system that is initiated in the adult functions and institutions. It is intended to be passed on to the following generation, which in turn, adapt it for their offspring. The stages of this endeavour include four functions that are made up of “(1) Threatened Language as a second language (ThLSL) for adults of child-bearing-age; (2) erstwhile ThLSL becoming Threatened language as a First Language (ThLFiL) of family-home-neighbourhood- community life; (3) schooling in a ThLFiL, and (4) post-school adolescent and young adult activities in ThLFiL” (Fishman 2001,15). The best intention and the best suggestion this model makes is the shift of the threatened language from the status of a second language to that of a first language. The cultural and symbolical ascent of this dimension is unique for a linguistic medium. A negative scenario would be one in which the links between the different stages would come apart. In such a case, the school would instantly fall back into the role of a second language institution (Fishman 2001, 15). Additionally, the language would be narrowed to the school only. So, there would be no real link neither back or forth. Fishman argues that the latter, meaning the negative development, has happened with many threatened languages. In Fishman’s perspective, this led to “disappointment and disillusionment, with schools and with RLS efforts as a whole” (2001, 15f). In the scenario of the linked stations within the realm of RLS, the teachers must be dedicated to the purpose of this endeavour (Abley 2004, 31). This means a thriving exchange of information, teaching materials,

59 curricular ideas, and sharing ideas via all modern media. The positive outcome of the scenario and the exchange of ideas as well as materials can be seen by means of the “BG und BRG für Slowenen/ZG in ZRG za Slovence” in Klagenfurt/Celovec. This institution was established in 1957 and proved to be one of the most important and defining institutions of Slovene- speaking children in Carinthia (Inzko 1988, 199). Moreover, this cultural fix point ensures that the language will persist in Carinthia.

Connected to Fishman’s idea of putting RLS into different phases, stages, and principles is the scenario in which the speakers of the threatened languages do not think their way of communication to be suitable to carry literature and a standardised system of education. They feel a larger lingua franca to be more fitting in schools. The larger, more classical language would work as a functional cluster in this case and would carry the education for the descendants of the speakers of the threatened language. However, in these cases, the transition of languages from one generation to another happens in a way that is crucial to the entire population of speakers. It happens via “intergeneration mother-tongue transmission” (Fishman 2001, 16). Representatives of RLS can be seen as the inner core of activists that are entirely dedicated to saving and reviving the threatened languages. They are the forerunners in acquiring knowledge of the threatened language in early adulthood. This means that they learn the language when they are around the age of 20. In this case, acquiring would mean to re-acquire the language they have lost since the time of their childhood. Forward and backward sequencing must also be taken into account when thinking about RLS. Both are feedback principles that deal with past and future educational efforts during education of the threatened language (Fishman 2001, 16). In addition to the acts taken by the representatives of RLS, it can be said that they establish adult learning centres that focus on adult socialisation, outreach for community building purposes, and also the activation of these purposes beforehand. Schooling in the threatened language would then take place only in this language instead of the majority language. The RLSers will raise their offspring as the first ThLFiL speakers in their infancy and early childhood. In fact, the representatives of RLS will take every measure that is in their power to revive the language. In respect of decreasing financial support, their program includes the founding of pre-school-schools, after school- schools, and other institutions that are dedicated to literacy in the concerned language. This strategy of course would mean that all these institutions are out of reach for the majority language. The purpose of this would be a weakened influence and the derogation of the respective authorities. Thus, activists would be able to fully concentrate their efforts precisely

60 in the way, the RLSers favour it and how they planned it. Despite the noble ambitions of the principle of reversing language shift, it needs to be kept in mind that the cost of “aiming too high” is a sizeable one and that the institutions they aim to install are in permanent need of rebuilding. However, this is the case, when the aim is not fully directed towards the desired destination of this principle. The following paragraph will describe both, the problems of RLS in the context of its stages and the relation of RLS to civil nationalism as well as to ethnonationalism (Fishman 2001, 17f).

RLS faces problems that are multifaceted, ambiguous, and bear potentially harming future developments. The differing movements that represent the principle of RLS are in constant need of awareness for the “ethnos” in their ideological clarification. This means that with “a continuing ethnohumanistic, ethnoreligious and ethnocultural constellation of beliefs, behaviours and attitudes” the ethnolinguistic authenticity is crucial (Fishman 2001, 17). The constellation of the terms mentioned before can be an overcoming of the principle that ‘if you can’t beat them, join them’. The single conviction in this case is the perception of the individual language and culture in an elevated position to others (Fishman 2001, 17). The danger of assimilation is the triggering factor for most RLS related movements. However, in the nearer future it is inevitable to be part of something that is both, multilingual and multicultural. RLSers may perceive this as a defeat. However, the idea of such a scenario can be enriching as well as constructive. It can be a solution to multiple ethnocultural identities that are “destined to enact as an inevitable consequence of the complexity of ongoing globalisation” (Fishman 2001, 17). This position, clearly is seen as a compromise for activists and representatives that specialise in academic research on the topic. The most compelling arguments that are brought forth by those people include the discussion of preferences as well as the already mentioned backward and forward linkages between essential target functions. It can be said that the goal of RLS as well as the awareness for the problem need to be the ultimate objects of desire for the RLS groups in different minority languages (Heltai 2012, 83). The complexity between the differing opinions is an indication for the fact that saving a threatened language is a difficult undertaking. Additionally, threatened and endangered languages appear in a wider margin than most people expect. Even on the European continent there are dozens of minor languages. However, only a small number of classic examples is known among many laymen and linguists as well (Salminen 2007, 205). This includes the opposing parties as well as the ones who believe that reviving smaller languages is possible and desirable (Fishman 2001, 17).

61 Linking the idea of RLS with differing manifestations of civil nationalism is rewarding and gives an image of the current national situations within Europe as well as other, more difficult global regions. Together with the above mentioned linkage goes the idea of RLS as the offspring of ethnonationalism. The representatives of this principle are aiming at its complete installation in the so-called post-national European and global political alliances such as the EU, EC, Nato, and the OSCE. The situation surrounding RLS in these regions is more than promising. This, however, cannot be said for the diverse regions of Africa and Asia. The problem is not located in the above mentioned exotic areas that form the problem children of RLS, but in the upcoming “weariness with the incessant efforts of ethnolinguistic minorities to preserve their own identities, regardless of whether such efforts are accompanied by the aspiration for independent statehood” (Fishman 2001, 18). Perceptions of RLS in this environment are often different and can be extremely negative. The feelings that are evoked by the principle of RLS are often described as somewhat toxic. In fact, the feeling for the efforts of RLSers changed very much over the past years. This is due to the image of it being an attempt to save something that cannot be saved as well as the desire to stop the inevitable course of time. This image of it being “too little and too late” or the opinion of RLSers as being “disturbers of the peace” speaks for itself. Even the denotation of RLS as “expressions of provincialism and contraproductive balkanisation” is very direct and shows the blatant refusal by many (Fishman 2001, 18). In the above mentioned expressions of rejection, there are two types of opposition. It can be said that the movements, which follow the same goal as the RLSers, are ethnolinguistic liberation, reunification and democracy, have faced both of the above mentioned types. These types are the “criticism of disenchantment and the criticism of opposition” (Heltai 2012, 84). The movements have been struggling with the opposition since their early beginnings in the 19th century. This has changed since the so-called ethnic revivals of the mid-1960s (84).

Both types of criticism stem from different sources that are both manifold and intriguing in their respective natures. The criticism of disenchantment is held by a group that was actually seen as a strong supporting party of RLS. They especially support the language revitalisation efforts of ethnolinguistic groups. This is due to the fact that they see themselves as part of these groups. Their kind of criticism is the consequence of their subjective feeling of disappointment for the failed attempts to reform and improve their situation. Especially, undersized settlements have been accepted by parts of their language groups who originally wished for more extreme solutions. Their assumption of the problem was that they “thought

62 the struggle for the language was part of a struggle for political independence, rather than just an amicable détente with the state” (Fishman 2001, 18). This feeling of emptiness towards the representatives of RLS is much clearer when we take into consideration that these people have been deeply disappointed. They perceive the reached arrangements not as benefits, but as a trap and as a political and cultural deadlock. In their view, the RLS movement cannot move away from this failure (Fishman 2001, 18). Connected to the aforementioned feeling of hopelessness about the future, comes a constant uneasiness with the situation in which the representatives from the respective language groups find themselves in. They have a sense of doom and feel the foreshadowing that the achieved positive developments such as reached autonomy, linguistic diversity, and cultural democracy concessions will be taken away from them. The enemy in their eyes is the “Big Brother”, which is the more dominant language in their geographical environment. The majority language is suspected to either strip the minority language off its rights and cultural autonomy concessions or to put immense as well as constant pressure on them. This could be achieved with the overwhelming number of speakers, the vast resources, and the “dynamism associated with the less compartmentalisable language of greater power” (Fishman 2001, 18). It is likely to reach a level of negativism that robs valuable intellect and motivation in the RLS movement. It even goes so far that in certain cases, active splinter groups, who are made up of maximalists, are formed on their own. In other cases, however, these subgroups remain rather silent and passive. It can be said that they are separated from the main body of RLS and therefore represent an immense loss that is both devastating to RLS as well as all the supporters of this idea of language rescue (Fishman 2001, 19).

