Policies on ethnolinguistic diversity and cultural hierarchies. Metamorphosis of inertia
Abstract
The complexity and multiplicity of multilingual communicative practices and exchanges that characterize today's world are very difficult to understand and translate into coherent and inclusive actions, in terms of language policies, national bilingual education systems and action protocols within the main public institutions. 'Languaging', 'translanguaging', 'polylanguaging', 'crossing', 'metrolanguaging', 'transidomatic practices' and other terminologies reflect attempts to define the complex and unstable current situation (Blommaert & 2014). Institutional arrangements, called 'official language policies', function as mediations based on the assumption that a harmonious and multilingual multicultural society can be molded on the logic of capitalist economies with subsidies for poverty and social inequalities. However, their actions do not reflect the material and cultural improvements of indigenous peoples. In this essay we reflect on the little success of institutional policies of language, based on the paradigmatic evolution and the components (and their probable hierarchy) in the theory of the regulation of sociolinguistic changes. The omission or ignorance of these elements has generated a condition of inertia in the policies of the language.
Downloads
References
Bastardas i Boada, Albert. 2002. “Política lingüística mundial a l'era de la globalització: diver-sitat i intercomunicació des de la perspectiva de la 'complexitat'.” Noves SL. Revista deSociolingüística 2 (estiu): 1−14. http://www.gencat.cat/llengua/noves
Blommaert, Jan. 2013. Ethnography, Superdiversity and Linguistic Landscapes. Chronicles of Com-plexity. Bristol-Toronto: Multilingual Matters.
Blommaert, Jan y Rampton, Ben. 2011. “Language and Superdiversity”. Diversities 13(2):1−22. http://newdiversities.mmg.mpg.de/?page_id=2056
Blommaert, Jan y Backus, Ad. 2012. “Superdiverse repertoires and the individual”. TilburgPapersin Culture Studies. Paper 24:1−32. https://www.tilburguniversity.edu/upload/d53816c1-f163-4ae4-b74c-0942b30bdd61_tpcs%20paper24.pdf
Calvet, Louis-Jean. 2004. “Globalización, lenguas y políticas lingüísticas”. Le Monde Diploma-tique. La diversidad cultural, un debate en Chile,39−54. Santiago: Instituto Franco-Chilenode Cultura, Aún creemos en los sueños Editorial.
Cámara de Diputados del H. Congreso de la Unión. 2003. “Ley general de Derechos lingüísti-cos de los pueblos indígenas y reforma de la fracción cuarta del artículo séptimo de LeyGeneral de Educación.” México: Diario Oficial de la Federación 13 de marzo 2003.
Fishman, Joshua. 1972. “Domains and the Relationship between Micro and Macrosociolin-guistics.” En Directions in Sociolinguistics, editado por Gumperz, John y Hymes, Dell,435−453. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston Inc.
García, Ofelia y Li, Wei. 2014. Translanguaging. Language, Bilingualism and Education. NewYork: Palgrave MacMillan.
Gumperz, John. 1968. “The speech community.” En International Encyclopedia of a Social Sci-ences, editado por Sills, David, Vol. IX, 381−386. Nueva York: MacMillan.
Grupo de Friburgo. 2007. “Declaración de Friburgo.” Fribourg: Institut interdisciplinaired’éthique et des droits de l'homme. Accessed Agoust, 25, 2007.http://www.unifr.ch/iieddh.
Labov, William. 2012. Dialect Diversity in America. The Politics of Language Change. Char-lottesville-London: University of Virginia Press.
Labov, William. 1966a. “Principles of Linguistic Change.” Social Factors, Vol. 2. Oxford: Black-well Publisher.
Labov, William. 1966b. The Social Stratification of English in New York City. Washington: Centerfor Applied Linguistics.
Lafont, Robert. 1980. “La spectacularisation de l’occitanophonie dans l’enquête sociolinguisti-que: la fonction du ‘retour’” Lengas. Revue de sociolinguistique 7: 71−77.
Lorenzi-Cioldi. 2002. Les représentations des groupes dominantes et dominés: Collections et agré-gats. Grenoble: Presses Universitaires.
Milroy, Lesley. 1987. Language and Social Networks. Oxford: Blackwell.
Muñoz, Héctor. 2010. Reflexividad sociolingüística de hablantes de lenguas indígenas. Concepcionesy cambio sociocultural. México: Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana-Iztapalapa.
Muñoz, Héctor. 1998. “Los objetivos políticos y socioeconómicos de la educación intercultu-ral bilingüe y los cambios que se necesitan en el currículo, en la enseñanza y en lasescuelas indígenas.” Revista Iberoamericana de Educación 17: 31−50. Madrid: Organiza-ción de Estados Iberoamericanos.
Presidencia de la República. 2000. “Iniciativa de Reforma Constitucional en materia Indíge-na.” Senado de la República. Documento − 05/12/2000. Iniciativa de Reforma Constitu-cional en materia Indígena N°001205. Aprobada el 25 de abril de 2001. Último acceso03/01/2004. http://www.senado.gob.mx/comunicacion/content/leyes/
Spolsky, Bernard. 2009. Language Management. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Spolsky, Bernard. 2006. “Prolegómeno a una teoría de políticas del lenguaje y ordenamientolingüística para el siglo XXI”, En Los retos de la planificación del lenguaje en el siglo XXI,editado por R. Terborg y L. García. Vol. 1, 59−76. México: CELE, Universidad NacionalAutónoma de México.
Tosi, Arturo. 2001. Language and Society in a Changing Italy. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress.
Unesco Etxea. 2010. Derechos culturales Documentos básicos de Naciones Unidas. Bilbao: CentroUNESCO del País Vasco.
Van Meter, Donald y Van Horn, Carl. 2003. “El proceso de implementación de las políticas. Un marco conceptual.” En La implementación de las políticas, 97−146. Editado por L.Aguilar V. México: Miguel Ángel Porrúa.
Woehrling, Jean-Marie. 2005. The European Charterfor Regional Minority Language. A criticalcommentary. Estrasburgo: Council of Europe Publishing.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Licenza Creative Commons - Attribution 4.0 International (CC-BY 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
