[lg policy] A request
Christina Paulston
paulston at PITT.EDU
Mon Apr 11 21:48:45 UTC 2011
Are we having fun yet? Dear Mr Zaidi, I did not intend to be libelous
and insulting but merely responding to your " request [for] more
enlightenment on it". If you have taken my enlightenment, such as it
was without knowing the intent, purpose, genre, stance or ideology of
your scholarship, amiss I am most sorry. But you see, it is exactly
academics - at least in America - that can argue about facts, data,
and theories without taking such discussions personally. We find
them useful. I refer several times to certain areas of disagreements
between scholars -- it is a fact of our life. I prefer to think that
times have changed since Kipling wrote about East and West that
"never the twain shall meet". But you can be right about that when
you say we live in different worlds , and you can be right about the
Ethnologue's figures. But I don't have to believe it without being
insulting. I shall write the editor and ask how accurate they take
the Pakistan data to be. It is the primary English language resource
on data about the world's languages as you know. If you want to
discuss census data, we can do that too.
If I were you, I would not bother wasting your time on writing
rejoinders. They never achieve anything except amusement to the
readers. A civil question whether you are certain of your data
merely requires a "yes, I am" and documentation of same.
I am simply writing this note to say I am sorry if I have upset you
which seems to be the case. It was not my intention. Christina
On Apr 11, 2011, at 10:05 AM, Zaidi wrote:
> Friends
> I have read this email a couple of times and cannot believe that an
> academic
> can write such a libelous, insulting, and mind-boggling composition
> unless
> the goddess Fury has taken possession of them. I will not respond
> counter-libelously because we have come together on this list for
> better
> things than mudslinging.
>
> Also overwhelming is this author's knowledge of the situation of
> Punjabi in
> Pakistan. All sociolinguistic studies on Punjabi in Pakistan (e.g.,
> Mansoor,
> 1993; Rahman, 1996 and 2002; Imtiaz-Asif, 2005) have said that
> Punjabi is
> undergoing a shift. The author of this email lives in a different
> world. I
> will write a detailed rejoinder in order to show that not a single
> observation in this email carries weight. But at a later date
> because I must
> complete a couple of manuscripts, and I am running against a deadline.
>
> Regards.
> Abbas Zaidi
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: lgpolicy-list-bounces at groups.sas.upenn.edu
> [mailto:lgpolicy-list-bounces at groups.sas.upenn.edu] On Behalf Of
> Christina
> Paulston
> Sent: Monday, April 11, 2011 7:09 AM
> To: Language Policy List
> Subject: Re: [lg policy] A request
>
> As you have all seen, Dr. Schiffman has asked me to keep this
> discussion on
> the list. First a few questions to Abbas Zaidi.
> "My referee" refers to whom? Are you writing a dissertation? Or
> are you
> involved in some kind of competition and the referee is your judge?
> Does not
> seem likely. My basic question is Why do you have to pay attention
> to what
> your referee thinks. In the real world that is of some importance,
> even in
> defining concepts and data.
> Second question, are you sure your data are correct? I don't really
> believe you and here is why. In 1982 The Ethnologue lists about 58
> million
> speakers of Panjabi, in 2005 it lists 60 and a half million
> speakers, ie a
> gain of 2 million speakers. Pakistan has a literacy rate of 26% so
> your %
> of educated Panjabi speakers is not likely to
> be high; it is a standardized written language with all forms of
> oral media, film, radio, and TV, and furthermore it is an official
> state
> language in India. All these are factors which contribute to lge
> maintenance. I have no economic data which would argue for shift
> ( I am not
> saying that there aren't any, just that I don't know them ) but if
> Pakistan
> Punjab is like the India Punjab I knew, the majority of Panjabi
> speakers
> live off the soil, another factor which tends toward maintenance.
> In short,
> Panjabi strikes me as a very poor candidate for language shift so
> why are
> you doing this study.
> To keep your referee happy whoever s/he be, I suggest you follow
> Myers-Scotton's implied suggestion and use majority-minority languages
> ONLY quantitatively and for comparing or labeling demographic data
> which incidentally your government is not very keen on having made
> public
> (personal communication). So to answer your question, if you want to
> present Panjabi as a minority language, do not use that term but as
> Vilfan
> (1993) suggests instead label it a non-dominant or non- privileged
> language
> to which I would add subordinate (Paulston 1994) and make very sure
> that you
> discuss the social factors that make you draw such a conclusion that
> it is
> subordinate. You have mentioned one, is not used as medium of
> education.
> What else?
> Religion was the rationale for the creation of Pakistan, how does that
> influence language policies. You will have explicit but also implicit
> rationales for these language policies. Do you know what they are?
> I would
> guess that most of them serve to keep the elites as elites, that is
> also a
> form of maintenance that often results in status quo. What about East
> Bengal; what influence does history have on the language
> situation? What
> is your own ideology behind wanting to declare Panjabi as a minority
> language? What questions do you want to answer?
