'Status' drives extinction of languages

Thu Feb 14 19:23:56 UTC 2008

I'd like to separate two of the points:

(1) Languages 'driven to extinction are almost always tongues with a low social status'. That seems to be fairly uncontroversial. Have we had a counter example of it? Remembering that we should define 'extinction' as 'having no speakers left of the language or of any language that developed from it anywhere in the world'.

(2) 'bilingual societies do exist: "But the  histories of countries where two languages co-exist today generally involve split populations that lived without significant interaction, effectively in separate, monolingual societies. Only recently have
these communities begun to mix, allowing language competition to begin." 

Surely there are dozens of counter examples to this one. Not all bilingualism is associated with split populations. A lot of bilingualism that has been persisitent is associated with a vernacular/prestige split, where pretty well everyone knows the vernacular and only an elite knows the prestige. Most of India, for example, consists of communities dominated by a strong regional language with an elite who are bilingual in that language and English (and English slotted in where previously Persian had functioned). There are threats to other languages, but the big languages, which are also prestigious, are secure, and not threatened by the bilingualism with English (or, formerly, with Persian). There are similar patterns in many parts of the world, such as Nigeria and Kenya.

I was impressed when I read de Swaan's model of language shift, which, to simplify, measures the power of a language in terms of the number of non-native speakers it recruits. Places like Nigeria and India operate with two levels (at least) of lingua franca and sustain bilingualism over centuries in this way. Surely no-one thinks Bengali, Tamil, Yoruba, etc. are at risk of language death despite widespread bilingualism on a daily basis in the countries with which they are associated?

Anthea
*     *     *     *     *
Anthea Fraser Gupta (Dr)
School of English, University of Leeds, LS2 9JT <www.leeds.ac.uk/english/staff/afg>
NB: Reply to a.f.gupta at leeds.ac.uk
*     *     *     *     *

________________________________

	From: owner-lgpolicy-list at ccat.sas.upenn.edu [mailto:owner-lgpolicy-list at ccat.sas.upenn.edu] On Behalf Of Stan & Sandy Anonby
	Sent: 14 February 2008 19:40
	To: lgpolicy-list at ccat.sas.upenn.edu
	Subject: Re: 'Status' drives extinction of languages

	I can think of examples where the higher status tribes assimmilate much more quickly than the lower status tribes. I'm talking here about status in their own eyes as well as in the eyes of outsiders. I'll give you one example. In Brazil, there are two tribes living more or less in the same area. The Surui are more outgoing and have think more highly of themselves than the Nambiquara. The Nambiquara have had contact with outsiders since the 1930's, while the Surui were contacted in the early 1970's. The Surui are much smaller numerically. Yet they are more bilingual than the Nambiquara. In fact, in Brazil and in Canada, (the two places I've worked) it seems to me that it is almost always the case that the lower status families, individuals, and tribes tend to retain their language longest.

	Stan 

	---- Original Message ----- 

		From: Laurence D. Krute <mailto:krutel at mville.edu>  
		To: lgpolicy-list at ccat.sas.upenn.edu ; lgpolicy-list at ccat.sas.upenn.edu 
		Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 2:16 PM
		Subject: Re: 'Status' drives extinction of languages

		The process of community language shift are much more complex than the brief version of the article seems to indicate.

		Felecia's astute comment can be generalized; 'status' and other attitudinal factors matter a great deal, but status *according to whom* matters a great deal more, but perceived functionality, among many other factors, matters far more that that.

		Piaroa (Amazonas Territory, Venezuela, linguistic genetic isolate basically, possibly 13,000) strongly feel that their society, customs, and language are quite uniquely wonderful, special, and correct.  However, Piaroa are no more monolingual in Piaroa or even more bilingual in Piaroa and Spanish (as opposed to monolingual Spanish) than are surrounding indigenous groups, in the face of the equally strong beliefs to the contrary (that the language, customs, and people are bascially subhuman) by those whose views matter--local Spanish-speakers....(That is, Piaroa speakers are still giving up Piaroa.)

		Larry

		Dr. Laurence Krute
		Associate Dean--Graduate Advising
		School of Education
		Manhattanville College
		2900 Purchase Street Purchase, NY 10577
		voice:914 323-5366
		fax:914 323-5493

		-----Original Message-----
		From: "Felecia Briscoe" <Felecia.Briscoe at utsa.edu>
		Sent 2/14/2008 12:03:47 PM
		To: lgpolicy-list at ccat.sas.upenn.edu, lgpolicy-list at ccat.sas.upenn.edu
		Subject: RE: 'Status' drives extinction of languages

		Doesn't status really mean the language spoken by the group that controls the most resources?