The types of criticism that have been previously mentioned, culminated in certain smaller types of splinter groups, whose motivation is as diverse as the minds and sentiments of their critics. Their thinking in this issue is somewhat questionable, as is their opinion that the main movement has “really seriously miscalculated how much further the Big Brother might have been pushed” (Fishman 2001, 19). The aforementioned sentence insinuates that the major language has been forced to use incorrect measures to restrict the influence of the minority. Generally, it can be said that the belief of the existence of the main movement together with the minorities they aim to save, serves as a warning for the Big Brother language to abide to agreements that have been arranged before. If this is not the case, problems would arise for the larger language. According to Fishman (2001, 19), these tactics can be compared to the “Good Cop, Bad Cop” situation. Extremists, also known as

63 maximalists, definitely need to be reckoned upon in the post-nationalist world. Although their forces and their influence in the RLS world have diminished during the second half of the 20th century, it is still likely that their numbers and splinter groups are still large. An interesting and very tangible example for the phenomenon of splinter groups can be found in recent history. While the Soviet Union was crumbling apart, a lot of smaller languages that have been cooped up in the totalitarian system were emerging. They formed supporting systems for the concept of saving smaller languages. Although this environment could since then not be found elsewhere, there are still problematic devolutions involved. It means that those groups, who feel disappointed by what the RLSers have reached, or better said, have not reached until this day, think that a system of multilingualism and multiculturalism is not the correct or most promising future. The groups who believe in this future have become a minority. They are faced with an opposition that feels an “independent statist solution” to be the fitting solution to their ethnolinguistic grievances (Fishman 2001, 19).

At this point, the focus lies on the second group of critics for RLS, who are of the opinion that the concept is predominantly useless. Their number is far greater than those who believe that saving a language with this method is possible. Representatives for this group include members of right-wing activists, who imagine the state in need of defence, as well as “intellectual defenders of post-state regionalism or internationalism” (Fishman 2001, 19). A rather disturbing condition that can be found in many political, cultural, and societal environments can also be found amongst the circle of RLS-critics. The first are those who adhere to a more conservative political sphere and often pretend to be part of the second one. The image this group conveys to the public is more positive when they are thought to be part of the university environment. The Reasons for their subscription to the group of intellectuals is due to its increasing importance (Brenzinger 2007, 11). This group of critics often faces such arguments as being ‘disturbers of the peace’ and ‘destroyers of civility’, yet they respond to this by pointing out such entities as the European Union, which is made up of a rather high number of states. Their most compelling argument is the question for their opponents that deals with the issue of current independent states that are a little bit blind for internationalism of commerce or governmental practices. Moreover, they are pointing out the recrudescence of circumstances in which there are no independent states anymore (Fishman 2001, 19f). Another circumstance that can be interpreted as a major argument for the larger group of critics towards RLS is the social mobility as well as the uprising of state-nations. These have moved on from being “formerly prototypic anti-states” (Fishman 2001, 20). States such as

64 Germany, Sweden, Spain, and the Netherlands are perhaps the most compelling examples for this moving on to a more developed type of modern state. Inextricably linked to the development of individual states is the social movement that is happening at this very moment. This mass migration of people from their original country to geographical regions with a considerably greater wealth and affluence is going together with their assimilation into the new surroundings. During their first weeks and months, even years, they only have a very limited grasp of “long-term ethnocultural and ethnolinguistic self-maintenance” (Fishman 2001, 20). This means that in the course of time, their understanding of these concepts in their adopted homeland will rise and improve. The different groups of migrants will amalgamate with their cultural, linguistic, and societal surrounding in respect of this determining factor. Fishman argues at this point that authors, screenwriters, and poets of a different ethnic as well as cultural background are part of the modern, normal painting of a modern society (Fishman 2001, 20). The distinguishing development of the above mentioned situation will be the topic of the following paragraph.

The tipping point for the shift from poorer countries to richer ones is the exact spot in which the representatives argue for the enormous benefits of a multicultural and assimilated society. The key word in this argumentation has to be ‘parochialism’. This is due to its backwards character that is often criticised by its opponents. They stress their thinking that the inevitable trend will be a world in which the many regional and indigenous ethnocultural groups will be part of the “wave of the supra-ethnic future” (Fishman 2001, 20). Therefore, it can be mentioned that critics, who perceive RLS from many sides, are manifold and also stem from sides that support both individual states and nation structures such as the EU or the African Union. The latter example, however, can never be as influential in world politics as the first one.

Additionally, the fact of protection for individual languages against the background of criticising ongoing linguistic trends is in urgent need of discussion. Individual states as well as the national structures hold positive outcomes for the linguistic and cultural prerogatives of individual groups (Fishman 2001, 20). Both sides, the ones who represent the ideals of the confederation of states and the others, which are loyal to the traditionally established states, fail to comprehend the reality of sub-nation ethnicities and ethnocultural identities. This is deeply embedded in humankind and the roots of this situation go back farther than both types that are mentioned above. It can even be said that these groups seriously underestimate the

65 far-reaching complexities as well as the potential that is situated within these difficulties. The regional identities are carrying valuable cultural goods and repertoires of humanity. This includes gender, religion, politics, recreation, and many other aspects that make a group different from another. Probably, a very fitting comparison is that of the juggler. He tosses around the identities, combines and implements them. Thus, there is no way that this is the right strategy as they might impoverish the core of human experience (Fishman 2001, 20f).

The vision that such a development might lead to the obliteration of ethnicities and concepts such as religion, gender, and language is perhaps an overstatement. However, it is likely that the shape of humanity would considerably change if it is affected in such a serious way. This can be seen in the various examples of the Alaskan minority languages, of which Nora Marks Dauenhauer and Richard Dauenhauer wrote in their article about the emotional, technical, and ideological issues within the concept of RLS (Dauenhauer and Dauenhauer 1998, 57). It is clear that the future gives mankind no signs of a time in which humanity lives without religion, gender, or languages. The latter one is mostly affected in the way that is discussed in this chapter. The future of smaller languages will inevitably lead to the assimilation of dominant languages. They will have to find their place amongst new and unknown identities. Also, the reason for this can be found in the pervasiveness and the attraction of these identities which are larger in scale. The rescue of threatened languages will be postponed to the time in which the true potential of humankind can be understood in a way that is more incisive than today. Linked to this is the level of support that can be given to those smaller communities, ethnicities, and language groups. Blatant is perhaps the fitting word to describe the danger that is affecting threatened languages and their speaker- communities (Fishman 2001, 21). This danger has been bewailed as well as illustrated and regretted, yet the effects of these acts have been mostly of limited success. Connected to this is perhaps the fact that criticism is affecting RLS, and is therefore not helping the previously mentioned cause (Sperlich and Uriarte 2014, 2).

The final response to the pressuring query about the high level of difficulty to establish and maintain a functioning type of language rescue and revitalisation can be found in two differing topics. The first one is the continuing trend to abandon locality, tradition, and the culture connected to it. It is perhaps the most problematic. The basic problem is already superabundant in its own way. Worsening the situation is that it carries a whole string of additional problems such as the loss of culture. Not only is it lost, the culture is robbed of its

66 original defenders and a rivalling identity is established. This new identity is in no need of an original traditionally established language. Its only claim is to admire the original, now threatened language. Secondly, attempts to protect traditionally associated but weakened languages are perceived as social mobility contraindicated. Moreover, the whole structure as well as its topics and measures are seen as examples of holding on to the past. Anti-modern is the fitting word that the representatives of RLS need to deal with in numerous situations. Moreover, imbecility is something their struggles are faced with on a regular basis (Fishman 2001, 21). Thirdly, a possible solution to defending a threatened language is to differentiate and share some of the functions with the greater competitive language. This is a complex undertaking. The origin of this can be found in reasons that also include competition and obstinacy on both sides of the language spectrum. Connected to this is the fact that if the threatened language wants to regain any functions, they need to be reinforced at the same time from ‘below’ and from ‘above’ in terms of power consideration. The last answer to the question of why saving a language is a complex undertaking deals with the opposing powers that representatives of RLS face on a daily basis. The opposition occurs in two simultaneous ways. They are both statist and supra-statist. Consequently, RLS and its efforts are labelled as both “disruptive of local civility and of higher-order international advantage” (Fishman 2001, 21). This is, however, not the truth due to the character of RLS, which can attain dispensations that are strategic in its nature. Also, it attempts to not descend into either sedition or parochialism (Fishman 2001, 21). In this chapter it has been stressed that the attempt of rescuing such smaller language communities is an extremely complex endeavour, which requires both expertise and steadfastness in order to deal with the many diverse types of criticism.

6.1.Failed and successful examples of RLS

Possible outcomes of the concept are an ideal way to deepen the understanding for it and to make it tangible for the reader. The above written chapter explained in detail how RLS works and how the concept can be undergone with success and also with failure. The following paragraphs will now describe some determining examples on how RLS is used in practical examples. The case in southeast Alaska and the minority languages that are spoken there are an ideal topic to grasp the overall concept better. It has been discussed and worked at by a great number of linguists that include Nora Marks Dauenhauer and Richard Dauenhauer, who have already been cited above. James A. Bauman, who gave instructions on how to navigate in the realm of Indian language retention, is another name worth mentioning. The examples

67 that are described by the Dauenhauers are highly interesting due to their profound knowledge about the concept and their past attempts in this field. They dealt with the languages in the above mentioned area in depth and were involved in a large number of saving attempts of minority languages that were successful and unsuccessful.

