The programming period of „Development Plan of the Estonian language 2011–2017” will end soon. It... more The programming period of „Development Plan of the Estonian language 2011–2017” will end soon. It is high time for an interim evaluation of the status quo of Estonian but also for setting new strategic targets. Puur et al. (2016) have taken up the task by providing an overview of native languages spoken in Estonia, the competence of Estonian as a second language, and the processes of language shift over the last 25 years. While they might be right that the analytic potential of the census data has not been exhausted yet, this data is limited in scope and unable to reflect multilingualism and language practices in a necessary detail. Thus, the census data provides a somewhat simplified account on multilingualism and language shift. However, this can be tackled with quantitative and qualitative, mixed methods research which combines the census data with those from language sociological survey, ethnographic observation, and micro-sociolinguistic analysis. This article presents new survey data from the research project „Sustainability of Estonian in the Era of Globalisation” (2014–2019) at the University of Tartu to complement the analysis by Puur et al. (2016). To start with, the paper outlines the meaning of ‘language environment’ by highlighting constraints of its census and register-based definitions. Then the use of Estonian as a second language in different Estonian language environments is analysed. The focus is on the Russian speakers’ choice of Estonian in different communicative situations, e.g. in family, with friends, colleagues, officials. The analysis indicates that the family domain is largely monolingual Russian with little signs of language shift. The use of Estonian is wider in official settings, and in public spaces. The analysis also shows that the representatives of third ethnicities attend to shift either to the Estonian or to the Russian community.
The article examines, and questions, the centering of the state as the primary language policy ac... more The article examines, and questions, the centering of the state as the primary language policy actor particularly in the context of Estonia. In responding to several
paradigmatic shifts in the field of language policy and planning, including a critical
turn that shifted researchers’ attention to language users, the authors explore the
multiple expressions of language policy and introduce language policy actors other
than the state. The article opens with an introduction to the core concepts of language, policy, and state with attention to the multiple interpretations and examples
that challenge current understandings of these ideas. The authors then turn
to present the case for an Estonian focus. First, Estonia is situated on multiple
borders – geopolitical and linguistic among others (resulting in the country’s rich
language ecology) – that reflect political and migratory shifts over time. Second,
Estonia represents a case of dynamic state-building. From the enduring commitment
to being “European” to legal restorationism and neoliberal economic policies,
language policies are developed in a multifaceted, changing context. The article
then presents a fresh focus on language policy and Estonia by moving beyond the
past, dominating foci of research on the temporal border which either fixed Estonia
in a post-Soviet, Baltic, and European Union frame or tethered it to a singular
development, particularly to “solving” the Russian problem. While these frames
dominate research, other geographic imaginaries, like the Baltic Sea Region, lend
themselves to a redrawing of the lines and influence of the language-policy power
of the state. The authors also examine the powerful decentering of the state in
language policy through attention to globalization, migration, and regionalization.
Finally, the article explores the enduring ways the Soviet “covert” language policies
continue to shape contemporary Estonian language policies.
This paper focuses on the representation of agency in the discourse of language endangerment. I c... more This paper focuses on the representation of agency in the discourse of language endangerment. I consider strategies to (de)legiti-mate through the competing claims regarding lesser-spoken South Estonian varieties by language activists and their opponents, language professionals and others, from 2004−2005 and arguments used in the broader media debate on pro-Estonian language policy since the mid-1990s. My focus is on what processes are nominalised in the discourse of endangerment and what other schemes of hidden or backgrounded agency are employed. I will demonstrate within the broad framework of critical discourse analysis (CDA) that material processes, which represent language change, shift or loss, are deactivated and deagentialised leaving no space for agency. Discursive practices, which hide agency and thus under-represent the process-like nature of language, support the Estonian linguistic culture of monoglossia. Finally, the public discourse of endangerment is a public arena for claims of jurisdiction for Estonian language professionals.*
Sociolinguistic Transition in Former Eastern Bloc Countries Two Decades after the Regime Change Series: Prague Papers on Language, Society and Interaction / Prager Arbeiten zur Sprache, Gesellschaft und Interaktion, 2016
Estonian language policy and planning (LPP) research has begun to expand beyond its decades-long ... more Estonian language policy and planning (LPP) research has begun to expand beyond its decades-long focus on the integration and the Russian minority and on the state's central role in policymaking. These traditional and critically important areas of focus, however, threaten to obscure other important and fascinating trends in Estonian LPP. Critical areas such as the Anglicization of higher education , the practices of transnational families and corporations, the changed security
Finland grants exclusive status to Finnish and Swedish as national languages and has had a relati... more Finland grants exclusive status to Finnish and Swedish as national languages and has had a relatively homogenous language situation so far. Among four bigger immigrant groups, Estonian-speakers make up the second largest community of practice in Finland; their number increased by more than thirtyfold between 1990 and 2015. We support the idea that Estonian-speakers' practices should be looked at in the context of the emergent Estonian–Finnish transnational space. This means that their language political (LP) agency should be analyzed in terms of Estonian-Finnish transnational relations. After providing an extensive historical account of the emergence and development of Estonian-speakers' diaspora in Finland, the paper brieey addresses the legal and institutional aspects of the Finnish state language policies. Then we go beyond both the state and the family by offering a preliminary exploration of different aspects of language management, language practices and ideologies which may affect Estonian-speaking familiesʼ choices of Estonian-language day-care and a comprehensive school with a bilingual, Estonian-Finnish program available in Helsinki. Our preliminary ndings contribute to the understanding of LP as a situated sociocultural process which is however further complicated by the multi-sited nature of LP and speakers' transnational relations.