		Felecia

		-----Original Message-----
		From: owner-lgpolicy-list at ccat.sas.upenn.edu on behalf of Stan & Sandy Anonby
		Sent: Thu 2/14/2008 11:54 AM
		To: lgpolicy-list at ccat.sas.upenn.edu
		Subject: Re: 'Status' drives extinction of languages

		Interesting. Sounds like it's broadly researched.  I've got a couple of
		comments.

		1) I wonder how widely the status argument can be applied. For instance, the
		article says the researchers point out that bilingual societies do exist:
		"But the histories of countries where two languages co-exist today generally
		involve split populations that lived without significant interaction,
		effectively in separate, monolingual societies. Only recently have these
		communities begun to mix, allowing language competition to begin."

		Maybe the populations lived without significant interaction because the
		status difference was so great. Maybe mixing happened recently only because
		the lower status language began to gain prestige.

		2) I believe that the increased status of French in Quebec may have helped
		in creating a larger percentage of speakers there. However, I think larger
		factors included the flight of English speakers and large immigration from
		Francophone countries.

		Stan Anonby

		----- Original Message -----
		From: "Harold Schiffman" <hfsclpp at gmail.com>
		To: "lp" <lgpolicy-list at ccat.sas.upenn.edu>
		Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 11:27 AM
		Subject: 'Status' drives extinction of languages

		> 'Status' drives extinction of languages
		> Bob Beale
		> ABC Science Online
		>
		> Thursday, 21 August 2003
		>
		>
		>
		>
		>
		> A language's status in society is the best way to predict if it is
		> headed for extinction Languages evolve and compete with each other
		> much like plants and animals, but those driven to extinction are
		> almost always tongues with a low social status, U.S. research shows.
		> The social status of a language is the most accurate way of predicting
		> whether it will survive, argue researchers in a paper appearing today
		> in the journal, Nature . They also suggest that active intervention to
		> boost the status of rare and endangered languages can save them.
		> "Thousands of the world's languages are vanishing at an alarming rate,
		> with 90% of them being expected to disappear with the current
		> generation," warned Dr Daniel Abrams and Professor Steven Strogatz,
		> both of Cornell University in New York.
		>
		> The pair have developed a simple mathematical model of language
		> competition to explain how dialects such as Welsh, Scottish Gaelic and
		> Quechua - the most common surviving indigenous language in the
		> Americas - have lost out to more dominant tongues.
		> The model is based on data they collected on the number of speakers of
		> endangered languages - in 42 regions of Peru, Scotland, Wales,
		> Bolivia, Ireland and Alsaçe-Lorraine - over time. All have been in
		> steep decline over the past century or so, and the model suggests that
		> Scottish Gaelic and Quechua will be close to extinct by about 2030.
		>
		> Previous models of language dynamics have focused on the transmission
		> and evolution of syntax, grammar or other structural properties of a
		> language itself. Yet by comparing various influences that help to
		> explain the steadily declining numbers of speakers of each language,
		> Abrams and Strogatz singled out status as the single most significant
		> factor that could predict its extinction threat.
		>
		> "Quechua, for example, still has many speakers in Huanuco, Peru," they
		> note. "But its low status is driving a rapid shift to Spanish, which
		> leads to an unfortunate situation in which a child cannot communicate
		> with his or her grandparents." A language's fate generally depends on
		> both its number of speakers and its perceived status, the latter
		> usually reflecting the social or economic opportunities afforded to
		> its speakers, they said. When two languages are in competition, the
		> one that offers the greatest opportunities to its speakers will
		> usually prevail.
		>
		> The researchers point out that bilingual societies do exist: "But the
		> histories of countries where two languages co-exist today generally
		> involve split populations that lived without significant interaction,
		> effectively in separate, monolingual societies. Only recently have
		> these communities begun to mix, allowing language competition to
		> begin." They urged active intervention to slow the global rate of
		> language decline, pointing out that their model also predicts that
		> higher status will keep a language alive. They also cite a real-life
		> instance where this has happened: "The example of Québec French
		> demonstrates that language decline can be slowed by strategies such as
		> policy-making, education and advertising, in essence increasing an
		> endangered language's status."
		> Similar measures may make a difference elsewhere, they argued.
		>
		> http://www.clipclip.org/Bevsiem/clips/detail/66166
		>
		> --
		> **************************************
		> N.b.: Listing on the lgpolicy-list is merely intended as a service to
		> its members
		> and implies neither approval, confirmation nor agreement by the owner
		> or sponsor of
		> the list as to the veracity of a message's contents. Members who
		> disagree with a
		> message are encouraged to post a rebuttal. (H. Schiffman, Moderator)
		> *******************************************
		>