Patterns of change and continuity in the language attitudes of several generations in two bilingual Spanish communities: the rural regions of Els Ports and Matarranya

Abstract

An analysis of the language attitudes in the adjacent regions of Els Ports (in the province of Castellón, Spain) and Matarranya (in the province of Teruel, Spain) using the matched-guise technique shows that in both areas, Catalan and Spanish coexist today in a diglossic situation in which Catalan has instrumental values that are lower than those of Spanish. Nonetheless, analysis of some social factors (especially age) confirms that there are significant differences between the two language communities. We observed greater dynamism as regards this situation and more favourable attitudes to Catalan in Els Ports, especially among young people, and especially in terms of instrumental values. However, in Matarranya the diglossia is more stable and the attitudes towards Catalan are less positive. When analysing the causes of this significant difference, we considered the different general sociolinguistic situations in the two regions, which both belong to the Catalan language environment, and more specifically, the treatment the languages receive in their respective educational systems after several decades of linguistic normalisation policies in Spain.

Keywords:

• bilingualism
• diglossia
• dual language programme
• language attitudes
• language maintenance
• minority languages

Notes

1. Normally, these four models of linguistic schooling are grouped in two broad categories. The first category, known as the pluralist approach, includes immersion and immersion maintenance programmes. Immersion programmes promote the general use of a second language as the system for communication in all subjects, while the general use of the second language in immersion maintenance programmes is unequal and not systematic. For example, this is the case with Catalan in Catalonia and in the Valencia Autonomous Region: in Catalonia, Catalan is generally used as a language of instruction, to foster Catalan's transition from L2 to L1 in a large proportion of the Spanish-speaking population; the objective is similar in the Valencia Autonomous Region but the use of Catalan in the education system is not systematic or widespread, and school students instead adapt to the use of Catalan as the language of instruction to varying degrees. The assimilationist programmes are the opposite of the pluralist programmes, and include submersion and segregationist approaches. The objective of both is the assimilation of an external language by a language community, either by means of general and exclusive use (submersion programmes) or by means of its general use as a language of instruction in education, except in the classes concerning the language itself (which then gives is a segregationist programme) (Arnau 1992; Huguet, Lapresta, and Madariaga 2008).

2. The case of Catalonia deserves a brief clarification. Although we usually speak of immersion in this community, the controversial education plans implemented for nearly three decades under a model of immersion have been only carried out, strictly speaking, among Spanish-speaking students, in order to ensure their acquisition of the needed communicative competence in Catalan.

3. The status of Catalan in the Valencian Community also requires some clarification. Its unity with the Catalan variety in Catalonia is beyond doubt, from a philological perspective; however, we must recognise that this question is not seen in the same way by an important part of the political and social spectrum of this territory, who have used the linguistic (and cultural) secessionism as a political flag for decades. In any case, guided by philological criteria and trying to be as clear as possible in the explanation, in this present work we refer to this language under the name Catalan. Anyway, we want to document that the controversy over its status has continued in recent decades. And as a tip of that, we can relate how in many cases the name used means taking positions on whether: (1) Valencian is something different from Catalan, in a approach commonly called ‘particularístic’ (sometimes even with the derogatory expression ‘blavero’, referring to the most segregacionist faction of right politic positions in this community); or (2), in fact, the Catalan ‘from Catalonia’ and the one ‘from Valencia’ are two dialectal varieties of one main language, an approach called as ‘generalista’ or ‘pancatalanista’ (this last name is specially common among the first group).

4. Although the 2007 Statute of Aragon includes legal recognition for minority languages (Catalan and Aragonese) and covers teaching at compulsory levels in articles 3 and 5, respectively, this is all pending implementation in the form of specific measures based on the Aragonese Law of Languages of December 2009 mentioned above, which has yet to be implemented. In any case, this implementation seems unlikely to be done: when writing these pages, the new autonomous government (belonging to the conservative Partido Popular) has announced it is going to be abolished not so late.

5. The term fabla aragonesa is today used to refer to the old Aragonese Romance dialect, which is genetically related to Spanish and Catalan, and has for centuries been restricted to the dialect of the Pyrenean valleys of Aragon. In recent years, some social and political movements have advocated the social normalisation of this dialect and its official recognition by the autonomous regional authorities, with little success.

6. Finally, perhaps we need to define our position on the use of terms such as diglossia and language conflict, appeared throughout this research, in opposition to the general description of bilingualism. If we focus on (socio)linguistic context of the Valencian Community, as has been commonly described, we should use the expression diglossic bilingualism (Blas Arroyo 2005, 408), because the studies have described a situation of asymmetry in the social functions of Spanish and Catalan: the first language would have assumed the prestigious uses and functions; or, what is the same, Spanish would be the H or prestige language of a system where Catalan language is the not prestigious or L language (Fishman 1967). However, not all authors have used this designation; although most agree with that diagnosis, many prefer to speak preferably about language conflict (Aracil 1965; Calvet 1981; Casesnoves and Sankoff 2003; Vallverdú 1981, etc.), because the concept of diglossia, as it's traditionally understood, implies a component of statism that these authors do not perceive in the Valencian (socio)linguistic reality. When they use the terminology language conflict, therefore, they point out the dynamic component of this situation, usually resulting in a regression of Catalan in its formal uses, and ultimately, in a worrying process minorisation, whose magnitude is still to be determined. Finally, when we refer to bilingualism in our context, we should think about the second of the contexts mentioned by Appel and Myusken (1996, 10) regarding to the social bilingualism: generally in Els Ports and Matarranya, we find speaking communities whose members can use the two linguistic varieties present in their daily lives, in this case Spanish and Catalan.

7. In addition, 15 representatives of each sex were allowed. However, in order to guarantee a more realistic representation of the population analysed, the amount of informants for the medium (12) and low (12) levels was double that of the upper level (6).