KEY ISSUES OF SOCIOLINGUISTICS

BY ALELIGN ASCHALE
Addis Ababa University
PhD Candidate in Applied Linguistics
worldclassfreedom@gmail.com

MARCH 2013
ADDIS ABABA

1
 INTRODUCTION
Language, our primary tool of thought, perception and expression, is at the heart of who we are as individuals.
It is arguably clear that languages are constantly changing, sometimes into entirely new varieties, leading to
subtle differences in how we present ourselves to others. Pending the differences, the writers of this
assignment strongly believe that people cannot live without language as fish cannot live without water. That
is, the fish is in the water and water is in the fish; likewise, human is in the language and language is in
human. Besides, there are diverse views to the origin of language, its acquisition and/ or learning and the
pertinent policies and implementation in a given country. For fortune or pity, some countries are monolingual,
others bilingual; multilingualism is for many countries in the world who were colonized; it is a fact in African
life, the Africa‟s lingua franca. In this regard, multilingualism so often is seen as a handicap to development.
However, we, the writers of this assignment, argue that multilingualism needs to be developed as strength and
achievement, not criticized as a failure. In a relationship, diversity breeds individual search for identity,
control, status and similar quests of life. It must be clear that such differences are inevitable to bring attitude
differences and the resultant identity conflict.

In the following four sections of this assignment (term-paper), we will try to pinpoint key notions with regard
to language and society, language diversity and development, language policy and development and language
attitude and development in their respective order. Besides, a clear introduction and conclusion is made to
each chapter. To meet our objectives, countless books, journals and credible internet websites were
thoroughly read and summarized to create a big picture in this assignment.

2
 CHAPTER ONE
LANGUAGE AND SOCIETY
 Language and society deals with issues pertinent to sociolinguistics
 Language is societal; we cannot talk about society without language and vice-versa.
 The way human is configured physiologically and anatomically is totally different from
capable animals: ape, chimpanzee, dogs, monkeys, bees, parrots, rats, cats, etc.
 The language faculty in the cerebrum is the mighty and sophisticated power house of
the language to process and produce language.
 Language is societal, human born with healthy and normal physio-anatomy.
 OTISM occurs when there is physiological and anatomical disability/impairment.
 As language is classified and well structured, the society does so.
 The most vibrant finding to study, classify people for anthropologists, sociologists,
social workers, social psychologists, sociolinguists, etc. is the finding of linguistics.
 Multilingualism, bilingualism and monolingualism at individual, group, regional,
societal, national or global levels indicate the relationships between language and
society.
 Sociology of language, sociolinguistics, X-linguialism, communication using language,
etc. are the major evidences to believe that the relationship between language and
society are undeniable.
 The following points need to be considered as they affect language use:
 Age-grading
 Professional continuum
 Economic status/continuum
 Social status/structure
 Authority continuum
 Religious structure
 Power hierarchy
 The sexistness of a language is the variety of meanings due to the connotative or
denotative meaning of the word used/understood.
 Language use Considers:
 Who & To whom?
 What & To whom?
 When & Where?
 Why?
 In which Varity?
 Code-switching:
 Intrasentencial (within a given/single sentence)
 Intersentencial (across sentences; between two or more sentences)
 There is Language:
 Death
 Obsoleteness
 Attrition
3
  Endangerment
 Extinction
 Shift (Linguistic erosion)
 * Language Death can be:
 Gradual (the case in Salavdor)
 Dynamic
 Sudden (Language Murder)-the case in Tasmenia.
 Bottom-to-top (the case of Ge’ez & Sanscrit) ( …>>> Home >>>
Society >>> Institution)
 Top-to-bottom (Media >>> Society >>> Home >>> …)
 Language Death and Shift can be due to:
 Small number of Speakers
 Negative attitude, Stigmatization
 War and Conflicts
 Natural Disasters
 Massive borrowing from dominant languages (flooding)
 Political influence
 Coercive /Voluntary assimilation
 E ……T ……C……

