35.2914, Review: Applied Linguistics: Linn and Dayán-Fernández (eds.) (2024)

[The LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List: Vol-35-2914. Sat Oct 19 2024. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 35.2914, Review: Applied Linguistics: Linn and Dayán-Fernández (eds.) (2024)

Moderator: Steven Moran (linguist at linguistlist.org)
Managing Editor: Justin Fuller
Team: Helen Aristar-Dry, Steven Franks, Joel Jenkins, Daniel Swanson, Erin Steitz
Jobs: jobs at linguistlist.org | Conferences: callconf at linguistlist.org | Pubs: pubs at linguistlist.org

Homepage: http://linguistlist.org

Editor for this issue: Joel Jenkins <joel at linguistlist.org>

================================================================


Date: 19-Oct-2024
From: Vasiliki Vita [675802 at soas.ac.uk]
Subject: Applied Linguistics: Linn and Dayán-Fernández (eds.) (2024)


Book announced at https://linguistlist.org/issues/35.1530

EDITOR: Mary S. Linn
EDITOR: Alejandro Dayán-Fernández
TITLE: Agency in the Peripheries of Language Revitalisation
SUBTITLE: Examining European Practices on the Ground
SERIES TITLE: Multilingual Matters
PUBLISHER: Multilingual Matters
YEAR: 2024

REVIEWER: Vasiliki Vita

SUMMARY

Linn & Dayán-Fernández's (2024) book is organised in discussing a
series of European language revitalisation case studies that are part
of the SMiLE project funded by the Smithsonian Center for Folklife and
Cultural Heritage. In the Preface and Acknowledgements, Linn provides
the timeline and background of the case studies, arguing that although
“the case studies are within European contexts, the issues and
questions are universal, the strategies for gaining agency are
replicable, and the insights are transportable”. The first three case
studies, coming after the editors’ introduction, focus on Irish,
Galician, and Sorbian, followed by a commentary from Ó hIfearnáin
(2024). "Tús Maith: Empowering Children’s Agentive Role in Language
Revitalisation" by Cassie Smith-Christmas and Orlaith Ruiséal examines
how children can play an active role in the revitalisation of minority
languages. Using the Tús Maith (A Good Start) program in Ireland,
which supports Irish language learning in early childhood education,
the authors argue that children are not just passive recipients but
active agents in language transmission. The study highlights the
importance of creating supportive linguistic environments where
children feel empowered to use and promote the target language,
contributing to its revitalization efforts.

"Sowing the Seeds at Semente: Urban Breathing Spaces and New Speaker
Agency" by Bernadette O’Rourke and Alejandro Dayán-Fernández explores
the role of "Semente" schools in the revitalisation of Galician, a
minority language in Spain. These urban schools create ‘breathing
spaces’ where the language can flourish, offering immersive
environments for young children and their families. The study
emphasizes the importance of new speakers—individuals who adopt a
minority language later in life—in driving language revitalisation,
highlighting their agency in promoting and sustaining Galician within
urban contexts. Finally, "The Dynamics of a Triangle of Agency:
Sorbian Language Policy" by Nicole Dołowy-Rybińska and Cordula
Ratajczak examines the interaction between three key
agents—institutions, communities, and individuals—in the
revitalisation of Sorbian, a minority language in Germany. The
‘triangle of agency’ framework analyzes how these actors influence
language policies and practices, with institutions shaping language
planning, communities fostering collective support, and individuals
acting as active agents in using and transmitting the language. The
authors argue that a balanced collaboration between all three agents
is essential for the successful revitalisation and survival of
Sorbian. "Commentary: Language Conflict and the Contextual Nature of
Agency" by Tadhg Ó hIfearnáin reflects on the complex and contextual
nature of individual and collective agency in language conflicts,
especially in minority language situations. Ó hIfearnáin discusses how
language agency is shaped by sociopolitical, cultural, and historical
contexts, influencing whether individuals feel empowered or
constrained in their linguistic choices. He emphasises that agency in
language revitalisation or conflict is not static but fluctuates
depending on external pressures, resources, and opportunities
available to language speakers and communities.