Dissertationes Sociologicae Universitas Tartuensis, 2011
Dominating and other language ideologies and linguistic representations within the public discour... more Dominating and other language ideologies and linguistic representations within the public discourse of South Estonian (SE) are analysed in this dissertation. Language ideologies contribute to the construction of some languages and linguistic practices of greater worth than others and to a positioning of them hierarchically. Efforts to legitimate SE varieties and to achieve their public recognition as the SE language and resulting legitimacy claims in print media together with pro and contra arguments regarding legal recognition belong to the discourses of (de)legitimation and language endangerment. Estonian print media, texts, which focus was on language endangerment and the (de)legitimation of SE are qualitatively analysed. The methods of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) have been applied. The dissertation draws upon three original research publications. Despite explicit polarisations and diverging discursive strategies, opposing voices, i.e. the proponents of SE legitimation and their opponents, reinforce rather similar representations: both reproduce essentialist representations of Estonian and South Estonian. Besides having value on its own, the analysis of linguistic representations in public discourse is complementary to research on the (discourses of) Estonian nation- and standard-building. The discourse of language endangerment should be given increased attention in future analyses of the politics of language and identity.
The programming period of „Development Plan of the Estonian language 2011–2017” will end soon. It... more The programming period of „Development Plan of the Estonian language 2011–2017” will end soon. It is high time for an interim evaluation of the status quo of Estonian but also for setting new strategic targets. Puur et al. (2016) have taken up the task by providing an overview of native languages spoken in Estonia, the competence of Estonian as a second language, and the processes of language shift over the last 25 years. While they might be right that the analytic potential of the census data has not been exhausted yet, this data is limited in scope and unable to reflect multilingualism and language practices in a necessary detail. Thus, the census data provides a somewhat simplified account on multilingualism and language shift. However, this can be tackled with quantitative and qualitative, mixed methods research which combines the census data with those from language sociological survey, ethnographic observation, and micro-sociolinguistic analysis. This article presents new survey data from the research project „Sustainability of Estonian in the Era of Globalisation” (2014–2019) at the University of Tartu to complement the analysis by Puur et al. (2016). To start with, the paper outlines the meaning of ‘language environment’ by highlighting constraints of its census and register-based definitions. Then the use of Estonian as a second language in different Estonian language environments is analysed. The focus is on the Russian speakers’ choice of Estonian in different communicative situations, e.g. in family, with friends, colleagues, officials. The analysis indicates that the family domain is largely monolingual Russian with little signs of language shift. The use of Estonian is wider in official settings, and in public spaces. The analysis also shows that the representatives of third ethnicities attend to shift either to the Estonian or to the Russian community.
The article examines, and questions, the centering of the state as the primary language policy ac... more The article examines, and questions, the centering of the state as the primary language policy actor particularly in the context of Estonia. In responding to several
paradigmatic shifts in the field of language policy and planning, including a critical
turn that shifted researchers’ attention to language users, the authors explore the
multiple expressions of language policy and introduce language policy actors other
than the state. The article opens with an introduction to the core concepts of language, policy, and state with attention to the multiple interpretations and examples
that challenge current understandings of these ideas. The authors then turn
to present the case for an Estonian focus. First, Estonia is situated on multiple
borders – geopolitical and linguistic among others (resulting in the country’s rich
language ecology) – that reflect political and migratory shifts over time. Second,
Estonia represents a case of dynamic state-building. From the enduring commitment
to being “European” to legal restorationism and neoliberal economic policies,
language policies are developed in a multifaceted, changing context. The article
then presents a fresh focus on language policy and Estonia by moving beyond the
past, dominating foci of research on the temporal border which either fixed Estonia
in a post-Soviet, Baltic, and European Union frame or tethered it to a singular
development, particularly to “solving” the Russian problem. While these frames
dominate research, other geographic imaginaries, like the Baltic Sea Region, lend
themselves to a redrawing of the lines and influence of the language-policy power
of the state. The authors also examine the powerful decentering of the state in
language policy through attention to globalization, migration, and regionalization.