Fitting examples are not only beneficial to the task of explaining how a concept works, but also ideal to deepen both the understanding and the differing linguistic situations they find themselves in. The first languages that are worth to talk about are the southern Alaskan languages of Tlingit, Haida, and Tsimshian. They are the original languages of the native inhabitants of the region and they fit into the differing categories that have been established by Fishman in his 1991 model of RLS. A reason why they have been chosen to be described in this chapter is because of their origin and the shift that they took as a whole. Their speakers have diminished over the past century due to the demographic change that has happened within their geographical areas as well as the intercultural marriages between speakers of those languages and speakers of global languages (Dauenhauer and Dauenhauer 1998, 59f). Although the languages of this area are rather complex and the number of speakers is hard to determine, it can be said that its speakers are a special case of RLS due to their dedication to the task (96). Despite the unfavourable odds, the revival of the language undergoes the usual measures such as enforcing literacy, education, and cultural revival.

However, language resurrection has been attempted multiple times and this provides material to discuss the benefits of RLS. The principle was used in a different type and with no real link to Fishman’s actual principle. If we speak about resurrecting a language, most people would actually think about Manx or Cornish, which were seen as extinct for a certain time. The case we discuss here is the one of the Copper Island Aleut. This island is also called Medny Island. Its name derived from the Russian transliteration. Moreover, it is located in the Bering Sea and is the smaller one of the two Commander Islands. The language in question here is that of the Copper Island Aleut. Nikolai Vakthin has dubbed this language CIA in order to avoid having to spell out the complete name each time. This example is interesting due to its character as a language between Aleut and Russian. The speakers have developed this language in order to eradicate the complexities that arose in the communication between the Aleuts, who came to the island in the early 19th century, and the Russians, who arrived later. The third group of people, including natives that Vakthin called “Eskimos” and

68 Kamchadals, who most likely spoke neither Russian, nor Aleut, are rather small in numbers (Vakthin 1998, 317ff.).

Copper Island Aleut is meaningful for language shift and the saving of a language due to several factors. The language can be characterised as a mixture of languages. It is influenced by English, Russian, and the Aleut language of the neighbouring geographical areas. Language borrowing in this example is difficult to explain because

the majority of verbal stems and many noun stems are of Aleut origin, as is the derivational morphology. Most auxiliaries and adverbs are of Russian origin, and all of the verbal morphology is Russian as well (Vakthin 1998, 321).

Borrowing in the sense of an isolated language group that is surrounded by and adds word stems and endings to the words of a larger and more prestigious language is not the case on Copper Island. The language, according to Vakthin, must have been developed by people whose mother tongue was Russian. Therefore, the theory of a native language borrowing elements from Russian is inconceivable (Vakthin 1998, 321). In order to build a metaphorical bridge to the original topic of this thesis, it is essential to understand that this language borrowing principle can also be applied to the Carinthian case between German and Slovenian. This should be mentioned due to the linkage that is required at this point. Additionally, it can be stated that this principle is in no way comparable to the relationship between English and Welsh. In this case, we have word borrowings and loan words from Welsh that found their way to the English language. Looking at examples for these borrowings, we find words such as bara brith (which is a traditional Welsh bread), corgi, and druid. It is conceivable that there is a great number of these words in the English language. However, we only find certain popular words of them as part of the daily vernacular English. The far greater percentage is limited to the area of Wales itself. Even there it is only used in a limited extent.

Language mixing and the creation of a new language can be seen in the CIA example is an intriguing development that can lead not only to the saving of a language, but also to the development of new linguistic communities, which in turn lead to questions asking about the origins for this community. The Aleut pidgin in this area is interesting due to the fact that in the normal origins for pidgins, a foreign power forces the natives to adapt to the language and its development of jargons or pidgins. However, this example shows that there is the Russian

69 group of inhabitants actively changing their own language and forming a new one on the basis of Russian. Vakthin investigates into the question of why this is and how the Russian settlers came to this type of behaviour (1998, 322). As mentioned above, the normal behaviour in such a case would be that the dominating force, meaning a force that is superior in number and in cultural development, would install its own language. Such a force would demand of the natives to learn their language and therefore adapt to the new situation. Due to these connections, language mixing would happen and creoles or pidgins would emerge. It is conceivable that differing language situations would have different outcomes. Whether a creole or a pidgin emerges is dependent on the type of contact and the situation that is given. According to Vakthin’s example, it is recognisable that language use of CIA is divided between the language groups. The level of fluency is also on a nearly equal level. Only, the group that possesses lesser knowledge of the language is the group of natives. For instance, this group would be the Eskimos or the Kamchadal people arriving in the region later than the Russians (Vakthin 1998, 318). Although the facts and figures that surround the language are intriguing, Vakthin managed to delve deeply in the subject and elucidate several processes. It is recognisable that the linguistic situation in the north-eastern parts of Russia is similar on a very superficial level. The usage of Aleut has almost ceased due to the fact that most inhabitants of this sparsely populated area have switched to Russian as their language of choice. Also, the issue about the reason for the inhabitants of this region using Aleut has already been mentioned above. However, Vakthin and other researchers (Golovko and Vakthin 1990) suggest, that the origin for this unique situation can be explained by pointing out that,

there must have existed in the area, on Copper Island or elsewhere, a Russian-speaking and socially dominated group which needed a means to communicate with an Aleut-speaking and socially dominating group (Vakthin 1998, 322).

This circumstance is defined by Vakthin with the term of sociolinguistic tension, which is an intense necessity for differing groups to communicate. They are co-dependant on common means of communication, and they are therefore forced to find a way (Gardner-Chloros 1995, 68). However, this description is a rather old one and Vakthin has the assumption that the situation in the far north-east may also be a result of certain tensions between not only different groups, but also generations. The missing link or the missing generation is called the “turning-point generation” (Vakthin 1995, 322f). The grandchildren in the Far North are unable to communicate with their grandparents due to the fact that the “Middle group” has

70 insufficient knowledge of neither Russian nor Aleut, while the “Senior group” is speaking Aleut, but little Russian. The “Junior group” is the greatest hope for a possible revival of many native languages. Usually, they speak Russian, but possess very limited knowledge of their native language. If it is possible to motivate them to learn Aleut, they could communicate with the “Senior group” (Vakthin 1998, 323).

The situation in the North-East and the mixing of the languages was witnessed by Vakthin in a specific example, which demonstrates the flow of one language into another. The example is to be described in compressed form at this point. Vakthin pointed out an incident that took place in 1985 in the Yupik Eskimo village of Sirinek. It included utterances by a five-year-old girl to his mother. The woman’s offspring asked her, whether she should pour a type of liquid into a container. Also, the sentence she spoke included seven morphemes. Five out of those seven were of Russian origin, while the other two were Yupik morphemes. Vakthin assumed that Russian in this case was used more intensely than Yupik. The original meaning of this example was to demonstrate that the girl, to some extent, was likely to have invented this mix in order to talk to her mother. The mother’s reply sounded very much alike to the children’s original question. Copper Island Aleut, abbreviated CIA, is likely to have originated in such situations in which there was a need to communicate (Vakthin 1998, 324). However, this theory, in which children are the reason for a new language, lacks a specific proof. If it could be approved then the logical thought would be that in the Aleut case, the children felt the need to acquire a new language due to their language situation (Vakthin 1998, 324). In this theory, the children would have received intensive support from both, their grandparent’s generation as well as those groups who arrived later in the region. These groups spoke Aleut better than Russian and were therefore very friendly to the idea of a mixed language that made the communication with one another less complicated. Over time, the number of Aleut stems increased in this language mix and the bilingual situation that is known today had formed. It can be said that the inventors of this language mix have restored contact with Atkan (proper Aleut). Another consequence of the mixing of these languages and the contact with Atkan led to the inclusion of derivational morphology and to an extension of the Aleut lexicon. The CIA that is known today, emerged after several generations (Vakthin 1998, 325). The assumption that CIA has emerged in this fashion, cannot be supported by historical evidence. However, there are indicators, which suggest that such a change of social status and prestige of the Aleut language has actually happened. The theoretical hypothesis, which is the basis for Vakthin’s assumption, is not a new one. Le Page and Tabouret-Keller

71 (1985, 2) suggest that language and the communities that use it, can shift in terms of social identity. Their habits are changed and they signal their shift in social allegiance. Likewise, speech communities can shift their language to make clear that their identity is more focused.

This case of an emergence of a new language can be found in several examples, which present a complete picture about languages that have been developed under slightly different circumstances. For instance, the creole usage of black British children. They do not show any signs of using a certain creole language until the age of 14 or 15. From this time on, they start using black vernacular English as their means of communication. Vakthin suggests that this is a deliberate act of social and psychological protest (Vakthin 1998, 325). The means of communication is of secondary importance for this group. Neverthelesss, they are keen on using this language as a symbol of identity and unity within their social group (Romaine 1993, 188). Le Page and Tabouret-Keller assume that these individuals “create the patterns for their linguistic behaviour so as to resemble those of the group or groups with which from time to time they wish to be identified” (1985, 18). Another example is the situation of Romani mixed dialects, in which it can be seen that they evolved in entirely independent circumstances as well as under the influences of different languages spoken in Europe (Vakthin 1998, 325).

