Language maintenance: a liberal-egalitarian approach

Abstract

This paper will seek to determine what types of legislative or policy measures should be considered as morally acceptable ones for the state to implement as part of a language maintenance effort. It will approach the issue from a liberal-egalitarian perspective. As a first step, a series of normative constraints that liberal-egalitarians would require the state to observe will be established. Detailed consideration will then be given to the particular types of language maintenance measures that these constraints would rule in and out. This will be achieved by examining three different examples of language maintenance in action. While discussing these examples, it will be demonstrated that although the constraints would rule out certain language maintenance methods, in particular the general endorsement of official monolingualism, they would allow for a wide range of promotional steps that, if implemented carefully, could have a substantial impact on the degree to which a particular language can be maintained.

Keywords:

• liberal-egalitarianism
• language maintenance
• monolingualism
• multilingualism

Notes

1. It should be noted that some would not wish to treat all the examples referred to above as cases of language maintenance. For example, Nahir (2003, 439) suggests that language maintenance should only be used to describe those cases where the effort to combat shift focuses on a language that remains the chosen language of the majority within that political community. Given this, she would only use the description in relation to the case of Catalan and French in Quebec. In those cases where the focus is on a language that is spoken by a minority, as is the case in relation to Basque and Welsh, she favours the use of ‘language revival’ (Nahir 2003, 428). However, others, for example Turdgill (2003, 74), disagree and reserve use of language revival for only those cases where an effort is made to promote the prospects of a language that has already reached the point of death. One thinks, for example, of the case of Hebrew. For the purpose of this paper these terminological debates will be sidestepped and language maintenance will simply be adopted as a term that encompasses all efforts to arrest language shift.

2. For a general discussion of the manner in which various liberal theorists have understood and applied the principle of state neutrality, see Wall and Klosko (2003). For accounts of how adherence to neutrality could influence one's approach to language policy, see Patten (2003a) and Taylor (1992).

3. For further discussion of the immigrant/national group dichotomy see: Carens (2000, 77–87); Kymlicka (1995, 95–100); Patten (2003c, 2006) Rubio-Marin (2003).

4. This is by no means a comprehensive argument in favour of the inclusion of the equality of respect or dignity criterion within the liberal-egalitarian conception of justice. Such an argument would include detailed engagement with the work of those who have argued against such a move (see, in particular, Barry 2001). However, due to space considerations, this is not possible here.

5. For a discussion of the significance of the right to exit see Kukathas (2003, 96–98).

6. It should be noted that Alan Patten (2003b, 306–310) has identified a very specific set of demographic and socio-economic circumstances that could allow liberal-egalitarians to advocate the use of official monolingualism, despite the potential respect implications for those that happened to identify with other languages. Unfortunately, there is no space here to evaluate the merits of his argument in detail - that task must be left for another occasion. What can be said, however, is that even if one were to agree with Patten's conclusions, the number of cases where official monolingualism could be endorsed would be extremely rare. As Patten himself acknowledges, a case could, potentially, be made in a location such as Quebec (2003b, 320–321). Yet, with regards to most other cases where there is a desire to arrest and reverse language shift, the demographic and socio-economic circumstances point in a very different direction. Indeed, this means that even after allowing for Patten's potential exceptions, the default position for liberal-egalitarians would remain one where pursuing language maintenance by means of official monolingualism was viewed with suspicion.

7. A good example of a language maintenance effort that is consistent with this description is the case of the Welsh language. For further information see the Welsh Government's national language action plans. For the period between 2003 and 2011 see Welsh Government (2003) and for the period between 2012 and 2017 see Welsh Government (2012).

8. For a similar argument that focuses on the claims of Canada's indigenous nations, see Kymlicka (1989, 186–189). See also Denise Réaume's (1991, 1994) discussions of the concept of linguistic security.