Finally, the article explores the enduring ways the Soviet “covert” language policies
continue to shape contemporary Estonian language policies.
This paper focuses on the representation of agency in the discourse of language endangerment. I c... more This paper focuses on the representation of agency in the discourse of language endangerment. I consider strategies to (de)legiti-mate through the competing claims regarding lesser-spoken South Estonian varieties by language activists and their opponents, language professionals and others, from 2004−2005 and arguments used in the broader media debate on pro-Estonian language policy since the mid-1990s. My focus is on what processes are nominalised in the discourse of endangerment and what other schemes of hidden or backgrounded agency are employed. I will demonstrate within the broad framework of critical discourse analysis (CDA) that material processes, which represent language change, shift or loss, are deactivated and deagentialised leaving no space for agency. Discursive practices, which hide agency and thus under-represent the process-like nature of language, support the Estonian linguistic culture of monoglossia. Finally, the public discourse of endangerment is a public arena for claims of jurisdiction for Estonian language professionals.*
Sociolinguistic Transition in Former Eastern Bloc Countries Two Decades after the Regime Change Series: Prague Papers on Language, Society and Interaction / Prager Arbeiten zur Sprache, Gesellschaft und Interaktion, 2016
Estonian language policy and planning (LPP) research has begun to expand beyond its decades-long ... more Estonian language policy and planning (LPP) research has begun to expand beyond its decades-long focus on the integration and the Russian minority and on the state's central role in policymaking. These traditional and critically important areas of focus, however, threaten to obscure other important and fascinating trends in Estonian LPP. Critical areas such as the Anglicization of higher education , the practices of transnational families and corporations, the changed security
Finland grants exclusive status to Finnish and Swedish as national languages and has had a relati... more Finland grants exclusive status to Finnish and Swedish as national languages and has had a relatively homogenous language situation so far. Among four bigger immigrant groups, Estonian-speakers make up the second largest community of practice in Finland; their number increased by more than thirtyfold between 1990 and 2015. We support the idea that Estonian-speakers' practices should be looked at in the context of the emergent Estonian–Finnish transnational space. This means that their language political (LP) agency should be analyzed in terms of Estonian-Finnish transnational relations. After providing an extensive historical account of the emergence and development of Estonian-speakers' diaspora in Finland, the paper brieey addresses the legal and institutional aspects of the Finnish state language policies. Then we go beyond both the state and the family by offering a preliminary exploration of different aspects of language management, language practices and ideologies which may affect Estonian-speaking familiesʼ choices of Estonian-language day-care and a comprehensive school with a bilingual, Estonian-Finnish program available in Helsinki. Our preliminary ndings contribute to the understanding of LP as a situated sociocultural process which is however further complicated by the multi-sited nature of LP and speakers' transnational relations.
Dissertationes Sociologicae Universitas Tartuensis, 2011
Dominating and other language ideologies and linguistic representations within the public discour... more Dominating and other language ideologies and linguistic representations within the public discourse of South Estonian (SE) are analysed in this dissertation. Language ideologies contribute to the construction of some languages and linguistic practices of greater worth than others and to a positioning of them hierarchically. Efforts to legitimate SE varieties and to achieve their public recognition as the SE language and resulting legitimacy claims in print media together with pro and contra arguments regarding legal recognition belong to the discourses of (de)legitimation and language endangerment. Estonian print media, texts, which focus was on language endangerment and the (de)legitimation of SE are qualitatively analysed. The methods of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) have been applied. The dissertation draws upon three original research publications. Despite explicit polarisations and diverging discursive strategies, opposing voices, i.e. the proponents of SE legitimation and their opponents, reinforce rather similar representations: both reproduce essentialist representations of Estonian and South Estonian. Besides having value on its own, the analysis of linguistic representations in public discourse is complementary to research on the (discourses of) Estonian nation- and standard-building. The discourse of language endangerment should be given increased attention in future analyses of the politics of language and identity.