The next three cases studies present issues, strategies and insights
from Griko, North Frisian, and Occitan, followed by a commentary from
Grenoble (2024). "I Was There: Agency, Authority and Morality Among
the Griko Linguistic Minority of Southern Italy (Apulia)" by Manuela
Pellegrino explores how members of the Griko-speaking community in
Southern Italy engage with language revitalisation. Pellegrino focuses
on the role of personal and collective agency in efforts to preserve
Griko, highlighting the tension between local authority figures, such
as cultural activists, and the broader community. The article delves
into how notions of morality, responsibility, and authenticity shape
the decisions of individuals involved in language revitalisation,
illustrating the complexities of agency within minority language
contexts. Lena Terhart, Femmy Admiraal, and Nils Langer’s "Which North
Frisian Should Be Maintained? Exploring Language Attitudes and Agency
of Speakers and Non-Speakers" investigates the diverse attitudes
toward the preservation of North Frisian, a minority language in
Germany, among both speakers and non-speakers. The authors explore
which dialects of North Frisian are considered worth maintaining and
the factors influencing these choices. They highlight the role of
individual and collective agency in language preservation, showing how
speakers and non-speakers navigate identity, cultural heritage, and
practical considerations when deciding which varieties of the language
should be prioritised for revitalisation.

Sara C. Brennan in "Reconsidering Agency in 21st-Century Language
Revitalisation: Insight from the Occitan Context" reexamines the
concept of agency in modern language revitalisation efforts, using the
case of Occitan in southern France. Brennan challenges traditional
views of top-down revitalisation strategies, instead highlighting the
crucial role of grassroots movements and individual agency in
sustaining minority languages. The study emphasises how new speakers,
activists, and local communities adapt to contemporary social and
political conditions, finding innovative ways to promote and use
Occitan despite institutional neglect. It calls for a more nuanced
understanding of agency that accounts for shifting dynamics in
21st-century language revitalisation. Lenore A. Grenoble's
"Commentary: Rethinking Agency" argues that traditional views of
agency, which focus on individual choice, are limited in capturing the
complexity of language use. She proposes a more nuanced perspective
that incorporates the influence of sociocultural and structural
factors on language practices. By considering both personal intentions
and external constraints, Grenoble suggests a deeper understanding of
how agency functions in diverse contexts.

The significance of the book does not lie only in the universality,
replicability and transferability of the content, but also in the
shift of perspective regarding language revitalisation. This further
complicates the narrative surrounding Fishman's (1991) question, “Can
threatened languages be saved?”. In the Introduction, Linn &
Dáyan-Fernández (2024) deal with language revitalisation as
reclamation (Leonard 2012), where the focus is not on the language
itself but social transformation. That is, projects, activities, or
schools are not in the centre, but rather agency, that is who is
saving threatened languages, and particularly, where. The answer comes
from the peripheries, local actions by grassroots community actors who
are more and more new speakers. In the Conclusion, Costa (2024)
attempts a redefinition of agency in the context of language
revitalisation, where it is defined as the creation of a critical
mass. This mass is created through affections, products of
interactions that determine modifications in the body and result in
action. The mass in turn, through its intrinsic capacity, as a
collection of affections, mobilises and moves other sectors of society
to act in favour of what it stands for. Through critical discourse
analysis, the authors discuss issues of conflict, responsibility,
evaluation, and ‘breathing spaces’. In those spaces, language
revitalisation does not necessarily focus on language learning and new
speakers, but to (re)build, heal and wellness. It is initiated,
determined and situated locally, aiming to reposition the centre. The
focus is not on linguists but practitioners teaching and advocating
for the language on the ground, where communities of practise “share
concern or passion [or affections] for their language and regularly
working to improve their own or others’ ability to identify with
and/or use the language” (Linn & Dáyan-Fernández 2024: 6).

