Julia Sallabank

This paper looks at examples of language-related activities in the Channel Islands (between Britain and France) and relates them to theoretical issues regarding language revitalization, in an attempt to address the fundamental questions of what is meant by ‘saving a language’, and what might constitute ‘success’ in language revitalization. With reference to the case studies I discuss common trends such as: - a focus on formal education, ‘technical fixes’ and language as ‘window-dressing’ - a general lack of ‘prior ideological clarification’ when planning revitalization activities - a tendency not to specify short- and long-term goals (except in very broad terms) - lack of evaluation of outcomes, especially in terms of symbolic value versus sustainable language use in the community, or what other value(s) might be invested in language revitalization (e.g. political capital or social revitalization) - the assumption that ‘the community’ is homogeneous - prioritising the maintenance of...

The Bailiwick of Guernsey is a small, semi-autonomous archipelago in the English Channel. Although it is a British Crown dependency and part of the British Isles, it has its own parliament and does not belong to the United Kingdom or the European Union. This unusual geopolitical situation means that the nation-state has little relevance. It is only recently that the indigenous former vernacular has been accorded any worth, at either grass-roots or government level: as its vitality declines (increasingly rapidly), its perceived value for individual and collective identification has grown. Although public opinion overtly supports indigenous language maintenance, and increasing its vitality is a stated aim (e.g., a government Language Commission was announced in 2012), effective top-down measures to increase the number and fluency of speakers appear to be low on the agenda. This article explores the implications of this socio-political background for language policy. It discusses langu...

... This model is used in the teaching of Corsican. Research into the indigenous language variety of Guernsey reveals 'folk linguistic' acceptance of a regional variation as a source of richness, which suggests that a polynomic approach might be applicable. ...

This paper is based on recent research into the small, highly endangered language Giernesiei1(Guernsey, Channel Islands).2Language documentation has found unexpectedly rich variation and change in Giernesiei usage, not all of which can be accounted for by regional and age-related factors. At the same time, our research into language ideologies and efforts to maintain and revitalise Giernesiei has revealed deep-seated purist or ‘traditionalist’ language attitudes that resist and deny language change. This nostalgic view of language and culture can hyper-valorise ‘authentic’ traditions (arguably reinvented3) and can lead to reluctance to share Giernesiei effectively with younger generations who might ‘change the language’, despite an overt desire to maintain it. This mismatch between ideologies and practices can be seen at language festivals, in lessons for children, and in the experiences of adult learners who were interviewed as part of a British Academy-funded project. I present a ...

This report stems from a brief visit to Rarotonga in April 2013 facilitated by Roderick Dixon, Director of the University of the South Pacific in the Cook Islands. It addresses the following topics: 1. Language maintenance / shift 2. Languages and dialects 3. Expatriate / diaspora members of the speech community 4. Language policy and language in education 5. Dictionaries of Cook Islands Maori 6. Records of Cook Islands Maori: (a) oral, and (b) written 7. Proposals.

It is widely agreed that at least half of the world’s 7000 languages are endangered and no longer being learnt as first languages by children, and that if nothing is done they will disappear within the coming century as the older generations who now speak them pass away (Krauss 1992; Grenoble 2011). The reasons for language endangerment are complex but typically involve a process of language shift as communities abandon their minority heritage languages in favour of larger more economically, politically and socially powerful tongues, most often those spoken by their neighbours and/or supported by local, regional or national governments and economic systems. In some cases, communities are actively engaged in language revitalisation in an attempt to stem or reverse the tide of language shift. Attitudes to language are of key importance in assessing the chances of endangered language survival, a factor recognised in Giles, Bourhis, and Taylor’s (1977) ethnolinguistic vitality framework, Bourhis, Giles, and Rosenthal’s (1981) and Bourhis and Sachdev’s (1984) subjective vitality questionnaire and UNESCO’s (2003) language vitality scales. Negative attitudes towards minority and endangered languages by both the speaker communities themselves and by speakers of the larger languages within which they are embedded are well documented and are both an outcome and a cause of shift to dominant languages. Such attitudes may reflect long histories of marginalisation, racism, stigmatisation and disadvantage. They can lead to ‘linguistic insecurity’, which is related to Gramsci’s (1971) notion of hegemony, whereby subordinate groups come to accept the inferiority of their own ways of speaking as ‘common sense’ and ‘natural’. Labov (1966, 489) claimed that in such cases ‘the term ‘‘linguistic self-hatred’’ may not be too extreme’. Fishman (1991, 340) asserts that ‘such self-views are reflections of the destruction of Xish self-esteem, due to decades of negative comparisons with Yish political power, economic advantage and modern sophistication’ (where Xish stands for the threatened language and Yish is the replacing language). Use of the minority language thus comes to be stigmatised, and members of minority groups may come to believe that if they acculturate to majority society by shifting language, their social and economic standing will improve. This can lead to a self-perpetuating spiral of declining use: ‘When the children object to speaking a language, gradually forget it or pretend to have forgotten it because they are ashamed of it, its future is much less assured’ (Calvet 1998, 75). Economic necessity or pragmatism are often cited as reasons for abandoning a minority language, since there may be little instrumental motivation for learning it. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 2013 Vol. 34, No. 4, 313 316, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2013.794806