D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D

1.0. INTRODUCTION
It is understandable that when two or more people communicate with each other in sign, in speech or
in writing, we can call the system of communication that they employ a code; that code will be
something we call a language (Wardhaugh, 2006). Besides, it must be acknowledged that a
language is essentially a set of items, what Hudson (1996: 21) calls „linguistic items,‟ such entities as
sounds, words, grammatical structures, sign, and so on. Very paramount, according to Wardhaugh
(2006), to understand how societies are structured and how people manage to live together,
sociologists use such concepts as authority, identity, power, class, status, solidarity, accommodation,
face, gender, politeness, etc.
Two aspects of language behavior are very important from a social point of view: first, the function
of language in establishing social relationship, and second, the role played by language in conveying
information about the speaker. But, it should be clear that both these aspects of linguistic behavior
are reflections of the fact that there is a close interrelationship between language and society.
Language cannot be studied without society for it can exist only with human society. Thus, in simple
language to say language is to say society; language both shapes and is shaped by social reality.

4
According to Wardhaugh( 2006),language is an important means of communication that
demonstrates human social behavior. It is a human identity, and that is why we use language to send
and receive messages about who we are, where we are from, and whom we are associated with. Its
role in the society makes it interesting and necessary to live; it is compressive in that humanity needs
it. It plays a crucial role in social interaction and is an all-important agent in the transmission of
cultural and social values.
According to Oha, A.C et.al (2010:1), “Language and society are intertwined because a society
moves with language. When communication takes a proper process whereby meaning is generated,
and a society moves with the pace of the language. A language defines the linguistic behavior of a
group of people in a given society.” Thus, based on their linguistic behavior, there might be
different speech communities.
What is more, language is indissolubly linked with the members of the society in which it is spoken,
and social factors are inevitably reflected in their speech (Downess, 1998).
The big question is; how can we relate these two concepts-language and society, the linguist and the
sociologist, very clearly? There are a number of realistic relationships (evidences) between language
and society which are presented here under.

1.1. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LANGUAGE AND SOCIETY

1.1.1. Social Structure and Linguistic Behavior/Structure
According to Jaspers, Ostman & Verschueren (2010) and Wardhaugh (2006), social structure may
either influence or determine linguistic structure and/or behavior. That is, society controls our
language, the associated meaning, the potential attitude in both parties, etc by giving us the
preferences as what are acceptable and not, because each one of us has our own perception or point
of view, attitude and identity for maintenance. Scholars argue that a group of people may accept our
language and the embodied meaning, but for some others, it could be kind of offence or insult. We
must know how, when and where to say it and for what purpose. For example, the „age-grading‟
phenomenons whereby young children speak differently from older children and, in turn, children
speak differently from mature adults. For this author, the varieties of language that speakers use
reflects such matters as their regional, social, or ethnic origin and possibly even their gender; besides,
particular ways of speaking, choices of words, and even rules for conversing are in fact highly
determined by certain social requirements.

1.1.2. Linguistic Relativity in Language and Society-Linguistic Behavior/Structure and

Social Structure
5
A second possible relationship- as a best evidence for language and society, which is directly
opposed to the first is that linguistic structure and/or behavior may either influence or determine
social structure (Wardhaugh (2006). This is called the principle of linguistic relativity, strongly put
forward by linguists and anthropologists in the 1920s and 1930s centuries, which holds the logic that
the characteristics of one‟s language can affect other aspects of life (Jourdan & Tuite, 2006). The
Sapir–Whorf‟s hypothesis, as mentioned in Jourdan & Tuite (2006), is generally understood as the
principle that language conditions habits of speech which in turn organize and generate particular
patterns of thought; that is, language determines thought.

1.1.3. The Bidirectional Relationship in Language and Society

The Dittmar‟s (1976:238) bidirectional relationship of language and society argument says that
“speech behavior and social behavior are in a state of constant interaction and the material living
conditions are an important factor in the relationship”. This third possible relationship shows that the
influence is bi-directional; this is to mean, language and society may influence each other.