EVALUATION

The agents discussed in the case studies face several limitations such
as lack of power, or limited mass in Costa’s terms, and resistance
about whose idea of community will be (re)built and by whom. But the
agency of the next generation more and more comes to the forefront.
Smith-Christmas & Ruiséal (2024) focus on children’s agency,
recognising the important role of parents within the environment that
allows for their agency. Of course, they are not passive receivers,
but at the same time it is parents’ responsibility to create that
space, like Fishman’s father passing on responsibility for Yiddish (Ó
hIfearnáin 2024). The concept of ‘Saibhreas’ presented in
Smith-Christmas & Ruiséal (2024) focuses on children acquiring and
using their language skills to participate in socialisation, that is,
language competence. In a sense, their choices can be seen as acts of
conflict or resistance, where they language accordingly. Although,
preserving the language for children and the future generation is many
times cited as a central motivation for language revitalisation, this
paper repositions the focus from children as passive receivers of
knowledge to actors. This suggests avenues for future research in
terms of reconsidering ownership and activities to expand the critical
mass for social transformation.

Reactions to multilingualism in all case studies are ambivalent. For
example, Terhart, Admiraal & Langer (2024) discuss how learners of
North Frisian react negatively to native speakers’ ‘mistakes’. At the
same time, ‘mistakes’ seem to be defined as variation emerging from
language change, and mixing with German and Danish. Regardless, in
this case, maintenance is stable, because of the lack of overt
conflict from the majority group. “Revitalisation movements [after
all] start because the language is deemed valuable by an outside,
dominant group which the dominated group seeks to emulate in order to
gain recognition” (Costa 2024: 167). Too strong institutional support,
as in the Sorbian case, (Dołowy-Rybińska & Ratajczak 2024) promotes
passivity, rendering the language a symbol of regional identity. In
the Galician case, the lack of top-down support further enhances
motivations for learning and speaking the language as a symbol of
resistance (O’Rourke & Dayán-Fernández 2024). In the North Frisian
case, the lack of conflict with the acceptance of the language from
non-speakers as a symbol of regional identity further encourages
passivity (Terhart, Admiraal & Langer 2024). In both cases,
accommodation not to create any conflict leads to passivity, and thus,
inaction. Central in both cases is schooling, since speakers evaluate
that, since the language is in the landscape, in schools and
nurseries, and parents raise their children in the language, it is
safe. Concurrently, mixing is also seen negatively. The purist
ideologies described for Griko, where speakers do not feel comfortable
with introducing to the language neither Modern Greek, nor Italian
(Pellegrino 2024), highlight speakers’ resistance, and, from a
different perspective, responsibility, toward an idealised, imagined
variety (Grenoble 2024).

The moral right to represent Griko, a moral duty towards the language
and its speakers, past and present brings to the forefront questions
about ‘language’ and what constitutes it. ‘Language rights’ and ‘no
need for named languages’ are both seen as problematic (Linn &
Dáyan-Fernández 2024). Although, it is understandable and reasonable
because of the importance of considering the ongoing colonial contexts
in which language revitalisation happens, representation still
matters. Instead of limiting representations of a language,
particularly when its representations are a 30-hour audio and video
documentation project, it is important to avoid their becoming
representations of the people who claim it, and by extension also of
their political sovereignty (Leonard 2018). For example, in the case
of Sonsorolese in Micronesia, this relates to how not only ethnic
Palauans, but also foreigners talk about the Sonsorolese languages.
Daphne Nestor shared the admonition that we should not talk about
Sonsorolese as Echangese, which is the name of the hamlet many
speakers reside in Koror, because this further promotes the ideology
that Sonsorolese is a lesser dialect of Palauan that Palauans do not
understand, rather than a completely different language (Vita & Nestor
2023). This further supports the criticism that western linguistics
still treats languages as arbitrary codes (McCarty 2018). Considering
that many minoritised contexts in Europe have experienced extensive
internalised colonisation, a recommendation would be for language
revitalisation researchers in Europe to further investigate such
matters, as colonisation of the language is currently happening in
some places already (Skrodzka et al. 2020).