6.2.Outlook on RLS

Reversing language shift, as has been shown in previous paragraphs of this thesis, has been, still is, and will be a promising field for the future of linguistics and language research as such. The concept of revitalising languages with the help of society, politics, and professional linguistics that provide the much needed theoretical background will most likely be the strategy with the best prospects. Several researchers in the challenge of reviving languages have been already mentioned. However, the most important is perhaps Joshua Fishman, who coined the term RLS himself to raise awareness for the problem. Other researchers such as David Crystal have their individual approach to the topic. However, a large part of linguists, who have dealt with the topic after Joshua Fishman, have very similar ideas to the original design of reversing language shift. Suggestions such as an increased wealth, increased power within a national political system, and increased literacy within a linguistic minority, have been made by Crystal (2000, 130-141). However, they have been a part of the original thoughts by Fishman, who brought them up almost ten years earlier. The aforementioned comparison simply showed that better ideas in order to save threatened languages from

72 extinction are unlikely. Also, a possible impact on the problem could be made by an increased performance of technology. These devices could be used to make the learning of a new language attractive to children.

73 7. Empirical Research

Dealing with minority languages like Welsh and Slovenian in their geographical, historical, and linguistic contexts, opens a sizeable field of research possibilities. Empirical research in such a topic is inextricably linked to methods such as questionnaires or personal interviews. In this thesis, the empirical research will be done with the help of two example towns and bordering communities. These are Bangor, in the north of Wales, and Zell/Sele, in the south of Carinthia. The reason for choosing these communities lies within their geographical location. Bangor is located in Gwynedd, in the far north of the Welsh heartlands. It offers an ideal surrounding of bilingualism and the number of Welsh speakers in this region is the highest in Wales. Additionally, large parts of the participants are students of several fields at Bangor University. The example community of Zell/Sele in the south of the capital city Klagenfurt/Celovec is also a promising place to attempt such a research. The small community can be seen as a stronghold of the Carinthian Slovenes. More than 90% of its inhabitants are members of the minority and the language spoken on the street and in pubs is Slovenian. The comparison of these two locations will be the main content of the following paragraphs. In conclusion, 15 questions help to gather, analyse, and present the data with the help of statistics.

Having looked upon the broad methodology, the individual nature of the questionnaire needs to be investigated. Containing 15 questions, it is split up into three groups of five questions each. The first section asks for information on the usage of the minority language in everyday use. Additionally, it raises issues such as bilingual education and language acquisition. The second set of questions deals with language status and policy, while the third contains questions on the relations to the linguistic majority and the self-awareness of the Carinthian Slovenes. The same topics are present in the questionnaire for the Welsh-speaking participants. However, it investigates into the language policy in a way that is more thorough than with the Austrian example. Although this might seem to falsify the results as far as their comparability is concerned, the differences are minimal and still give an impression of the situation in the UK. The last question in the second set of questions for the Welsh is dealing with a policy that is specific for Wales. The question covering the National Assembly cannot be compared to the Austrian example. However, it needs to be included due to its importance for the Welsh. Empirical research as such would be incomplete without a specific look at the participants and their social and working environment.

74 However, the participants of both questionnaires are in the age group between 18 and 30 and predominantly come from an academic background. Most of them either study or have finished their tertiary education. Although the majority of participants is from a university environment, it is still important to include non-academic “blue collar workers”. This will assist in creating an encompassing image of the selected village or town. Additionally, the number of participants for each questionnaire is essential. Each group contains 20 people to represent their minority language. The number is not chosen arbitrarily, but includes a fitting amount of people to give an image of societal variety. Data privacy was given throughout the entire phase of this empirical research. This is stated in the introducing paragraph on the questionnaire. The completed forms were sent via email and the participants themselves have been made anonymous by the conductor of this study. The participant’s anonymity was important to guarantee data protection. Furthermore, it was vital to create an environment in which an unbiased answering of the questions was possible. The questions themselves are put into a Likert-scale scheme to provide a convenient and pleasurable environment. This scheme not only provides such an environment for the people filling out the form, but also for the author. This is due to the fact that the answers can be analysed in a rather swift way.

Participating individuals are contacted via personal relations or emails to Welsh educational and language organisations. The established contacts were helpful in the finding of enough participants. In the Carinthian Slovene example, it is legitimate to state that the topic itself is a rather tiring one to the Carinthian public in general. This is due to the fact that these participants are in a specific age group which heard the problematic historical situation from their parents or grandparents. They have been confronted with stereotypes and most often are open to the idea of expressing their personal opinion on the topic. Usually, their answers represent their views as well as their ideas on the development and current situation of Slovene in Carinthia. The previous sentence is supposedly a statement of the obvious, yet it still shows the freedom that is offered in answering the questions of this study.

7.1.Methodological overview

In the following chapter, the questionnaire that was used during the study is described to give an impression of the material. Such a tactic is useful for an improved understanding of the gathered data.

75 7.2.Questionnaire

The used questionnaire is a way of investigation into the minds of participating individuals and is presented comprehensively in the discussed topic. The full set of questions and the options that were at the participant’s disposal is shown in the appendix. The first questionnaire was designed for the Carinthian Slovenes, while the second one was distributed amongst the Welsh speakers.

76 8. Results

The final result of the empirical research shows an image that was not expected by the conductor of this study. First and foremost, this is due to the fact that certain questions were answered in a kind of way which cannot be seen as definite. Much rather it seems that the participants were not certain of their opinion in several cases. The results will be shown via the presentation of certain questions of greater interest to the overall topic. In the appendix, the full chart with every number for every question will be added. Also, the gathered data for the chosen questions will be presented in the following paragraphs. The Carinthian Slovenes will be the first ones to be analysed and evaluated. Moreover, a special focus will lie on the questions regarding language policy. This will be followed by the Welsh case, in which the relation towards English-speakers will be in the centre of attention. In the introducing sentence of this paragraph, it was mentioned that parts of the gathered data are different from what was expected. Some questions have been answered in a certain way that was expected by the conductor. However, the details are given in the paragraphs below.

77 8.1.Carinthia

Graph 1: Slovenian is my vernacular language.

Graph 1 shows the first question that is of greater interest for the overall topic. It shows the vernacular language for the participants. In the case of the Carinthian Slovene minority, the results create an image of pride in their group. On the other hand, we can witness uncertainty in some areas. We see that 50% of the participants use Slovenian on a daily basis and that its usage is more frequent in comparison to German. However, the imagined result was even higher than just 50%. Language usage in the chosen village is therefore split between those predominantly using Slovenian and others using it only on an irregular basis.

Graph 2: Slovenian is an important sign of identity and culture for the minority. In graph 2 one can see a question that has sparked little discussion or dissension between the participants. It was the first one in the second set of five questions. This question asked about the signalling effect of Slovenian as a carrier of identity. 80% of the participants have answered this question with the highest number, meaning the highest number of approval. Therefore, this result reflects the expectation for this question. It also shows that the minority holds a strong belief of approval for their individual language and it consequently gives an image of how they value their language as their property and cultural artefact. When talking about language as their property, it means their language variety. What is meant with language variety and dialectal idiosyncrasies has already been discussed above. It means that

78 the variety of Slovenian spoken in this part of the bilingual region of Carinthia is expected to be kept and maintained.

Graph 3: Oppressive measures towards the minority had a considerable negative influence on the minority.

Graph 3 shows the results for the second question in the second group of fives. It asked about the negative influence of oppressive measures of the German language group towards the minority in the time of the late 19th and the early 20th century. Almost equally unanimous answers can be found with this question. As a result, we have 65% that answered the question with the highest level of agreement, meaning they feel that these measures have had a considerable negative effect on the bilingual culture in the region. It is not as definite as the question discussed above, yet it shows the still existent distrust against the members of the German speaking majority. As can be seen from graph 3, not every participant opted for the highest number. One fifth of the participants chose number four. Therefore, it can be said that the approval for such distrust is slightly higher than it was expected before this study was conducted.

Graph 4: The bilingual Schools in southern Carinthia are sufficient order to maintain the Slovenian language.

Graph 4 shows the second question in the first group of fives. It asked about the bilingual school system in southern Carinthia and whether it is sufficient to maintain Slovenian in the country. One participant showed special interest in this issue. He commented on the question that more than 50% of all the pupils in the area, affected by the minority schooling law, learn Slovenian in Grammar schools. However, this is a deteriorating trend and

79 the number has sunk during the last few years. Amongst the participants, 45% feel that the situation is in no way ideal. In general, an uncertainty is visible. This can be taken from graph 4 shown above. The majority of people opted for a lower number, which means that they perceive the system as inadequate for an ongoing Slovene language.

Graph 5: Bilingual education in the south of Carinthia has a promising future.

