(Fwd) Workshop Report

[B.Woll]

------- Forwarded Message Follows -------
Date sent:              Thu, 5 Jul 2001 17:43:31 +0100
Send reply to:          Stefan Wolff <S.Wolff at BATH.AC.UK>
From:                   Stefan Wolff <S.Wolff at BATH.AC.UK>
Subject:                Workshop Report
To:                     MIN-LANG at JISCMAIL.AC.UK

Please find below the workshop report compiled by Gabrielle and
distribute
it as widely as possible.

Thanks,
Stefan

Conference report

An international conference on Minority Languages in Europe:
Frameworks
Status  Prospects. A Pan-European comparative, multi-disciplinary
approach
, sponsored by the European Science Foundation, was held at the
University
of Bath on 8-10 June 2001. The aim of this event, which was organised by
Gabrielle Hogan-Brun (University of Bristol) and Stefan Wolff (University
of Bath) was to extend our existing knowledge and understanding of the
importance of minority languages within a democratic Europe and the need
for their adequate protection as part of our cultural heritage.

The keynote speakers were John Packer, (Director of the High Commission on
National Minorities, Organisation on Security and Cooperation in Europe,
The Hague, The Netherlands), Franois Grin (Deuty Director, European Centre
for Minority Issues, Flensburg, Germany) and Bencie Woll, (Chair in Sign
Language & Deaf Studies, Department of Language & Communication Science,
City University London).

24 short papers were presented, under the following seven topics:

1. Pan-European perspectives on language and ethnicity
Minority language communities in the age of globalization: Rethinking the
organization of human language diversity was the focus of the contribution
by Albert Bastardas-Boada (University of Barcelona, Spain). Considering
the impact of worldwide globalization processes and of European
unification on minority language communities he stressed the importance of
continued cultural diversity and the need to organize peaceful
co-existence. He suggested an 'ecological' principle as a way forward,
according to which stable habitats would be provided for sustainable
language communities, whilst at the same time assuring intercommunication
in Europe through an interlingua. It was his view that a global language,
though important for international communication, should have limited
functions, because of the application of the subsidiarity principle in
language use. Thus all communication functions that could be accomplished
by the local languages should not be allocated to the major or big
language or languages to preserve their functionality in all domains.

Camille OReilly, Richmond (The American University, London) spoke on
Minority languages, ethnicity and the state in the European union and
eastern Europe post 1989. Her paper entailed a comparative perspective,
comprising an overview of trends in both parts of Europe regarding the
politics of ethnicity and the position of minority language groups. She
explored the impact of EU policy and discourse on individual movements
within states, as well as on the overall orientation towards linguistic
heterogeneity and cultural diversity in both the East and West. She argued
that while the EU is moving away from an ideal of ethnic homogeneity
within states and towards a model of cultural and linguistic diversity
based on multiple and hybrid identities, most states in Eastern Europe
still take a largely modernist and homogenising approach, relying on the
ethnic nationalist ideal of the state.

2. Legal dimensions in the protection of minority languages and linguistic
minorities In his keynote speech John Packer (Director of the High
Commission on National Minorities, Organisation on Security and
Cooperation in Europe, The Hague, The Netherlands) clarified the role of
the OSCE High Commissioner on National minorities in the protection of
linguistic minorities, whose mandate is to de-escalate at the earliest
stage conflicting tensions involving national minority issues. Human
rights standards serve as an analytical framework in their work to
maximise freedom through non-discrimination, and to provide opportunities
through democratic, inclusive means in areas where disintegration and
conflicts arise.

The focus of the keynote by Franois Grin (Centre for Minority Issues,
Flensburg, Germany) was The effectiveness of various measures for the
protection of minority languages. Distinguishing between the two poles of
politics of language, where law is seen as normative, and language policy,
with its problem-oriented stance, he called for the need to put
appropriate strategies in place that give substance to the linguistic
rights of minorities. Such steps ought to involve appropriate policy
measures to ensure positive outcomes. He argued that evaluation of
language policy processes should involve the following three pillars:
capacity (creation of) opportunities  desire (attitudes to improvement) in
order to guarantee effectiveness.

Kristin Henrards (University of Groningen, The Netherlands) contribution
was on Devising an adequate system of minority protection: individual
human rights, minority  rights and the right to self-determination. Her
paper contained a critical assessment of the acquisition of current
minority right standards, whilst acknowledging their additional protection
as compared to individual human rights and thus their potential to
contribute to minority protection. She argued that qualified recognition
of internal self-determination for minorities could be an option to
further their integration without assimilation.