Nonetheless, the Griko situation still arguably constitutes one of
inaction where the language is a passion, a fascination, that belongs
to the authority of older generations because of their competence.
That is, the language needs representation from those who carry with
them an embodied experience of the language, the older generation,
rather than those who are inheriting it, new and emerging speakers.
Despite the superficial passivity, there is still conflict, not only
in terms of multilingualism, that is, language mixing and change, but
also in terms of authority guided by competence. This fluctuates in a
continuum between speakers of the past, the present, and language
experts, all assigned different degrees of competence, and thus
authority. Here too, schooling further perpetuates this lack of
conflict, since it focuses on replicating past cultural and linguistic
artefacts by re-introducing language that has gone into disuse
(Pellegrino 2024). Language as symbol here focuses on heritage, not
place like in the other two examples. Language, place and heritage,
all connected to roots, can also be connected to each other but not
always. Yet, they have the potential to be motivating. The resistance
here too, as with Galician (O’Rourke & Dayán-Fernández 2024), is
towards potential—and this is important—institutional powers that may
push for teaching the language as a foreign language influencing
competence in the language. A solution to these cases of inaction,
conflict, and resistance, is arguably offered by Smith-Christmas &
Ruiséal’s (2024) concept of ‘Saibhreas’. This is related to
competence, where language is coherent, local and embodied, and can be
applied not only in the case of Irish, but anywhere. This could happen
by identifying locally conceived and appropriate responses to the
challenge of language revitalisation (Ó hIfearnáin 2024). The concept
does not replace or challenge previous efforts of revitalisation, not
contradict formal education but validates a logical local
understanding of the purpose and role of the language offering
required resistance or conflict with colonial languages.

Iteration, projectivity and practical evaluation are seen as central
factors in human agency, where iteration relates to social engagements
informed by the past, that are projective, that is, oriented towards
the future, and evaluative of the present (Emirbayer & Mische 1998).
However, it seems that in all cases iteration is missing, since after
the evaluation there is no further activity. In all cases, the desire
for a lack of conflict is evident, especially when it concerns the
role of schooling. Schooling, not education, is not questioned.
Although the authors argue that the concept does not contradict formal
education, understandably schooling, it arguably should be
investigated. Some scholars suggest that schools can support language
revitalisation by making indigenous languages visible and valued
(Hornberger 2008), in other words, by providing places of conflict
with colonial languages. Others argue for the decolonisation of
education by identifying alternatives to schooling and adopting
indigenous educational models (Kupferman 2013). Such an effort
requires reflection on the ongoing influence of western educational
models, the economic dependency on international funding, in many of
the cases in the case studies that would be EU funding, and the
pressures of globalisation. At the same time, the alternatives
identified so far, such as immersion programmes, present various
limitations especially when they do not consider the ongoing colonial
contexts in which language reclamation occurs (Chew, Leonard &
Rosenblum 2023).

Perhaps schooling and the education system in the way it functions in
Europe might be difficult or almost impossible to change, since as
speakers of Sorbian note “any change of the system is risky because it
is never possible to predict all the consequences of the change”
(Dołowy-Rybińska & Ratajczak 2024: 68). The goals the authors set to
achieve, of, first, presenting case studies that are universal,
replicable, and transportable, and second, of shifting the focus from
the centre to the peripheries, have definitely been achieved, as
discussed comparatively with other contexts. However, the question of
education that continuously comes up across the chapters remains
unanswered. If agency is related to affections (Costa 2024), where
language revitalisation is dependent on responsibility,
conflict/resistance, desire, locality, and the degree of embodiment,
education, if it is to support language revitalisation, should
arguably reflect, support and cultivate that. For example, the
activities presented in Smith-Christmas & Ruiséal (2024) reflect and
cultivate resistance, in the sense of children making choices about
their language practises, locality, as they are sent in familial and
familiar contexts, and finally, a high degree of embodiment, where
children engage in ‘fun’. The argument for reconsidering education is
further supported by the fact that all contributors to this book, in
one way or another, discuss ‘breathing spaces’, or safe spaces, that
highlight the importance of ‘fun’. These breathing spaces can be fun
for children and/or adults, at cafés, bars, social centres, parks, as
in the cases of Galician (O’Rourke & Dayán-Fernández 2024) and Occitan
(Brennan 2024), and performance events, as in the case of Griko
(Pellegrino 2024). These present examples of places of “transformative
pedagogy” with the values of coeducation, laicity, assembly-based
decision-making, respect for child autonomy, respect for the
environment. If these are the values that successfully promote social
inclusivity, a question to consider next is whether education systems
in Europe and elsewhere actively promote and act upon them, and what
possible iteration they promise to escape present and future
passivity.

