In today's class, the topic of English threatening other languages was introduced. Sometimes I like to think through an issue by way of the various terms, concerns and questions that are imbedded in the debate. Here are the terms that immediately come to mind: loss, gain, personal identity, national identity, education, proficiency, competency, history, regionalism, values, and responsibility.
Who is responsible for the maintenance of a language? It seems that the people and communities have to be the primary holders of the responsibility, not the government or academicians. I think that individuals and communities are also the only agents that can ultimately kill-off a language. Historically, languages have been kept alive (though perhaps on0life support) in the face of government attempts to silence the language. They have been t alive through the people. Certainly, the inverse is also true that language grows out of the people. Allegiences to language and allegiances to other identity forming factors carry value (for example, language may represent someone's heritage while financial security may represent someone's committment to family), and the choice to let a language die is a choice of values.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I like your process of listing some key terms to help you think through an issue. Having that list definitely comes in handy and helps with crafting one's thoughts and assist in understanding of any topics. :D
ReplyDeleteI definitely do agree that the primary holders of language lies with the people and the communities. But I also think that governments and academicians also play an integral part as well. Although language can still thrive even without support by the government and academicians and/or so called "experts". Institutions such as government, schools, businesses, etc. are extension of the people and the communities so at at certain level without involvement of such institutions and experts we might run the risk of either limiting the "availabe" resources for support/maintenance of the language or promotion of certain language(s) at the expense of another. I guess I was thinking of the cliche "it takes a village." Whether a language is intimately connected to our community or any personal connection we have to a language, I kind of feel like there is this interconnected and interwined web that connects each individual, community, language to one another. That even when we may never be "connected" on a conscious or familiar level, when a loss happens (such in the case of language death or shifting/change in language prestige) it somehows effects each and every single member in that web.
I agree that the speakers of the language have to be conscious and aware of their role in language maintenance. I think people don't actively participate and contribute to the language laws and policies that are created. We leave the decisions up to a select group of people, and then complain about them, instead of being active participants in creating rules that are equitable and reflective of our population.
ReplyDelete