It is widely agreed that at least half of the world’s 7000 languages are endangered and no longer being learnt as first languages by children, and that if nothing is done they will disappear within the coming century as the older generations who now speak them pass away (Krauss 1992; Grenoble 2011). The reasons for language endangerment are complex but typically involve a process of language shift as communities abandon their minority heritage languages in favour of larger more economically, politically and socially powerful tongues, most often those spoken by their neighbours and/or supported by local, regional or national governments and economic systems. In some cases, communities are actively engaged in language revitalisation in an attempt to stem or reverse the tide of language shift. Attitudes to language are of key importance in assessing the chances of endangered language survival, a factor recognised in Giles, Bourhis, and Taylor’s (1977) ethnolinguistic vitality framework, Bourhis, Giles, and Rosenthal’s (1981) and Bourhis and Sachdev’s (1984) subjective vitality questionnaire and UNESCO’s (2003) language vitality scales. Negative attitudes towards minority and endangered languages by both the speaker communities themselves and by speakers of the larger languages within which they are embedded are well documented and are both an outcome and a cause of shift to dominant languages. Such attitudes may reflect long histories of marginalisation, racism, stigmatisation and disadvantage. They can lead to ‘linguistic insecurity’, which is related to Gramsci’s (1971) notion of hegemony, whereby subordinate groups come to accept the inferiority of their own ways of speaking as ‘common sense’ and ‘natural’. Labov (1966, 489) claimed that in such cases ‘the term ‘‘linguistic self-hatred’’ may not be too extreme’. Fishman (1991, 340) asserts that ‘such self-views are reflections of the destruction of Xish self-esteem, due to decades of negative comparisons with Yish political power, economic advantage and modern sophistication’ (where Xish stands for the threatened language and Yish is the replacing language). Use of the minority language thus comes to be stigmatised, and members of minority groups may come to believe that if they acculturate to majority society by shifting language, their social and economic standing will improve. This can lead to a self-perpetuating spiral of declining use: ‘When the children object to speaking a language, gradually forget it or pretend to have forgotten it because they are ashamed of it, its future is much less assured’ (Calvet 1998, 75). Economic necessity or pragmatism are often cited as reasons for abandoning a minority language, since there may be little instrumental motivation for learning it. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 2013 Vol. 34, No. 4, 313 316, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2013.794806

Of the approximately 7,000 languages in the world, at least half may no longer be spoken by the end of the twenty-first century. Languages are endangered by a number of factors, including globalization, education policies, and the political, economic and cultural marginalization of minority groups. This guidebook provides ideas and strategies, as well as some background, to help with the effective revitalization of endangered languages. It covers a broad scope of themes including effective planning, benefits, wellbeing, economic aspects, attitudes and ideologies. The chapter authors have hands-on experience of language revitalization in many countries around the world, and each chapter includes a wealth of examples, such as case studies from specific languages and language areas. Clearly and accessibly written, it is suitable for non-specialists as well as academic researchers and students interested in language revitalization. This book is also available as Open Access on Cambridge...