REFERENCES

Brennan, Sara C. 2024. 6 Reconsidering Agency in 21st-Century Language
Revitalisation: Insight from the Occitan Context. In Mary S. Linn &
Alejandro Dayán-Fernández (eds.), Agency in the Peripheries of
Language Revitalisation: Examining European Practices on the Ground,
138–161. Multilingual Matters.
https://doi.org/10.21832/9781800416277-010.

Chew, Kari A. B., Wesley Y. Leonard & Daisy Rosenblum. 2023. 34
Decolonizing Indigenous language pedagogies: Additional language
learning and teaching. In Carmen Dagostino, Marianne Mithun & Keren
Rice (eds.), The Languages and Linguistics of Indigenous North
America, 767–788. De Gruyter.
https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110712742-034.

Costa, James. 2024. Conclusion: Final Thoughts on Agency and Affects.
In Mary S. Linn & Alejandro Dayán-Fernández (eds.), Agency in the
Peripheries of Language Revitalisation: Examining European Practices
on the Ground, 167–172. Multilingual Matters.
https://doi.org/10.21832/9781800416277-012.

Dołowy-Rybińska, Nicole & Cordula Ratajczak. 2024. 3 The Dynamics of a
Triangle of Agency: Sorbian Language Policy. In Mary S. Linn &
Alejandro Dayán-Fernández (eds.), Agency in the Peripheries of
Language Revitalisation: Examining European Practices on the Ground,
62–83. Multilingual Matters.
https://doi.org/10.21832/9781800416277-006.

Emirbayer, Mustafa & Ann Mische. 1998. What Is Agency? American
Journal of Sociology 103(4). 962–1023. https://doi.org/10.1086/231294.

Fishman, Joshua A. 1991. Reversing language shift: theoretical and
empirical foundations of assistance to threatened languages
(Multilingual Matters 76). Clevedon ; Philadelphia: Multilingual
Matters.

Grenoble, Lenore A. 2024. Commentary: Rethinking Agency. In Mary S.
Linn & Alejandro Dayán-Fernández (eds.), Agency in the Peripheries of
Language Revitalisation: Examining European Practices on the Ground,
162–166. Multilingual Matters.
https://doi.org/10.21832/9781800416277-011.

Hornberger, Nancy H. (ed.). 2008. Can schools save indigenous
languages? policy and practice on four continents (Palgrave Studies in
Minority Languages and Communities). 1. publ. Basingstoke: Palgrave
Macmillan.

Kupferman, David W. 2013. Disassembling and Decolonizing School in the
Pacific: a genealogy from Micronesia (Contemporary Philosophies and
Theories in Education 5). London: Springer.

Leonard, Wesley Y. 2012. Reframing language reclamation programmes for
everybody’s empowerment. Gender and Language 6(2). 339–367.
https://doi.org/10.1558/genl.v6i2.339.

Leonard, Wesley Y. 2018. Reflections on (de)colonialism in language
documentation. University of Hawai’i Press.
http://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/handle/10125/24808. (13 November,
2021).

Linn, Mary S. & Alejandro Dáyan-Fernández. 2024. Introduction:
Sustaining Minoritised Languages in Europe: An Agentive Perspective on
Social Actors and Language Revitalisation. In Mary S. Linn & Alejandro
Dayán-Fernández (eds.), Agency in the Peripheries of Language
Revitalisation: Examining European Practices on the Ground, 1–22.
Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781800416277-003.

Linn, Mary S. & Alejandro Dayán-Fernández (eds.). 2024. Agency in the
Peripheries of Language Revitalisation: Examining European Practices
on the Ground. Multilingual Matters.
https://doi.org/10.21832/9781800416277.

McCarty, Teresa L. 2018. Indigenous Language Rights—Miner’s Canary or
Mariner’s Tern? In Kenneth L. Rehg & Lyle Campbell (eds.), The Oxford
Handbook of Endangered Languages, 0. Oxford University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190610029.013.6.

