BiankaSylvee M.

Dumlao

SEEL 106

Language Policy Critique Paper

The article, “Language Policy”, by Bernard Spolsky seeks to probe a great number of discourse at
the facade of language policy: ideas of bilingualism and multilingualism, accuracy and bad language,
language choice as a civil and human right, language death and efforts to conserve endangered
languages and language education policy. We now come to the problem which is being addressed, first,
how can language policy be recognized?; and second, how can language be managed?

As to its substance, the nature of language policy was discussed. Spolsky contended that
language policy has three components: language practices, language beliefs and interventions detailed
to alter practices or beliefs. He argued that language policies are frequently implied wherein they are
being recognized through a scrutiny of practices rather than official documents. Further, policies may
aim language elements like words, spellings, sound, as well as whole varieties. Many of these issues are
revisited wherein the basis of a theory of language policy, Spolsky introduces further concepts and
distinctions. He argues, for instance, that policy-making may be undertaken at a variety of levels – from
the family up to the national level and beyond, and less controversially, that language policy interacts
with a variety of other social, economic, political factors. He also illustrates the range of domains (e.g
schools, workplaces, nations) over which language policy may range.

Unfortunately, the article appears to have over-emphasized language death as a failure for
native speakers. The social, economic, technological, and political factors that contribute to language
loss were not taken into consideration. Hence, a limitation of this article is that it is insufficient on the
analysis of linguistic dominance of the English language. The presence of English-based consumers
driven by pop-culture and marketing strategies in industrialized and developing countries is an
indication of language’s power within the global economy.

Moreover, within many developing nations the push towards English language acquisition has
had the residual effect of creating greater polarization between the rich and poor as reflected in the
growing divide between linguistic have and havenots. Therefore, while many nations have choice in
their language policies, how much genuine agency exists within the context of globalization? While
Language Policy may lack some argumentative nuance, it serves as a useful resource for understanding
the core issues within current language diversity debates. The arguments put forth in this article,
substantiated by the author’s 30-plus years of experience in language policy research, serves as a
provocative read for emerging, as well as established, scholars in this field.