Does language prestige correlate with community size?

[Nicholas Ostler]

At 12:02 pm -0400 1/4/04, Stan & Sandy Anonby wrote:
>I guess "lesser languages" isn't a good term.  I'm open to suggestions...

In Europe, it's common to use the term "lesser used languages", as in
European Bureau for Lesser used Languages.  "Minority languages" too
seems fairly objective.

>I've only worked for SIL for 2 1/2 years, so I can't say my views are
>representative of the organization.  I've traveled quite a bit, though, and
>I've noticed the less prestigious groups learn the language of the more
>prestigious ones.

This may be analytic, since the term "prestige" characterizes the
tendency of the favoured group to attract others to assimilate to it.
But greater population is not a universal feature of such prestige
groups. And even dominant groups can look outside themselves for the
source of the "true class".

>I haven't seen any examples to the contrary.  I've seen
>isolated individuals who learn smaller languages, but it's pretty uncommon,
>I think.  Do you have any examples of larger, dominant groups learning the
>language of the smaller groups?

Assyrians/Babylonians giving up Akkadian for Aramaic, from 8th
century BC; as a result, Akkadian, the traditional language of the
ruling class, died out.
Romans using Greek throughout their Eastern Mediterranean empire,
from 2nd century BC on
Turkic conquerors in central Asia learning Persian from 10th century,
indeed later transmitting it (as elite language) to India (e.g. in
Mughal Empire)
Japanese courtiers affecting Chinese in 8th-11th centuries (in
writing at least).
Elite learners of Greek in Western Europe since the Renaissance.
Christian clerics learning Hebrew
Russian elite speakers affecting French in 17th-19th centuries
Past language-switch by Ethiopian groups when they have changed
habitat/way of life (reported by Dick Hayward)
Deliberate learning of Guarani by Spanish-speakers in Paraguay
Afrikaans-speakers learning English in South Africa
English immigrants to Wales (esp. their children in schools,
obligatorily) learning Welsh.
Most modern learners of Irish (including many Americans).

And there are many examples of imperial elites learning the language
of lower-class communities (not necessarily indigenous languages):

British army officers in 18th-20th centuries learning Urdu in India,
Swahili in Africa etc.
Dutch administrators in 17th-18th century Ceylon, learning Portuguese
creole (widespread among servant class);
Dutch administrators in 17th-20th century Java and East Indies
generally, learning Malay
Portuguese (especially  Jesuits) in Brazil 16th-18th centuries,
learning Tupinamba

In general, it is a remarkable fact that the Dutch never passed on
their language in their colonies (except for Cape Colony in Africa),
although they held the East Indies as long as Britain did India.
There may be a particular sociolinguistic stance evinced here,
revealed also by the rather low profile of Dutch among the modern
European languages, despite its high population.

>I don't like crass materialism either - that's one reason why I live in
>Brazil and don't eat at McDonalds - but it would seem to me that whether we
>like it or not, this world is highly motivated by materialism.  It may be
>noble to fight these world wide trends, but what's wrong with admitting they
>exist?
>
>Stan Anonby

Nothing at all, up to a point.  But remember always that apparent
"universal trends" may just be passing phases of the current era.

Nick Ostler