> I can't really answer your question about similar situations because
> I don't trust your description of it. Could you restate the
> question? You
> must have in mind something like a situation where the majority of
> the
> population speaks a language which is ignored officially by the
> government?
> You will find, as you mention with Wolof, tthat different degrees of
> it will
> exist in most of sub-Sahara Africa. It will be your task to
> document the
> degree. Do private schools teach Panjabi? Does a doctor in a Lahore
> hospital speak to a Panjabi speaking patient in Panjabi? The
> Ethnolinguistic Vitality tests are based on categories for LMS that
> can
> guide you in setting questions, not for shift but for how much the
> government ignores or discriminates or exploits or ? ?
> whatever the social factors are for answering your questions.
>
>
>
> On Apr 9, 2011, at 9:43 PM, Zaidi wrote:
>
>>
>> Dr Christina
>> Many thanks for your response. Let me be specific. Punjabi is the
>> majority language of Pakistan (over 60 percent of Pakistanis are
>> native speakers of Punjabi). But Punjabi is absent from school to
>> university, media (print and electronic), and all the significant
>> state institutions. Punjabis themselves consider it a vulgar language
>> and educated Punjabis do not speak it to their children. Thus, there
>> is little intergenerational transmission of Punjabi.
>> In terms of both Objective and Subjective Ethnolingusitic Vitality,
>> Punjabi is seriously undermined. In this scenario, a Language
>> Maintenance and Language Shift (LMLS) study on Punjabi will take it
>> not as THE majority language, but A minority language. Now my
>> question
>> is: Does such a situation prevail elsewhere? Are there any
>> references?
>> (I can think of Wolof at the moment.)There is however, another
>> interesting question: On what basis should Punjabi in Pakistan be
>> considered a minority language? This may sound strange because I have
>> given reasons above to support my view (that Punjabi should be
>> considered a minority language). But my referee is not satisfied with
>> this line of argument.
>>
>> I request more enlightenment on it.
>> Regards.
>> Abbas Zaidi
>>
>>
>>
>> If by majority, you mean numbers and by minority subordinate groups
>> in
>> a nation state, all the native languages of RSA under apartheid ( and
>> probably to a degree still) would be examples. ( If you are picky,
>> you
>> can probably find tribal languages of less than the 3 million
>> speakers -- rough estimate of Afrikaans speakers -- which would then
>> not qualify). If by majority you mean superordinate but small in
>> numbers, the Afrikaners of same time is an example, the Swedes in
>> Finland during joint kingdom days, etc. With increasing number of
>> democratic countries, and increasing clout through actual votes, the
>> first example is becoming less common. We (sociology of language
>> people ) don't see very much in the literature of split power between
>> groups, e.g. Quebec which had Anglo economic power and Francophone
>> demographic, meaning majority votes, power but the present language
>> policies are a result of this split power. The Francophone concern
>> for Canadian minority language rights has not extended to their
>> indigenous population.
>> If I have misinterpreted your question, you will have to define your
>>
>> terms which I suggest you do anyway. It will make for less confusion.
>> But I am guilty of the same; I ( and sociolinguists in general) throw
>> the concept of power around without much or any analysis of sources
>> and explication in general. If anyone has a useful definition,
>> analysis of power, I would love a reference or two. By useful I mean
>> as a concept that can do solid work on the language scene. Any poli
>> sci people out there? Christina
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Apr 9, 2011, at 11:53 AM, Zaidi wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Friends
>>> In what context(s) can a majority language be considered a minority
>>> language? Are there some examples?
>>> Many thanks and Regards.
>>> Abbas Zaidi
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> This message came to you by way of the lgpolicy-list mailing list
>>> lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu
>>> To manage your subscription unsubscribe, or arrange digest format:
>>> https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/listinfo/lgpolicy-list
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> This message came to you by way of the lgpolicy-list mailing list
>> lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu
>> To manage your subscription unsubscribe, or arrange digest format:
>> https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/listinfo/lgpolicy-list
>>
>> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
>> signature database 6029 (20110409) __________
>>
>> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>>
>> http://www.eset.com
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> This message came to you by way of the lgpolicy-list mailing list
>> lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu
>> To manage your subscription unsubscribe, or arrange digest format:
>> https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/listinfo/lgpolicy-list
>
> _______________________________________________
> This message came to you by way of the lgpolicy-list mailing list
> lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu
> To manage your subscription unsubscribe, or arrange digest format:
> https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/listinfo/lgpolicy-list
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> signature
> database 6032 (20110411) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> This message came to you by way of the lgpolicy-list mailing list
> lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu
> To manage your subscription unsubscribe, or arrange digest format: https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/listinfo/lgpolicy-list
_______________________________________________
This message came to you by way of the lgpolicy-list mailing list
lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu
To manage your subscription unsubscribe, or arrange digest format: https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/listinfo/lgpolicy-list
More information about the Lgpolicy-list
mailing list