Ó hIfearnáin, Tadhg. 2024. Commentary: Language Confl ict and the
Contextual Nature of Agency. In Mary S. Linn & Alejandro
Dayán-Fernández (eds.), Agency in the Peripheries of Language
Revitalisation: Examining European Practices on the Ground, 84–90.
Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781800416277-007.

O’Rourke, Bernadette & Alejandro Dayán-Fernández. 2024. 2 Sowing the
Seeds at Semente: Urban Breathing Spaces and New Speaker Agency. In
Mary S. Linn & Alejandro Dayán-Fernández (eds.), Agency in the
Peripheries of Language Revitalisation: Examining European Practices
on the Ground, 43–61. Multilingual Matters.
https://doi.org/10.21832/9781800416277-005.

Pellegrino, Manuela. 2024. 4 I Was There: Agency, Authority and
Morality Among the Griko Linguistic Minority of Southern Italy
(Apulia). In Mary S. Linn & Alejandro Dayán-Fernández (eds.), Agency
in the Peripheries of Language Revitalisation: Examining European
Practices on the Ground, 93–114. Multilingual Matters.
https://doi.org/10.21832/9781800416277-008.

Skrodzka, Magdalena, Karolina Hansen, Justyna Olko & Michał Bilewicz.
2020. The Twofold Role of a Minority Language in Historical Trauma:
The Case of Lemko Minority in Poland. Journal of Language and Social
Psychology 39(4). 551–566. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X20932629.

Smith-Christmas, Cassie & Orlaith Ruiséal. 2024. 1 Tús Maith:
Empowering Children’s Agentive Role in Language Revitalisation. In
Mary S. Linn & Alejandro Dayán-Fernández (eds.), Agency in the
Peripheries of Language Revitalisation: Examining European Practices
on the Ground, 25–42. Multilingual Matters.
https://doi.org/10.21832/9781800416277-004.

Terhart, Lena, Femmy Admiraal & Nils Langer. 2024. 5 Which North
Frisian Should Be Maintained? Exploring Language Attitudes and Agency
of Speakers and Non-Speakers. In Mary S. Linn & Alejandro
Dayán-Fernández (eds.), Agency in the Peripheries of Language
Revitalisation: Examining European Practices on the Ground, 115–137.
Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781800416277-009.

Vita, Vasiliki & Daphne Nestor. 2023. “Hyper-collaboration” for the
documentation and maintenance of Sonsorolese. Seminar talk presented
at the Center for Research and Practice in Cultural Continuity
“Decolonizing approaches to studying history and linguistic-cultural
heritage. Methods, tools, results and challenges,” Online.
https://culturalcontinuity.al.uw.edu.pl/the-next-meeting-in-the-seminar-series-hyper-collaboration-for-the-documentation-and-maintenance-of-sonsorolese-vasiliki-vita-daphne-nestor-june-7-2023/.
(21 March, 2024).

ABOUT THE REVIEWER

Vasiliki Vita, SOAS University of London



------------------------------------------------------------------------------

********************** LINGUIST List Support ***********************
Please consider donating to the Linguist List to support the student editors:

https://www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted_button_id=87C2AXTVC4PP8

LINGUIST List is supported by the following publishers:

Bloomsbury Publishing http://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/

Brill http://www.brill.com

Cambridge University Press http://www.cambridge.org/linguistics

De Gruyter Mouton https://cloud.newsletter.degruyter.com/mouton

Edinburgh University Press https://edinburghuniversitypress.com

Elsevier Ltd http://www.elsevier.com/linguistics

Equinox Publishing Ltd http://www.equinoxpub.com/

European Language Resources Association (ELRA) http://www.elra.info

John Benjamins http://www.benjamins.com/

Language Science Press http://langsci-press.org

Lincom GmbH https://lincom-shop.eu/

Multilingual Matters http://www.multilingual-matters.com/

Narr Francke Attempto Verlag GmbH + Co. KG http://www.narr.de/

Oxford University Press http://www.oup.com/us

Wiley http://www.wiley.com


----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-35-2914
----------------------------------------------------------