Gender neutrality and language

Mon Mar 3 01:48:02 UTC 2008

It's intererestng as Harold's example shows that the same the same
tradition of Biblical translation can lead to close mindedness on the
one hand and spiritual exploration on the other. As this mailing list
frequently illustrates it can be hard to attach an absolute value to
role of the vernacular, apart from its political uses. In the 15th
century the Catholic church in England asserted their authority by
surpressing the English Bible; 200 years later the Anglican church
reinforced its claims by promoting another translaton, the canonical
King James version -- part of whose importance attached its scholarly
fidelity to the original Hebrew as opposed to the Latin version, which
was the basis of earlier English translatiions..

As a theoretical linguist who long ago escaped into medieval studies,
I'm fascinated by how modern debates over language policy echo
language conflicts throughout history, not to mention how rife
contemporary debates are with their own historical & cultural
mythologies.

-Jeff

On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 4:51 PM, Harold Schiffman <haroldfs at gmail.com> wrote:
> I like to cite an example of something that happened in my language policy
> class, where
> (as Jeff notes) I devote a chunk of time to religion as a factor in language
> policy.  I was talking
> about the Reformation, and the importance of the translation of the Bible
> into vernaculars
> which had never been used for writing before, and mentioned that there were
> people in the US (at
> least) who did not realize that the English bible was a translation.  A
> young woman in the front
> row of the class gasped audibly, and stared at the floor for a moment or two
> with her mouth gaping
> open.  At first I thought it was a joke, but it wasn't. She really hadn't
> realized before that the bible
> was translated from other languages.
>
> If you look at the political storms that ensued when people began to
> translate the bible, especially
> in England (where people were burned at the stake for doing so etc.) it
> turns  out that it's intensely
> political what choices people make when they do translate, especially
> certain terms. The church
> fought translation precisely because they couldn't control what people would
> do and which words they
> would choose for terms like 'espiritus' ('spirit? or ghost?) (congregation?
> or church?) and furthermore,
> by placing the bible in the hands of untrained or 'unorthodox' people, they
> might draw their own conclusions about what it
> said, and what certain things meant!  And of course when the reformation was
> carried out, that's exactly
> what happened, and why we have so many protestant sects and schisms  in the
> US  in particular,  which
> differ from each other over such issues as whether Jonah was swallowed by an
> actual whale, or whether
> the story of Jonah is a metaphor for something else.
>
> Hal Schiffman
>
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 10:20 AM, Jeff Gross <jmgross1 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Jason's question, 'How often is religion invoked in discussions of
> > language policy across the world?' is a disarmingly important one.
> > Historically, there have to be few factors greater than religion in
> > shaping the growth and spread of languages and the complex role
> > language plays in people's lives. Obvious examples are Hebrew as the
> > official language of the state of Israel or Arabic as the dominant
> > language of an educated and priestly caste throughout the Muslim umma.
> > Another place to look is the role of missionaries in education and the
> > promotion of a written standard -- whether by St. Cyril in the 5th
> > century or Spanish Jesuits in the 16th or Christian evangelicals in
> > the 20th. To the extent that a particular language, scriptural or
> > otherwise, is associated with a religious faith, and that faith shapes
> > a country or region's social and political life, the implications of
> > religion on language policy will always be deep and complex.
> >
> > Harold Schiffman's Linguistic Culture and Language Policy devotes some
> > interesting pages to this issue, as does Bernard Spolsky's Language
> > Policy. Spolsky cites Charles Ferguson's 1982 article, 'Religious
> > Factors in Language Spread', as the standard scholarly discussion on
> > the subject.
> >
> > Jeff Gross
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Mar 1, 2008 at 8:21 PM, Siegel, Jason F. <siegeljf at indiana.edu>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > In an effort to redirect the discussion back to language policy and
> > > away from a topic that could easily be argued about with no end in
> > > sight, I would like to take the opportunity to pose a question to the
> > > list (and this is the genuine inquiry of a relative newcomer to the
> > > field): How often is religion invoked in discussions of language policy
> > > across the world? I've heard the old quote in support of Official
> > > English in the U.S. "If it's good enough for Jesus, it's good enough
> > > for me." (attributed to various people). In the research I've done on
> > > French policy, however, religion seems to be completely absent from the
> > > public discourse on language policy. So again, how frequently do
> > > religious concerns form a part of the discussion of language policy? Do
> > > we see it more often in certain types of language policy (e.g.
> > > feminization) than in others (e.g. acquisition planning)?
> > >
> > > --Jason
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jason F. Siegel
> > > Ph.D. Student, Linguistics & French Linguistics
> > > Department of French & Italian
> > > Ballantine Hall 642
> > > 1020 East Kirkwood Avenue
> > > Indiana University
> > > Bloomington, IN 47405-7103
> > > USA
> > > siegeljf at indiana.edu
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Quoting L Pierce <ldpierce at yahoo.com>:
> > >
> > > > It's recorded in the BIble.  You can read the history
> > > > for yourself, as you can read the histories of the
> > > > previously quoted men (quoted by an earlier
> > > > contributor) in other recorded histories; I gather
> > > > that is the empirical evidence you have for them.  I
> > > > don't really know why you want to change the issue,
> > > > but I am happy to answer your question.
> > > >
> > > > Lisa
> > > >
> > > > --- Ronald Kephart <rkephart at unf.edu> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> On 2/29/08 7:13 PM, "L Pierce" <ldpierce at yahoo.com>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > What some ignorant men wrote hundreds of years ago
> > > >> did
> > > >> > not create the order, God did...
> > > >>
> > > >>  We have empirical evidence that men wrote those
> > > >> rules. Do you have the same
> > > >> quality evidence for your assertion?
> > > >>
> > > >> Ron
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> > > > Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page.
> > > > http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
>
> Harold F. Schiffman
>
> Professor Emeritus of
> Dravidian Linguistics and Culture
> Dept. of South Asia Studies
> University of Pennsylvania
> Philadelphia, PA 19104-6305
>
> Phone:  (215) 898-7475
> Fax:  (215) 573-2138
>
> Email:  haroldfs at gmail.com
> http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~haroldfs/
>
> -------------------------------------------------