In his paper Linguistic diversity  pearl or stumbling bloc of EU-law?
Gabriel von Togggenburg (The European Academy, Bozen/Bolzano, South Tyrol,
Italy) discussed the legal attitude of the EU towards (its) minorities and
their languages. With reference to the Treaty of Amsterdam he showed that
minorities were not an issue in the economic and legal process of the
European integration, and that a lack of legal competencies in Primary law
at the European level was evident. He called for a new political
consciousness that should promote the recognition of minority and language
protection not only as a political export product but also as an internal
legal principle within the framework of the (enlarged) EU in order to
prevent minority languages from being macdonaldised through the (market
force driven) destruction of Europes linguistic variety.

3. Language status and ethnic linguistic identity
Facilitating or generating linguistic diversity? was the title by Mirad
Nic Craith (University of Liverpool, UK), who discussed the role of the
European Charter for Regional and Minority Languages (as a catalyst or
merely the facilitator of linguistic pluralism) in the context of a
multilingual Europe. Using a case study of Ulster-Scots in Northern
Ireland, she queried the emergence of new and disputed languages, whose
speakers then seek legitimacy under the terms of this Charter, and
explored their significance for the construction of regional identities.
With reference to the promotion of a Europe of the Regions, her paper
examined the reactions of speakers of more established minority languages
such as Irish to the emergence of such new and disputed tongues and asked
whether the promotion of a Europe of the Languages has served to maintain,
protect or to enhance the cultural diversity of its regions.

James OConnells (University of Bradford, UK) contribution dealt with The
failure of the Irish language revival: a problem for national identity.
Based on a historical analysis of linguistic development in Ireland, he
examined the intimate relationship of nationalism and language, paying
particular attention to the role of the Anglo-Irish, the nexus of language
and identity, and the search for other ingredients  the distinctive use of
English in Ireland and the literary revival, from Yeats to Heaney, from
O'Casey to Friei, from Joyce to Toibin  for the construction of a national
identity.

National minority-models for linguistic diversity was the focus of the
talk by Karen Margrethe Pedersen (Danish Institute for Border Region
Studies, Aabenraa, Denmark). She introduced the language situation of the
Danish-German border region Schleswig as a model that can contribute to a
development from confrontation to peaceful co-existence between majorities
and national minorities in a multilingual Europe. This national
minority-model relates to a functional regional bilingualism consisting of
the state language and two varieties of the minority language (the
standard language of the kin-state and a regional language containing
transfer phenomena), and to each language or variety having its own fields
of function with a high status. The system of variation of the regional
language, which is acquired as a minority second language, is like that of
ethnic minorities second language in the kin-state, the difference being
status. Linking linguistic diversity to transethnic identity, she finally
discussed whether status planning with the national minority-model is
possible in the kin-state and in a multicultural Europe.

Judith Broadbridge (University of Staffordshire, UK) was concerned with
the possibility of a reversal of language shift in her paper on Alsatian
in Alsace: linguistic ability, language use, language attitudes. Against
the background of French linguistic policy since the French Revolution and
its devastating effect on regional varieties she examined internal
language legislation as well as reaction to European-led initiatives.
Finally she considered the desirability for and effectiveness of attempts
to reverse language shift in a centralist state such as France where a
chronic lack of support has resulted in a drastic reduction of
inter-generational transmission of Alsatian.

4. The non-hearing community as a cultural and linguistic minority
In her keynote speech Bencie Woll (City University London) gave an
overview of the sign languages of Europe, introducing them as
long-established natural human languages that have their own lexicons and
grammars differing from those of the surrounding hearing communities.
Identifying similarities and differences with the situation of spoken
minority languages in Europe, she reviewed the status of sign languages
and commented on efforts which are being made for one of these tongues,
the British Sign Language (BSL), to achieve official legislative
recognition in the European Charter of Minority Languages.

With the title British sign language and the push-me-pull-you effect
Graham Turner (University of Central Lancashire, UK) referred to a set of
incentives and disincentives alike that are being offered by policy makers
to linguistic campaigners within the Deaf community. He argued that whilst
on the one hand, social policy developments - led by the introduction of
the Disability Discrimination Act - have revitalised the national debate
about ensuring access to public life for disabled people, on the other
hand, many years of campaigning have been devoted to raising public
awareness of the Deaf community as a linguistic minority group who -
whilst they may as individuals have a physical 'impairment' - do not
otherwise identify with the general integrationist thrust of disability
politics. In view of the fact that the devolution debate, with its
associated linguistic highlighting of the 'other' languages of Wales,
Scotland and Northern Ireland, may present a parallel and template for
Deaf people he offered an assessment of the prospects for a linguistic
maintenance project focusing on BSL within the current national social,
educational and cultural policy climate.