In graph 5, an equally discordant distribution of answers can be found. This is the fifth question of the first group of fives. This question asks whether the bilingual education in the south of Carinthia has a promising future or not. As can be seen in graph 5, the participants are rather unsure. Although 30% have opted for the highest number of approval, there are still another 30% that chose number two and 25% that chose number three. This means that the opinions are strongly divided and a clear trend cannot be detected for this question. The expectation for this question was a strong preference for the lower numbers, meaning that most of the participants would not be satisfied by governmental measures regarding bilingual education. Due to the fact that this is not the case, it can be said that opinions are split and that the perception in this case is highly individual. High individuality, however, was expected to happen to some extent before the study was completed. The divergent opinions on an important area such as bilingual education show an increased level of insecurity amongst the members of the minority. It leaves the impression that bilingualism in the affected regions is not one of the top priorities for the parental generation anymore. The perception of this development as being highly problematic is again very individual. Having said this, the author of this study is of the opinion that such a trend is to be reversed immediately.

80

Graph 6: Ostracism and degradation of Carinthian Slovenes is still a contemporary issue.

Of great brisance is graph 6, which shows the results for the third question in the second set of fives. It deals with the topic of Ostracism and degradation as a contemporary topic. As can be seen in graph 6, 45% of the people have opted for number four. This means that to a great extent the participants feel these issues to be an enormous problem. Also, it is visible that 30% are unsure what to feel about this issue. The results of this can be interpreted as being an image of distrust to some extent. Carinthian Slovenes still feel unwanted in a land that was originally Slavic. The fact that this is a great problem needs no further explanation. However, it must be stressed that this graph only represents the feelings of the participants, which are highly personal. Interpreting these answers as the opinion of the entire minority would be unrewarding and the level of professionalism would instantly drop. The interpretation of the lowest and highest numbers of approval are more interesting as well as promising for the future. There is no number one, but 10% voted for number two. This means that they do not feel unwanted and it is probable that they feel the topic to be of lesser importance than a few years earlier.

Graph 7: Personal experiences of discrimination at the hands of the German speaking majority.

The results to a question close to the one discussed above are visible in graph 7. It is the first question of the third set of fives and asks whether there are personal experiences of discrimination at the hands of the German speaking majority due to the fact that the

81 participant is a member of the minority. In this graph, it is visible that we have a high level of disunity amongst the participants again. However, the largest part is the 35% that refers to the participants, who had experiences of such nature. The second largest part of the participants opted for number two. This means that we have two extremes on both ends of the scale. According to this question, it was expected that very few members of the minority have actually had such negative experiences due to their cultural and linguistic heritage. It is worrisome that such a trend still exists today. However, it also shows the work that still needs to be done in parts of the German speaking group. To some extent, the people are in need of enlightenment when it comes to tolerating a language minority that has been part of the nation since a considerable timespan. On the one hand, we have two extremes on both ends. On the other hand, there is a considerable number of people that voted for the numbers three and four. It shows again the splitting up of opinions within this relatively manageable number of participants. The fact must be stressed that such a result is a step forward when it comes to understanding the nature of the minority. Questioning individuals on a topic with such a high potential of agitation is in itself a struggle. Due to a troublesome past, most of the participants have either had such an experience, or do not want to be asked about it. One of the participants explicitly answered that an individual defamation must not be taken into account as each individual is responsible for respectful contact.

Graph 8: The Carinthian Slovenes are an independent bearer of culture, different from the German speaking majority

In relation to what has been discussed in graph 2, stands graph 8. It shows the results for the second question in the third group of fives. The main difference in this case is that it speaks about the minority as a bearer of culture instead of asking specifically about the language they speak. It comes as no surprise that most participants opted for number five in graph 8, meaning that approximately 50% perceive the group as an enormous carrier of culture and that they are different to the German speaking majority. However, when it comes to the individual nature of how they are different, most participants argued that the cultural

82 goods such as songs, music, and dance, are very close to Slovene traditions instead of the folk heritage of the German speaking majority. Although half of the individuals, who were asked in this survey, are of the opinion that the minority is culturally individual, the number is smaller than in graph 2. It seems that the individuals believe that the language is a much greater sign of individuality than the fact that they are a minority in Carinthia.

Graph 9: The laws to protect the minority are sufficiently fulfilled

During the analysis of the Carinthian questionnaires, there have been interesting insights into questions that deal with politics, education, and culture. Nevertheless, the most prominent question is to be analysed last. The fourth question in the second group of fives deals with the topic of laws that protect the minority and their status in Carinthia. On a political level, as on several other levels, the topic of minority protection has been problematic. The answering of this question mirrors these problems. The participants themselves are rather unsure. Although 75% opted for the first two numbers in graph 9, meaning that they do not agree with the assumption that such laws are sufficiently fulfilled, there still are 25% people who feel differently. It is visible again that there is a kind of insecurity in this group of people. Thus, an unambiguous opinion cannot be observed here.

Concerning the Carinthian Slovenes, it can be said that the results mostly match the expectations. There are individual questions that displayed a larger difference from what was expected. Despite the fact that those are exceptions, they still need to be taken into account. Such results are an immediate assistance in understanding the way the minority thinks about several issues. Also, the complete data is visible in the appendix and it can be taken into account when dealing with such problematic topics. The results of the Welsh questionnaires will be dealt with in the following paragraphs.

83 8.2.Wales

Welsh language, culture, and the Welsh people themselves offer a great opportunity to do research and to gather data. Interestingly, the answers of the participants do match the expected results to a great extent. The reason for this will be discussed below. It can already be said that the difference between Wales and Carinthia lies within the dimensions of their language group. Such great numbers of people offer a higher potential to feel strongly and more publicly on issues such as language policy. The analysed questions match the ones with the Carinthian data to show the direct relations between the two groups.

Graph 10: I use welsh as the first language in my everyday life.

The first question analysed is the one about the vernacular language of the participants. In this case, we have results that almost match the data of Carinthia. The participants answered this question with a seeming passion for their language. It is visible in graph 10 that 60% opted for the highest number of approval. This means that a considerable number has Welsh as their first language of choice in everyday life. The fact that this number is so high might be a result of the geographical location of the study in Wales. The north of the country predominantly uses their original language along with English. Welsh culture is vibrant in Bangor and the surrounding towns.

84

Graph 11: The Welsh language, in my opinion, is an important signal of identity.

The first question in the second group of fives, we have a topic that, equal to the Carinthian Slovenes, sparks little to no discussion. It is visible in graph 11 that 90% of participants opted for the numbers four and five. This means that the validation of Welsh as a signal of identity, as was the question, is extremely high. Moreover, perceiving the own language as such a sign is understandable when it is a language of a minority within the context of a dominating language. Thus, the results have unequivocally matched the expectations. Understandably, the strong belief of the Welsh in their language and culture is something worth preserving. It seems natural that the Welsh themselves feel equally strong in this matter and it is understandable when the relations towards the English are taken into consideration. The historical connections have not always been friendly but rather filled with animosities. Due to these reasons, keeping a language as one centre of identity is understandable.

Graph 12: The measures taken by the English government to reduce the influence of the Welsh language in the early 20th century have had a considerable and lengthy impact on the Welsh culture.

The second question in the second set of fives deals with oppressive measures in Wales during the early 20th century and the results are shown in graph 12. As mentioned in the chapter about its history, this period was coined by brutal ways to eradicate this language. Welsh was perceived as unimportant and undesirable. The answers give an image that does not quite match the expectations. Graph 12 shows that 85% have chosen numbers four and five. This means that they think these measures have had a negative impact on the development of the Welsh language and culture. As far as the comparability is concerned, it

85 can be said that the results in the Welsh case are not as definite as with the Carinthian participants. The difference, however, is just a small percentage. It still shows that an overwhelming majority of participants are of the opinion that such measures are not to be repeated and that their consequences are still visible. This can be seen in the stagnating numbers of Welsh speakers. They have been reduced mostly through these measures and the participants are aware of this. Consequently, this knowledge is reflected in the results shown above. In relation to this, one can detect the feeling of animosity. The same was visible in the Carinthian case.

Graph 13: The bilingual educational system in Wales is sufficient to guarantee a continuation of the language.

One of the most interesting results can be taken from graph 13. In this case, we have the question that deals with the functionality of the bilingual education in Wales and how it is sufficient to guarantee a continuation of the language. According to the results, the participants, to a great extent, feel that the bilingual educational system in Wales is sufficient. Participants are convinced that their language and culture are well represented in grammar as well as secondary schools, and they are satisfied by this. The graph shows that 65% of the participants voted for four and five. This means that they strongly agree with the statement written below. It can be stressed that they feel positive about their culture being taken care of. There is a slight difference to the Carinthian case, which seems less optimistic. Reasons for this can also be found in governmental language policies and supports that are more visible in Wales than in Carinthia.

86

Graph 14: The future of education in the Welsh language is a bright one.

An equally optimistic result can be found in graph 14. The fifth question in the first set of fives deals with a topic that is quite similar to the one above. The only great difference here is the fact that fewer people have opted for the highest number and more people chose number four. The high level of optimism proves that the innermost beliefs of the Welsh are with their language and that they hope and feel that their language’s future is brighter than most of its past. The case in Carinthia is different again. Again, it can be said that the Carinthian case is of greater negativity and that the difference is only slight. However, the progress of Welsh is something that needs to be examined in the near future as their might be interesting developments.

