LL-L "Language politics" 2005.04.26 (02) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 26.APR.2005 (02) * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
http://www.lowlands-l.net * lowlands-l at lowlands-l.net
Rules & Guidelines: http://www.lowlands-l.net/index.php?page=rules
Posting: lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org or lowlands-l at lowlands-l.net
Commands ("signoff lowlands-l" etc.): listserv at listserv.net
Server Manual: http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/userindex.html
Archives: http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html
Encoding: Unicode (UTF-8) [Please switch your view mode to it.]
=======================================================================
You have received this because you have been subscribed upon request.
To unsubscribe, please send the command "signoff lowlands-l" as message
text from the same account to listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org or
sign off at http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html.
=======================================================================
A=Afrikaans Ap=Appalachian B=Brabantish D=Dutch E=English F=Frisian
L=Limburgish LS=Lowlands Saxon (Low German) N=Northumbrian
S=Scots Sh=Shetlandic V=(West) Flemish Z=Zeelandic (Zeêuws)
=======================================================================

From: Críostóir Ó Ciardha <paada_please at yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: LL-L "Language politics" 2005.04.25 (02) [E]


Ron wrote:
"Please do not misunderstand me. I am just wondering about it and about what
others feel, and I feel we need to examine several sides of the issue. Is it
a case of "desperate times require desperate measures" and "all that counts
is survival"? I think that this may be an area where language rights and
human rights clearly touch each other and may even clash with each other..."

This is certainly the case. I think of Latvia and Latvian as something of a
special case, because of the influx of Russophone Soviet settlers that
almost reduced Latvians to a minority (if Latvia had been in the Soviet
Union another ten years I believe this would have taken place) and
endangered the survival of Latvian. There is little chance that Latvian
could have achieved its present pre-eminent status in Latvia if Russian had
remained a co-official language. Many of the Russophones were openly
anti-Latvian language, and saw no social, political or economic advantage in
obtaining any Latvian. Now that cannot be said to be the case.

Another comparison might be with English immigrants to Wales. For decades
there was no need for English immigrants to Welsh-speaking areas to learn a
word of Welsh, because English was (and is) the dominant language of the UK.
However, things appear to be changing if census data are to be believed, and
a large number of those born outside Wales have acquired some skills in the
language. While much has to be done - especially with regard to second home
owners and the like - the reality is that Welsh is seen as a social,
political and economic asset today.

Ron also wrote:
"Requiring display of Irish along with English in Ireland is one thing.
Prohibiting the display of English and all other languages would be an
entirely different thing, would it not?"

Your statement raises two responses. Firstly, Irish is, under the
Constitution, the "national and first official language". Consequently, the
Government is legally beholden to give precedence to Irish. I say
"precedence" because the wording is "first" official language (English is
the "second"). Of course, the Irish Government does not follow its own rules
(and in fact finds inventive ways to circumnavigate those rules) so that
Irish is rarely used officially, and then only as an afterthought. Secondly,
I think prohibition of English on signage or other official uses in the
Gaeltacht, where the majority of the population is supposed to have Irish as
its daily language, is not only desirable but absolutely necessary. What,
otherwise, is the point in having a Gaeltacht than to uphold the usage -
both publicly and privately - of Irish as the main or only language of daily
communication?

It would be an easy and wonderful thing if Ireland became truly bilingual a
la Finland, Canada or Wales, but there's too many anti-Irish Irish [sic] -
especially in Government - for that to ever happen in my pessimistic
assessment. Irish is considered a useless family heirloom - pretty to look
at and remind us where we came from, but best left in the attic and not
shown to too many visitors.

Go raibh maith agat,

Criostóir

-----------

From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
Subject: Language politics

Thank you very much for your well-worded response, Críostóir, and for
presenting another aspect to us.  It's good to have someone so well informed
about these matters on board.

I can certainly see why you would think of the Latvian case as a special,
pretty much desperate, case, although I still have serious reservations
regarding the thought of the language police banging on people's doors.

Regards,
Reinhard/Ron

==============================END===================================
* Please submit postings to lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org.
* Postings will be displayed unedited in digest form.
* Please display only the relevant parts of quotes in your replies.
* Commands for automated functions (including "signoff lowlands-l") are
  to be sent to listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org or at
  http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html.
======================================================================