Slovak language law

[s.t. bischoff]

From: Kersti Borjars <kersti.borjars at MAN.AC.UK>
Date: July 24, 2009 11:16:14 PM GMT-07:00
To: LAGB at JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: [LAGB] Language law
Reply-To: Kersti Borjars <kersti.borjars at MAN.AC.UK>

I have been asked by Katalin É. Kiss from the Research Institute for
Linguistics, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, if I could circulate the
attached document about a new Slovak Language Law to LAGB member. The
document forbids the use in public places of languages and language
variants other than the version of Slovak codified by the Cultural
Ministry.

A petition against it can be signed at http://peticio.nytud.hu.

Kersti Börjars
-----
Statement on the modification of the so-called Language Law in Slovakia


The National Council of the Slovak Republic passed an act on June
30th, 2009, modifying
earlier regulations applying to the use of the Slovak language as the
state language of the
Slovak Republic. The new regulations restrict the use not only of
other languages but also
variants of the Slovak language, threatening violations of the law by
imposing fines of EUR
100 to 5000 on individuals and businesses, running to EUR 165,000 in
case of media
organisations.


Some of the linguistically relevant new sections of the Act 270/1995
“on the state language of
the Slovak Republic” are summarised below (in unofficial translation).


2. §, (1) “[S]tate authorities, authorities of local governments and
other authorities of public
administration are required to protect the state language”
2. § (3) “The codified form of the state language is approved and
released by the Ministry of
Culture […] on its web page.”


5. § (5) “Occasional printed matter intended for the public for
cultural use, catalogues of
galleries, museums, and libraries, programmes of cinemas, theatres,
concerts, and other
cultural events shall be published in state language, except those,
which are published in
language of national minority. This kind of printed matter, catalogues
or programs, published
in the language of national minority shall include content identical
in meaning with that in
the state language. Printed matter, catalogues and programmes
published in the state
language as mentioned in previous sentence may include texts of
appropriate lengths in
languages other than the state language, whose content shall be
identical with that of the text
in the state language and follows the text in the state language.”


5. § (7) “Inscriptions on monuments, memorials and memorial tables
shall be in the state
language. Provided they are translated into other languages, the text
in the foreign language
shall follow the text in the state language and its content shall be
identical with the content of
the text in the state language. The text in the foreign language shall
exhibit lettering of
identical with or smaller size than the lettering of text in the state
language. The constructor
is obliged to request a binding statement from the Ministry of Culture
for the approval of the
inscription on the monument, memorial and memorial plaque in
accordance with the present
Act.”


5. § (8) “Any participant at a public meeting or event on the
territory of the Slovak Republic
has the right to deliver a speech in the state language.”


8. § (4) ”The communication of the staff of healthcare institutions
and the institutions of
social services with patients or clients is generally carried out in
the state language; provided
there is a patient or client who does not have a command of the state language,
communication may be carried out in a language in which it is possible
to understand the
patient or client. The patient or client belonging to a national
minority is entitled use their
own mother tongue when communicating with the staff of these
institutions in settlements,
where the language of the national minority is used in official
contact according to a
particular regulation [i.e., where the ratio of the minority is 20 per
cent or above]. The
members of staff are not obliged to have a command of the language of
the national
minority.”


9. § (1)  Adherence to obligations as specified [in this Act] shall be
supervised by the Ministry
of Culture. In the execution of supervision, the Ministry of Culture
shall observe the codified
form of the state language […].
10. § (1) The Ministry of Culture shall submit a report to the
Government on the state of the
usage of the state language on the territory of the Slovak Republic
once every two years.


We find these restrictions untenable both linguistically and from the
point of view of
human rights. By determining the language, and the language variant to
be used, the Act
wishes to control communication in all public situations, also those
outside the competence of
the state, such as consultations among patients and doctors,
scientific conferences, business
meetings, communication in the offices of local governments.
Freedom of speech, including the choice of the language of communication, is an
inalienable human right according to the International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights,
which cannot be rendered an offence to be punished by a fine in the
21st century European
Union. From this right, the European Union cannot return to the
anachronistic principle of
“cuius regio, eius lingua”. Restricting the freedom of language use to
this degree is
particularly offensive in a member state of the Council of Europe and
the European Union,
since both the Council of Europe and the European Union respect
multilingualism, and also
expect their member states to do so.
 The explicit requirement that any content in a language different
from the state
language be translated from the state language runs counter to the
principle of the equal status
of languages that has been long accepted in the science of languages.
Thereby the Act violates
not only freedom but also equality; it is severely discriminating.
The Statute also criminalizes the use of all variants of the Slovak
language other than
that worked out and codified on the website of the Ministry of
Culture, thereby discriminating
against all Slovak speakers speaking dialects and other non-standard
varieties, primarily
people of a low social status, including the large Romani population.
It is a basic tenet of linguistics that the use of one’s native
language and language
variant cannot be restricted and/or regulated by enforcing laws, and
imposing fines on alleged
‘violators’ of some codified form. No conscientious linguist believes
that any language can
have one and only one codified form decreed to be observed in all
public communication by
all speakers, whether native or not. Languages are known to have
changed continuously over
time and location, and an attempt to carve them in stone can only be
successful in the case of
dead languages.
 In view of the above, we express our concern and objection with
respect to the new
regulations of the Law.