Graph 15: Ostracism or vilification of the Welsh in everyday-life in Wales is still existent today

A topic that has been of great brisance in the Carinthian case, also proves to be a problematic issue in the Welsh case. It can be seen in graph 15 Ostracism and vilification is, as visible, a rather unclear subject due to the fact that 50% of participants have opted for number three, which means they are not sure. Somehow it is interesting that 30% chose the first two numbers, meaning they have not had such issues. This can be described as a positive result of this study. It was not expected to have such a high number of negative results in this issue. The original expectation was to have higher numbers of people that think these experiences to be traumatic and therefore the results in general would tend towards the higher numbers. Needless to be said, it is a positive outcome for this question.

87

Graph 16: I had to deal with xenophobic behaviour, carried out by a member of the English-speaking majority.

In close connection to the subject above stands the first question in the third group of fives. It asks whether the participants have had such experiences of exclusion and discrimination themselves. It can be said that in graph 16 the result is again rather unclear. However, the ones that opted for numbers one and two have not had to deal with such issues. It is to be hoped that this positive development continues and that in the near future, such demeanour can be eradicated. As far as the minority in Carinthia is concerned, it can be said that there is a striking difference. Considerably, more people have experienced unfriendly and excluding demeanour due to the fact that they are a member of a minority.

Graph 17: The Welsh language group is an individual cultural group, distinct from the English-speaking majority.

In addition to the question on the personal perception of Welsh as a signal of identity, we have the second question in the third group of fives. In this case, the participants must answer how they feel about Welsh uniqueness and the significance of their culture. It is notable in graph 17 that 70% opted for the two highest numbers, namely four and five. This leaves little discussion on how the opinion of the majority is formed. The results are very well comparable to the Carinthian case due to the small differences that are visible. Both cultural and language groups are keepers of the strong belief in their language, culture, and their ways as a unique form. They also believe it to be entirely different from the respective majority languages and their cultures.

88

Graph 18: The laws protecting the Welsh language and culture are sufficiently enforced.

The last question to be analysed is the fourth in the second set of fives. As is the case with Carinthian Slovene, it deals with the impact of politics on minority language issues. The participants are asked whether they feel that the laws, that are installed to protect the Welsh language and culture are sufficiently enforced. As opposed to the minority in Carinthia, there is a greater ambiguity as to how the participants should feel. A definite opinion cannot be formed out of this result in graph 18 due to the fact that 35% voted for number four and 25% opted for number two. Together with number three, there are 65% who opted for an answer that cannot be described as a definite opinion. In this graph it is visible that this larger part slightly tends towards the direction of a jurisdiction that ensures Welsh language autonomy. The Government of Wales Acts are fitting examples for measures that seek to protect the Welsh as a people. These governmental acts ensure the establishment of a Welsh Assembly which led to a partial autonomy.

After having completed the empirical research in the topic of comparing two minority languages, it can be said that a broad spectrum of subtopics and general insights could be gained from the conducted study. Probably, the most important result is the comparability of the two chosen examples. It is visible in chapter 9 that in most asked questions, the results were close to each other. What is interesting is the fact that certain controversial questions are comparable too. Although some of the results are differing, the sizes of these differences are never significant. It is possible to juxtapose them. This gives us insights into the minds of both minority members. The thoughts of the members of both minorities are closely connected in terms of their opinion in certain topics. It has been mentioned above that in some issues, their ideas differ somewhat. However, they are inextricably linked from an overall perspective. Exceptions to this rule are the two questions in the Welsh example that deal with specific Welsh political issues. They cannot be compared to Carinthia due to a lack of representatives of this minority on a higher political level. Ultimately, the results which could

89 be gained from this study are manifold and show an image that was to a great extent expected, but in various cases also a great surprise.

90 9. Conclusion

A comparison of minority languages is an undertaking that requires great flexibility and creativity in order for it to be rewarding. This thesis has dealt with a number of topics that contained information on minority languages, how such languages could be defined, which models of minority language research do exist, and how such languages can be saved from extinction. The original purpose and research problem was how two of these minority languages can be compared, how such a comparison could work, and what the results of such an enterprise would be. Researching into the comparability of two chosen examples was the main purpose of this thesis. Thus, the general topic was introduced by gaining insights into the topic of minority languages. Examples that differ from the two main languages have been described in order for the reader to experience the depth of this topic. To sum up, a rewarding comparison of minority languages can only be reached by being very flexible as well as creative in one’s own approach to have a satisfying end result.

Chapter 2 was followed by a historical epitome of the respective situations of Welsh in the UK and Slovenian in Carinthia. In this chapter, it was necessary to deepen the understanding for the current cultural and political situations the two languages find themselves in. In the course of the historical chapter, it was shown that a devolution of language appreciation has happened in both cases and that these animosities towards the minorities were different as to how they were carried out. The historical description also showed the repressive measurements of the majorities towards the minorities. It can also be said that those measures lead to a feeling of strong antipathy towards the majority languages in the respective language examples. This chapter, as is the case with the historical one, served to delve into the past of the languages and to gather information as to why certain questions in the empirical research part have been answered in a certain way. The chapter on repressive measures was followed by an entirely different topic.

In chapter 4, Bilingualism was described in fine nuances and an attempt was made to define what it actually means to speak two languages. It can be said that bilingualism has several advantages and that the topic itself possesses a large amount of different issues. Moreover, bilingualism has several individual types. These types are different in their nature and their level of language competence. Certain elements such as levels of fluency and the nature of the individual speaker are also core topics in this chapter. Regarding the nature of the individual speaker, it must me mentioned that it has been taken into account when the

91 general topic of comparing minority languages was brought into discussion. The nature of the speaker in the compared examples played a great role in the course of the empirical research. As far as education in bilingual communities is concerned, it needs to be mentioned that there are great benefits for the children who are brought up speaking two languages. The deeper levels of bilingualism also encompass code-switching. It must be stressed that the result of these findings is a better understanding of what this phenomenon is and why it is legitimate to analyse it in such a thesis.

However, chapter 5 dealt with the most significant topic in this thesis, namely with minority languages, how they are lost in the course of the historical development of the respective countries as well as how they can be saved from extinction or revived after having lost all speakers. Reversing language shift and the measurements that go together with it, are essential for smaller communities. Their languages devolve and thus, it is necessary to use this principle. Generally, the method of reversing the shift of a language has a lot of potential and shows that minority languages are of utmost importance to the overall topic of language comparison. Additionally, saving languages is a highly complicated and worrisome endeavour. The reasons for this lie within the different prerequisites for each language and how well they respond towards these measures. Globalisation is a keyword in this chapter and most of the used research material makes it responsible for many developments that surround language devolution. The reason why this is dealt with is that the two example languages can directly be taken as examples for this concept.

The core of the thesis, however, lies within the chapter on empirical research. Here, we have data directly taken from the two example regions. The representatives from both geographical areas answered their respective questionnaires. They give an insight look as to how the situations in the minorities currently are. With the help of the explanations, the data can swiftly be understood. The graphs are a good method to present the results, which include surprises as to how the members of the minority actually feel about the situation. Additionally, this data shows an image of proximity and comparability on both sides. It can be seen as the centre of the thesis and it takes turns as to how minority languages work and how they are comparable. The full data is shown in the scientific apparatus in the appendix. This is due to the fact that an explanation for every graph would have been an abundance of information for the reader. The empirical data in the body of the thesis is reduced to the most important topics. These are accompanied by those questions with the most potential to spark

92 discussions amongst readers. The results of the empirical research have been interesting and, to some extent, expected. The data shows a rough image of the situations in both minorities. We have topics that present the positive and negative relations and opinions towards the majority group, but also those that circle around the innermost viewpoints of the minority members. Both these topics, and those that also have been covered in the research are a swift overview of the problems that arose for the minority and how they feel that these problems can be solved.

Empirical research, as has been shown in this thesis, is a complex undertaking that takes time and effort in order to give an overview of problematic situations such as language minorities. The limitations of the empirical research and the gathered data in this thesis are visible. The number of participants in a study decides the overall value of data. Therefore, it must be mentioned that the results in this thesis cannot be seen as comprehensive due to the small number of people that have answered the questions. Although the number of participants is not high, there is a great potential to do further research in the field of minority languages in Carinthia and Wales. A field such as this offers great possibilities in differing topics surrounding language and culture. It was visible that linguistics in its smallest subsections has, although superficially, been covered in the thesis. This creates the chance for future researchers to pick up existing data in the field to widen the data via a larger number of participants. It can be said that two minority languages in their respective situations can very well be compared and that such a comparison, in order to give a wholesome impression, needs to focus not only on linguistic, but also on cultural and especially historical topics. To recapitulate, a complete image of a language needs to contain these elements in order to understand the development and how the language reached its current status.

93 10. Used sources

“European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages” European Treaty Series – No. 148. Strasbourg, 5 November 1992. Accessed 10.02.2018. https://www.ifa.de/fileadmin/pdf/abk/inter/ec_ets_148.pdf

“Royal Assent for official status of Welsh language.” Wales Online, last modified 21 March 2013. https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/royal-assent-official-status-welsh- 1852353

“Welsh and 19th century education” BBC Wales. Last modified 2014. http://www.bbc.co.uk/wales/history/sites/themes/society/language_education.shtml

“Welsh speakers by LSOA, 2011 Census” StatsWales. Accessed 27 October 2017. https://statswales.gov.wales/Catalogue/Welsh-Language/WelshSpeakers-by-LSOA- 2011Census

Abley, Mark. Spoken here. Travels among threatened languages. London: Heinemann, 2004.