Pauline Darlings (University of Bath, UK) talk on Russian Sign Language
provided an overview of the history of RSL as an unrecognised minority
language, and sketched its current situation as an 'auxiliary' means of
teaching the deaf. Taking into account perceptions of the deaf community
and deaf identity, it seeked to establish attitudes towards RSL in Russia.
In view of the fact that, in the wake of glasnost and perestroika, there
is felt to be a move towards recognising sign as a minority language, she
attempted to assess how close the deaf community is to achieving official
recognition, and to raise questions about the future of RSL.

5. Minority languages and the media
The contribution by Lucia Grimaldi (Free University of Berlin, Germany)
and Eva-Maria Remberger (University of Cologne, Germany) was on The
promotion of the Sardinian language and culture via the internet: fields
of activity and perspectives. They introduced their project Limba e
curtura de sa Sardigna ("Sardinian language and culture"
http://www.spinfo.uni-koeln.de/mensch/sardengl.htmln) which was aimed
initially at the collection of information on the Sardinian language for
native speakers. This was soon to develop into one of the most extensive
sites on the subject, the principal objectives being the promotion,
preservation, linguistic analysis and the development of different kinds
of language (processing) tools for sociolinguistic data collection, as
well as the networking of information on the Sardinian language and
culture. They presented evidence on the relevance of the above tasks for
the protection of endangered languages, such as Sardinian.

Carmen Milln-Varela (University of Birmingham, UK) spoke on Minor needs or
the ambiguous power of translation. She argued that, whilst translation is
widely acknowledged as a crucial instrument for the creation and
development of national languages and literatures, in the case of
minor(itised) languages however, translation becomes a complex and
ambiguous activity: on the one hand, it contributes to processes of
linguistic and cultural normalisation and, on the other hand, it is a
painful reminder of the existence of asymmetrical relations of power. The
study of translation is thus revealed as a powerful research tool to
investigate issues related to language, power, and identity.

'Minority languages and local media: lessons from the Basque magazine
movement was the focus of the talk by Jacqueline Urla (University of
Massachusetts, Amherst, USA). She claimed that whilst language planning
policies have often placed emphasis on securing high prestige functions as
a key to minority language maintenance, policies need to pay more
attention to the promotion of more "low brow" language functions if they
are to attract young speakers. Drawing on ethnographic research on
community magazines in the Basque country, her findings indicated that
local media and other forms of popular culture help to encourage literacy,
localize standard varieties, and promote community building that is
essential for minority language survival, as well as affording
opportunities for creative experimentation with language, including
language mixing, that may not be seen as appropriate for other registers.
Her paper concluded with a call for more descriptive research on the
products and processes of local media-making and their functions as tools
for language development and intergenerational communication.

6. Politics of language and identity in multicultural societies
In his talk on 'Balkan dialects, migrations, and ethnic violence: the case
of the Bosnian Serbs, Robert Greenberg (University of North Carolina,
Chapel Hill, USA) traced the population movements in Bosnia-Herzegovina
before hostilities broke out in 1992. He showed that whilst the ethnic
Slavic groups (the Muslim Slavs, the Catholic Croats and the Orthodox
Serbs) differed primarily in religion and cultural heritage, the ethnic
differences of the population who had shifted from rural communities to
urban centres had often became neutralized, resulting in culturally
diverse cities, such as Tuzla or Sarajevo. In Bosnia's rural communities
however, where Serbs had settled for military and economic reasons, many
of the cultural and linguistic differences had remained strong. Due to
these polarizations it was not surprising that some of the fiercest
fighting of the war occurred it these rural areas, where some of the war's
worst massacres occurred. His research suggests that the preservation of
distinctive linguistic identity in the rural areas could well be a
reflection of each group's need to cling to their respective cultural
heritages and the their historical resistance to the pressures of
assimilative tendencies.

The focus of the contribution by Vanessa Pupavac (University of
Nottingham, UK) was on Education Reform and the Politicisation of Language
in the Post-Yugoslav States. Her paper was an analysis of the Serbo-Croat
language in the Post-Yugoslav states. It considered the politicisation of
the language through an examination of works by local linguists and school
grammars, and the response of international officials to the language
question. She argued that international responses over the last decade
have helped legitimate the claim of nationalists to separate languages as
part of the nationalist projects and that the divisive consequences of
this approach can be seen in the current problems being experienced by
international administrators in Bosnia-Herzegovina, attempting to
reintegrate education in the republic.