Uploads
This article presents new survey data from the research project „Sustainability of Estonian in the Era of Globalisation” (2014–2019) at the University of Tartu to complement the analysis by Puur et al. (2016). To start with, the paper outlines the meaning of ‘language environment’ by highlighting constraints of its census and register-based definitions. Then the use of Estonian as a second language in
different Estonian language environments is analysed. The focus is on the Russian speakers’ choice of Estonian in different communicative situations, e.g. in family, with friends, colleagues, officials. The analysis indicates that the family domain is largely monolingual Russian with little signs of language shift. The use of Estonian is wider in official settings, and in public spaces. The analysis also shows that the representatives of third ethnicities attend to shift either to the Estonian or to the Russian community.
paradigmatic shifts in the field of language policy and planning, including a critical
turn that shifted researchers’ attention to language users, the authors explore the
multiple expressions of language policy and introduce language policy actors other
than the state. The article opens with an introduction to the core concepts of language, policy, and state with attention to the multiple interpretations and examples
that challenge current understandings of these ideas. The authors then turn
to present the case for an Estonian focus. First, Estonia is situated on multiple
borders – geopolitical and linguistic among others (resulting in the country’s rich
language ecology) – that reflect political and migratory shifts over time. Second,
Estonia represents a case of dynamic state-building. From the enduring commitment
to being “European” to legal restorationism and neoliberal economic policies,
language policies are developed in a multifaceted, changing context. The article
then presents a fresh focus on language policy and Estonia by moving beyond the
past, dominating foci of research on the temporal border which either fixed Estonia
in a post-Soviet, Baltic, and European Union frame or tethered it to a singular
development, particularly to “solving” the Russian problem. While these frames
dominate research, other geographic imaginaries, like the Baltic Sea Region, lend
themselves to a redrawing of the lines and influence of the language-policy power
of the state. The authors also examine the powerful decentering of the state in
language policy through attention to globalization, migration, and regionalization.
Finally, the article explores the enduring ways the Soviet “covert” language policies
continue to shape contemporary Estonian language policies.
Despite explicit polarisations and diverging discursive strategies, opposing voices, i.e. the proponents of SE legitimation and their opponents, reinforce rather similar representations: both reproduce essentialist representations of Estonian and South Estonian. Besides having value on its own, the analysis of linguistic representations in public discourse is complementary to research on the (discourses of) Estonian nation- and standard-building. The discourse of language endangerment should be given increased attention in future analyses of the politics of language and identity.
This article presents new survey data from the research project „Sustainability of Estonian in the Era of Globalisation” (2014–2019) at the University of Tartu to complement the analysis by Puur et al. (2016). To start with, the paper outlines the meaning of ‘language environment’ by highlighting constraints of its census and register-based definitions. Then the use of Estonian as a second language in
different Estonian language environments is analysed. The focus is on the Russian speakers’ choice of Estonian in different communicative situations, e.g. in family, with friends, colleagues, officials. The analysis indicates that the family domain is largely monolingual Russian with little signs of language shift. The use of Estonian is wider in official settings, and in public spaces. The analysis also shows that the representatives of third ethnicities attend to shift either to the Estonian or to the Russian community.
paradigmatic shifts in the field of language policy and planning, including a critical
turn that shifted researchers’ attention to language users, the authors explore the
multiple expressions of language policy and introduce language policy actors other
than the state. The article opens with an introduction to the core concepts of language, policy, and state with attention to the multiple interpretations and examples
that challenge current understandings of these ideas. The authors then turn
to present the case for an Estonian focus. First, Estonia is situated on multiple
borders – geopolitical and linguistic among others (resulting in the country’s rich
language ecology) – that reflect political and migratory shifts over time. Second,
Estonia represents a case of dynamic state-building. From the enduring commitment
to being “European” to legal restorationism and neoliberal economic policies,
language policies are developed in a multifaceted, changing context. The article
then presents a fresh focus on language policy and Estonia by moving beyond the
past, dominating foci of research on the temporal border which either fixed Estonia
in a post-Soviet, Baltic, and European Union frame or tethered it to a singular
development, particularly to “solving” the Russian problem. While these frames
dominate research, other geographic imaginaries, like the Baltic Sea Region, lend
themselves to a redrawing of the lines and influence of the language-policy power
of the state. The authors also examine the powerful decentering of the state in
language policy through attention to globalization, migration, and regionalization.
Finally, the article explores the enduring ways the Soviet “covert” language policies
continue to shape contemporary Estonian language policies.
Despite explicit polarisations and diverging discursive strategies, opposing voices, i.e. the proponents of SE legitimation and their opponents, reinforce rather similar representations: both reproduce essentialist representations of Estonian and South Estonian. Besides having value on its own, the analysis of linguistic representations in public discourse is complementary to research on the (discourses of) Estonian nation- and standard-building. The discourse of language endangerment should be given increased attention in future analyses of the politics of language and identity.