Abrams, Daniel M. and Steven H. Strogatz. “Modelling the dynamics of language death.” Nature 424, no. 900 (2003). https://www.nature.com/articles/424900a

Aitchison, John W. and Harold Carter. A geography of the Welsh language 1961-1991. : University of Wales Press, 1994.

Baum, Wilhelm. Zum Tode verurteilt. NS-Justiz und Widerstand in Kärnten. Klagenfurt / Wien: Kitab-Verlag, 2012.

Benedikt, Robert. “Protest vor Landesregierung: ‚Slowenisch ist auch Landessprache‘.“ Kleine Zeitung, 14 February 2017. Accessed 11 October 2017. https://www.kleinezeitung.at/kaernten/landespolitik/5169770/Landespolitik_Slowenisch- auch-Landessprache

Bogataj, Mirko. Die Kärntner Slowenen. Ein Volk am Rande der Mitte. Klagenfurt / Wien: Kitab-Verlag, 2008.

Bourhis, Richard Y. “Acculturation, language maintenance and language loss.” In Language Maintenance and Language Loss, edited by J. Klatter- Falmer and Pieter van Avermaet, 5-37. Tilburg: Tilburg University Press, 2001.

94 Brenzinger, Matthias. “Language Endangerment throughout the world.” In Language Diversity endangered, edited by Matthias Brenzinger. 9-17. Berlin / New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 2007.

Brenzinger, Matthias. Language death. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1992.

Church, Jeffrey. and Ian King. “Bilingualism and Network Externalities”, Canadian Journal of Economics 26, no. 2 (1993): 337-345.

Cooper, Robert L. Language planning and social change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989.

Crystal, David. Language death. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.

Danglmaier, Nadja and Werner Koroschitz. Nationalsozialismus in Kärnten. Opfer, Täter, Gegner. Innsbruck / Wien: Studien-Verlag, 2015.

Dauenhauer, Nora Marks and Richard Dauenhauer. „Technical, emotional, and ideological issues in reversing language shift: examples from Southeast Alaska.” In Endangered Languages. Current issues and future prospects. Edited by Lenore A Grenoble and Lindsay J. Whaley, 57-99. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998.

Davies, Janet. The Welsh language. Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 1993.

Dinkelaker, Bärbel. Lebensbedingungen europäischer Kleinsprachen. Frankfurt am Main et.al.: Lang, 2002.

Dular, Janez. “Slowenisch” In Sprachkulturen in Europa. Ein internationales Handbuch, edited by Nina Janich and Albrecht Greule, 281-289. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag Tübingen, 2002.

Edwards, John. Minority Languages and Group Identity. Cases and Categories. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2010.

Edwards, John. Multilingualism. London / New York: Routledge, 1994.

Fife, James. Introduction to The Celtic Languages, 3-26. Edited by Martin J. Ball. London et.al.: Routledge, 1993.

Fischer, Gero. Das Slowenische in Kärnten. Bedingungen der sprachlichen Sozialisation. Eine Studie zur Sprachenpolitik. Wien: Kattnig, 1980.

95 Fishman, Joshua A. “What is reversing language shift (RLS) and how can it succeed?” Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 11, (1990): 5-36. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01434632.1990.9994399

Fishman, Joshua A. Can threatened languages be saved. Reversing language shift, revisited: A 21st century perspective. Clevedon et.al.: Multilingual Matters, 2001.

Fishman, Joshua A. Reversing language shift. Theoretical and empirical foundations of assistance to threatened languages. Clevedon et.al.: Multilingual Matters, 1991.

Forcher, Michael. Kleine Geschichte Tirols. Innsbruck / Wien: Haymon-Verlag, 2012.

Gabszewicz J. Jean et.al. “Bilingualism and Communicative Benefits”, Annales d’Economie et Statistique. No 101-2 (2011): 271-286.

Ginsburgh, Victor et.al. “Learning Foreign Languages: Theoretical and Empirical Implications of the Selten and Pool Model”, Journal of Economic Behaviour and Organization 64 (2007): 337-347.

Golovko, Evgenij V. and Nikolai B. Vakhtin. “Aleut in Contact: the Copper Island Aleut Enigma.” Acta linguistica Hafniensia, no. 22 (1990): 97-125.

Graves, Theodore D. “Psychological Acculturation in a Tri-Ethnic Community.” Southwestern Journal of Antrhopology 23, no. 4 (1967): 337-350. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3629450?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

Grenoble, Lenore A. and Lindsay J. Whaley. “Toward a typology of language endangerment” In Endangered Languages. Current issues and future prospects. Edited by Lenore A Grenoble and Lindsay J. Whaley, 22-55. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998.

Grosjean, François. Bilingual: Life and reality. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2010.

Gumperz, John Joseph. Discourse strategies. Cambridge et.al.: Cambridge University Press, 1982.

Gumperz, John Joseph. Language and social identity. Cambridge et.al.: Cambridge University Press, 1982.

Haugn, Einar. “The Analysis of Linguistic Borrowing.” Language 26, no. 2 (1950): 210-231. https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/410058.pdf

96 Heltai, János Imre. “Language shift in Moldavia.” In Language Use, Attitudes, Strategies: Linguistic Identity and Ethnicity in the Moldavian Csángó Villages, edited by Lehel Peti, Vilmos Tánczos, 71-97. Cluj-Napoca: IDEA and GLORIA Cluj, 2012.

Hilold, Peter. “Das Sprachenregime der Europäischen Union,” European Federation of National Institutions for Language. 2011, Accessed 11 December 2017. http://www.efnil.org/documents/conference-publications/dublin-2009/07-Dublin-Hilpold- Mother.pdf

Hindley, Reg. The death of the Irish language. A qualified obituary. London: Routledge, 1990.

Hunter, Katherine. “The Slovene-Speaking Minority of Carinthia: The Struggle for Ethnolinguistic Identity in the Gail Valley.” Master’s thesis, University of Alberta, 2000.

Inzko, Valentin. Geschichte der Kärntner Slowenen. Von 1918 bis zur Gegenwart unter Berücksichtigung der gesamtslowenischen Geschichte. Klagenfurt: Hermagoras/Mohorjeva, 1988.

James, Wyn E. “Viewpoint: The Argentines who speak Welsh.” BBC News (16 October 2014). https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-29611380.

Jones, Mari C. and Ishtla Singh. Exploring language change. London / New York: Routledge, 2005.

Khleif, Bud B. Language, Ethnicity, and Education in Wales. Paris / New York: The Hague, 1980.

Krauss, Michael. “The world’s languages in crisis.” Language 68, no. 1 (1992): 4-10. https://sustainableunh.unh.edu/sites/sustainableunh.unh.edu/files/images/Krauss(1992).pdf

Kukovica, Franc, Traudi Pasterk. Als uns die Sprache verboten wurde. Eine Kindheit in Kärnten (1938-1945). Klagenfurt. Drava-Verlag, 2008.

Lewis, Henry, and Wolfgang meid. Datblygiad yr iaith Gymraeg. Die kymrische Sprache. Grundzüge ihrer geschichtlichen Entwicklung. Innsbruck: Institut für Sprachwissenschaft der Universität Innsbruck, 1989.

Löffler, Marion. Englisch und Kymrisch in Wales. Geschichte der Sprachsituation und Sprachpolitik. Hamburg: Kovač, 1997.

97 Matter, Gray. “Why Bilinguals are smarter.” The New York Times, 17 March 2012. Accessed 04.03.2018. https://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/18/opinion/sunday/the-benefits-of- bilingualism.html

McWhorter, John. “The Cosmopolitan Tongue: The Universality of English” World Affairs Journal, 30 June 2015. Accessed 15.04.18. http://people.cas.sc.edu/dubinsk/LING240/readings/McWhorter.2009.The.Cosmopolitan.Ton gue.World.Affairs.pdf

Milroy, Lesley and Pieter Muysken. “Introduction: Code-Switching and Bilingualism Research.” In One speaker, two languages. Cross-disciplinary perspectives on code- switching, edited by Lesley Milroy and Pieter Muysken, 1-14. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995.

Milroy, Lesley. “Bridging the micro-macro gap: social change, social networks and bilingual repertoires.” In Theories on maintenance and loss of minority languages. Towards a more integrated explanatory framework, edited by Jetske Klatter-Folmer, Piet Van Avermaet, 39- 64. Münster et.al.: Waxmann, 2001.

Morgan, Kenneth O. “Welsh nationalism: the historical background.” In Journal of Contemporary History 6 (1971):153-172.

Moritsch, Andreas. Austria Slovenica, die Kärntner Slovenen und die Nation Österreich. Koroški Slovenci in avstrijska nacija. Klagenfurt / Wien: Hermagoras, 1996.

Morris, G.T. “Vine Deloria Jr., and the development of a decolonizing critique of indigenous peoples and international relations.” In Native Voices: American Indian Identity and Resistance, edited by R. Grounds et.al., 97-154. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2003.

Phillipson, Robert. English-Only Europe? Challenging Language Policy. London / New York: Routledge, 2003.