Tomasz Kamusella (University of Opole, Poland) spoke on Nationalism,
ethnicity and language: a case study of the Polish region of Upper Silesia
.. In his paper he claimed that the development of standard languages in
Central Europe is closely connected to the parallel unfolding of national
movements that are in part made through these languages and, in turn, make
these languages their own as national. He showed that whilst this standard
coupling of language and nation failed to take root in Upper Silesia it
served the Kashubs around Gdansk (Danzig) to refashion themselves as an
ethnic group who is on the road to become a new nation with their
distinctive language. Using these examples he presented and analysed
different uses made of minority languages in similar ecological contexts
to draw attention to choices made by group leaders and to their approach
to language as an instrument of doing identificational politics or not.

In his paper on Minority languages in Italy Paolo Coluzzi (University of
Exeter, UK) gave a brief introduction on the languages spoken in Italy,
both those that are protected and recognized as minority languages by the
Italian law, and those that are still termed dialects in spite of being
Romance languages, as different from each other as Italian is from
Spanish, and quite unintelligible to those who do not speak them.
Depicting the sociolinguistic situation of one of these protected
languages Friulian, (formerly called a dialect), spoken in northeast
Italy, he outlined what needed to be done in terms of language planning
and promotion..

7. Language policy for/against indigenous and immigrant minorities
Cidgem Balims (University of Manchester, UK) talk on Language as a tool of
group survival focused on language policy for/against indigenous &
immigrant minorities. Presenting cases from Turkic languages (Meskhetians,
Crimean Tatars and Bulgarian Muslims/Turks) she illustrated how languages
and/or dialects can act as a binding force between ethnically different
peoples in their determination to form a (national) identity. She stressed
the importance of keeping facilities (such as schools etc.) for minorities
to prevent resentment in the face of resulting assimilation due to a lack
of their provision.

Marietta Caldern (University of Jerusalem, Israel) gave a paper on
Francophobic Francophones? Perspectives on the Isareli French-speaking
community. Findings from her work on discursive identity constructions
among immigrated Israelis who remain French citizens revealed the emphasis
being laid on the importance they attribute to French, one of the most
important minority languages in Israel, as a constitutive element of their
(new) identity/identities. She also presented an analysis of the current
situation of French in Israel from a sociological point of view and the
political attitudes toward the Israeli French speaking community.

The talk by Gabrielle Hogan-Brun (University of Bristol, UK) and Meilute
Ramoniene (University of Vilnius, Lithuania) was entitled Lithuanian,
Russian and Polish languages in Lituania: traditions and changes. They
presented a sociolinguistic analysis of the changes which had affected
Lithuanians since the collapse of communist rule in 1990. Their findings
highlighted the language-related challenges that have arisen since
independence and the diverging attitudes of the - now legally protected -
national minorities whose behavioural and attitudinal patterns can be
observed to range from segregation to active integration.

Julia Sallabank (Reading University, UK) spoke on Guernsey French and
standard French: a symbiotic relationship. Her research showed how
Guernesiais, the indigenous language of Guernsey in the Channel Islands,
and once the language of government and of the ilite after the Norman
invasion of England in 1066, has declined over the years. According to her
findings most native speakers are past child-bearing age and now
constitute less than one in ten of the population. She held the view that
this language, which is now seen as a tongue of the uneducated and being
displaced by a former lower-status language, English, would benefit from a
revival programme at school through a combination of the medium of French
and Guernesiais.

The organisers are planning to publish a selection of papers in an edited
volume and to encourage future collaboration through the creation of an
ESF-Network. For more information contact one of the organisers or
consult: http://www.bath.ac.uk/~mlssaw/min_lang_workshop

Bristol and Bath                Gabrielle Hogan-Brun,
g.hogan-brun at bristol.ac.uk June 2001                       Stefan Wolff,
s.wolff at bath.ac.uk

Dr Bencie Woll
b.woll at city.ac.uk
Chair of Sign Language and Deaf Studies
Language and Communication Science
City University, Northampton Square
London EC1V 0HB, UK
Tel: +44 (0)20 7040 8354 (voice) +44 (0)20 7040 8314 (text)
Fax: +44 (0) 20 7040 8577