Pilch, Herbert. Die keltischen Sprachen und Literaturen. Heidelberg: Winter, 2007.

Pine, Aidan and Mark Turin. “Language Revitalization” Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Linguistics. 7 November 2017. http://linguistics.oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.001.0001/acrefore- 9780199384655-e-8.

98 Priestly, Tom. “Slovene in Austria.” In Minderheiten- und Regionalsprachen in Europa, edited by Jan Wirrer, 222-235. Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag, 2000.

Romaine Suzanne. Bilingualism. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1989.

Sager, Peter. Wales. Literatur und Politik, Industrie und Landschaft. Köln: DuMont, 1992.

Sallabank, Julia. Attitudes to endgangered languages. Identites and Policies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013.

Salminen, Tapani. “Endangered Languages in Europe.” In Language Diversity endangered, edited by Matthias Brenzinger, 205-233. Berlin / New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 2007.

Schaschl, Johannes W. Als Kärnten seine eigenen Kinder deportierte. Die Vertreibung der Kärntner Slowenen 1942-1945. Historischer Überblick – Zeitzeugenerzählungen – Briefe und Dokumente. Klagenfurt / Wien: Hermagoras, 2012.

Selten, Reinhard and Jonathan Pool. “The Distribution of Foreign Langauge Skills as a Game Equilibrium.” In Game Equilibrium Models IV: Social and Political Interaction, edited by Reinhard Selten, 64-87. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1991.

Shipton, Martin. “Welsh Not ‘a myth to stir up prejudice against the British Government’.” Wales Online, 17 November 2012. Accessed 15 October 2017. https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/welsh-not-a-myth-stir-2017604

Slomanson, Peter. “Explaining and reversing the failure of the Irish language revival.” Papers on Language Endangerment and the Maintenance of Linguistic Diversity. (MITWPL 1996): 115-135.

Sperlich, Stefan and José-Ramón Uriarte. Ikerlanak. The Economics of “why is it so hard so save a threatened language”. Basque Country: University of the Basque Country Press, 2014.

Sutherland, William J. “Parallel extinction risk and global distribution of languages and species.” Nature 423, no. 6937 (2003): 276-279. https://www.nature.com/articles/nature01607

The Statutes of Wales (1908). Collected, edited, and arranged by Ivor Bowen.

Thomas, Alan R. “The Welsh Langauge.” In The Celtic languages, edited by Donald MacAulay, 251-346. Cambridge et.al.: Cambridge University Press, 1992.

Thomason, Sarah G. Endangered Languages. An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015.

99 Tollefson, James W. Power and inequality in language education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995.

Vakthin, Nikolai. “Copper Island Aleut: a case of language ‘resurrection’” In Endangered Languages. Current issues and future prospects. Edited by Lenore A Grenoble and Lindsay J. Whaley, 317-328. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998.

Valentin, Hellwig. Kärnten. Vom Ersten Weltkrieg bis zur Gegenwart. Klagenfurt et.al.: Haymon, 2011.

Watkins, Thomas A. Kurze Beschreibung des Kymrischen. Innsbruck: Institut für Sprachwissenschaft der Universität Innsbruck, 1992.

Weinreich, Uriel. Languages in Contact. The Hague: Mouton, 1953.

Wutte, Martin. Deutsche und Slowenen in Kärnten. Klagenfurt: Selbstverlag des Geschichtsvereines, 1918.

100 11. Appendix

12.1. Overall Results

Carinthia:

Wales:

101 12.1. Questionnaire A

Fragebogen zur Selbstwahrnehmung der Kärntner Slowenen.

Anhand von 15 Fragen soll ein Eindruck gewonnen werden, wie die Kärntner Slowenen sich selbst wahrnehmen. Die Ergebnisse werden verglichen mit deutschnationalen Ansichten aus dem frühen 20. Jahrhundert. Darüber hinaus wird das Ergebnis genutzt um Parallelen zu einer Sprachminderheit in einem anderen europäischen Land zu ziehen. Ihre Daten werden streng vertraulich behandelt und im Rahmen der Erhebung anonymisiert wiedergegeben. Bitte verwenden sie bei den Antworten die folgende Skala von 1-5.

1- Stimme nicht zu 2- Stimme eher nicht zu 3- Weder noch 4- Stimme eher zu 5- Stimme zu

Alter und Geschlecht: Beruf: (Falls Student, Semester und Fach) Heimatort:

Aneignung, Verwendung und Nutzung:

1 2 3 4 5 1. Ich spreche in meinem Alltag mehrheitlich Slowenisch Kommentar:

2. Die zweisprachige Unterrichtssituation Unterkärntens ist ausreichend um ein Fortleben der Sprache in diesem Gebiet sicherzustellen. Kommentar:

3. Verpflichtender zweisprachiger Unterricht im gesamtem Unterkärnten wäre eine nützliche Maßnahme Kommentar:

4. Slowenischkenntnisse sind nicht nur in Kärnten und Slowenien ein Vorteil für die persönliche berufliche Zukunft. Kommentar:

102 5. Die Entwicklung der zweisprachigen Erziehung Unterkärntens hat vielversprechenden Charakter Kommentar:

Status des Slowenischen und Sprachenpolitik:

1 2 3 4 5 6. Die Slowenische Sprache ist meiner Meinung nach ein wichtiges Signal der Individualität/ein wichtiger Aspekt meiner Identität Kommentar:

7. Die Maßnahmen der deutschsprachigen Mehrheitsbevölkerung während des späten 19. und 20. Jahrhunderts, hatten eine nicht zu unterschätzende Wirkung auf die zweisprachige Kultur der Region. Kommentar:

8. Ausgrenzung und Herabwürdigung von Kärntner Slowenen ist immer noch ein aktuelles Problem. Kommentar:

9. Die Minderheitenschutzgesetze, die Kärntner Slowenen betreffend, sind zur Genüge erfüllt. Kommentar:

10. Die politische Vertretung der Kärntner Slowenen im Land war bedeutend für eine funktionierende Meinungsvertretung der Volksgruppe. Kommentar:

Identität der Kärntner Slowenen und das Verhältnis zur deutschsprachigen Mehrheitsbevölkerung:

1 2 3 4 5 11. Ich als Kärntner Slowene, fand mich bereits in einer Situation wieder, in der ich aufgrund meiner Slowenischkenntnisse ein Ziel von Spott und Hohn wurde, der von Mitgliedern der deutschsprachigen Mehrheit ausgetragen wurde. Kommentar:

103

12. Die Gruppe der Kärntner Slowenen ist ein eigenständiger Kulturträger der sich von der deutschsprachigen Mehrheit unterscheidet Kommentar:

13. Das Slowenische in Unterkärnten wird in naher Zukunft wieder verstärkt zum Einsatz kommen. Kommentar:

14. Unter der deutschsprachigen Mehrheit gibt es Stereotype bzw. Ressentiments gegenüber den Kärntner Slowenen. Kommentar:

15. Stereotype bzw. Ressentiments stellen für die Slowenische Sprache in Unterkärnten ein Problem dar. Kommentar:

Hvala lepa!

104 12.2. Questionnaire B

Questionnaire regarding the self-perception of the Welsh language speakers.

With the help of 15 questions, an impression should be gained as to how the Welsh speaking majority in Bangor identifies themselves. The results will be compared to those of a language minority in a community predominantly speaking another language. Also the results will be strictly confidential. However, it would be advantageous to add an age. To answer the questions below, please use the following scale and mark the answer matching your opinion with an “x”. When completed, please send the form to the following email-address: [email protected]

1. Strongly disagree 2. Disagree 3. Neither agree nor disagree 4. Agree 5. Strongly agree

Age and sex: Current profession: (if student, year of studies and major) Hometown:

Welsh: Acquisition, knowledge, and usage:

1 2 3 4 5 1. I use Welsh as the first language in my everyday life. Comment:

2. The bilingual educational system in Wales is sufficient to guarantee a continuation of the language. Comment:

3. Mandatory bilingual education in all parts of Wales is a useful measure. Comment:

4. Motivating minors to follow a career in a predominantly Welsh-speaking environment is a promising endeavour in

105 the future. Comment:

5. The future of education in the Welsh language is a bright one. Comment:

Welsh language policy and the status of Welsh:

1 2 3 4 5 16. The Welsh language, in my opinion, is an important signal of identity. Comment:

17. The measures taken by the English government to reduce the influence of the Welsh language in the early 20th century have had a considerable and lengthy impact on the Welsh culture. Comment:

18. Ostracism or vilification of the Welsh in everyday-life in Wales is still existent today. Comment:

19. The laws protecting the Welsh language and culture are sufficiently enforced. Comment:

20. The installation of the National Assembly for Wales has been beneficial for the country’s individual evolution. Comment:

Welsh identity and its interplay with English culture and language:

1 2 3 4 5 21. I had to deal with xenophobic behaviour, carried out by a member of the English-speaking majority. Comment:

106

22. The Welsh language group is an individual cultural group, distinct from the English-speaking majority. Comment:

23. Welsh as an individual language will spread across the borders of Wales in the near future. Comment:

24. The English-speaking majority still carries several stereotypes surrounding the Welsh language Comment:

25. Stereotypical images of the Welsh language are detrimental to the status and prestige of the Welsh language. Comment:

Diolch yn fawr!

107