1.1.4. Naming in Language and Society

Koul (1983) remarked that language reflects the society as clearly as the society is reflected in it.
The scholar says it would be necessary to make special references to the linguistic characteristics of
personal names, surnames, nicknames and other nomenclatures; arguing that they reflect the socio-
cultural, socio-economic, socio-political, religious, and linguistic patterns of the society. In addition,
the linguist contends, in a day-to-day communicative situation, the use of kinship terms, modes of
address and modes of greetings represent socio-cultural milieu of a certain society; they have
important place in the use of language in society and sociology of language.

1.1.5. Authority in Language and Society

Countless scholars (Cameron, 1998; Phillips & Hardy, 1997; Habermas, 1995; Elen, 1993; Lynch &
Woogla, 1990; Duck, 1982; Sacks, et al. 1974; etc.) identified that individual/group epistemological
and moral responsibility, the context and audience, issue sensitivity, gender, class, status, political
accountability, religious power-God, education and professionalism, etc grant or deny people the
right or the legitimacy to use language and express or manipulate their thought/idea and message, the
manacles in language and society (Jaspers, Ostman & Verschueren, 2010).

1.1.6. The Physiological and Anatomical Configuration of Humanity

Human being is created special anatomically and physiologically to create and beautifully produce
language for communication than other clever and capable animals such as bees, chimpanzees, birds

6
(e.g. parrots), dogs, etc. That is man is born with a language faculty in the cerebrum as sophisticated
powerhouse to process and produce language.

1.2. KEY TERMS IN LANGUAGE AND SOCIETY

“Anyone who wants to talk about the many varieties of a language is immediately faced with severe
problems, the initial manifestations of which are largely terminological” (Zwicky & Zwicky, 1982:
213 in Lewandowski, 2010). For the same purpose, the following terms need to be defined clearly
and briefly.

1.2.1. Sociolinguistics and Sociology of Language

Sociology of language focuses on the language's effect on the society, but sociolinguistics focuses on
the effect of the society on the language (Spolsky & Francis, 2007). Importantly, the sociology of
language seeks to understand the way that social dynamics are affected by individual and group
language use. The author elaborated that sociology of language deals carefully with who is
'authorized' to use what language, with whom and under what conditions; how an individual or
group identity is established by the language that they have available for them to use.

Different scholars have defined sociolinguistics in different ways with similar implication. For
example, Owen (2011) defined sociolinguistics as the study of the relationship between languages,
language use, and social context. In other words, sociolinguistics is another aspect of language apart
from how it works as a system rather than looking at sound, grammar, and cognition. One can also
look at language in terms of its function in social context.
In addition, Hudson (1996:4) has defined sociolinguistics as the study of language in relation to
society. Moreover, Wardhaugh (2006:13) stated that sociolinguistics is concerned with investigating
the relationships between language and society with the goal being a better understanding of the
structure of language and of how languages function in communication.
According to Ellis(2005),the major objective of sociolinguistics is to explain how speakers‟ variable
and linguistic variations are correlated with variation in the speakers‟ social characteristics. Its
primary concern is to study the correlation ship between language use and social status, with
describing language use as social phenomena and where possible, it attempts to establish causal links
between language and society, pursuing the complementary questions of what language contribute to
making community possible and how communities shape their languages using them. Since
sociolinguistics is a meeting ground for linguists and social scientists, some of who seek to
understand the social aspects of language while others are primarily concerned with linguistic
aspects of society, there are two centers of gravity known as micro- and macro-sociolinguistics,
7
which represent different orientations and research agenda. However, there is a general agreement
that both perspectives are very important for complete understanding of language as a social
phenomenon.
Stated in very general terms, micro-sociolinguistics investigates how social structure influences the
way people talk and how language varieties and patterns of use correlate with social attributes, such
as class, sex(gender),and age. On the other hand, macro-sociolinguistics studies what societies do
with their languages, that is, attitudes and attachments that account for the functional distribution of
speech forms in society, language shift, maintenance and interaction of speech communities.

1.2.2. Speech Community

The definition of speech community is debated in many sociolinguistic literatures. However, various
sociolinguists tend to involve varying degree of emphasis on the two points such as: Shared
community membership and shared linguistic communication. Oha, A.C et.al (2010) argued that
Speech community is a concept in sociolinguistics that describes a more or less discrete group of
people who use language in a unique and mutually accepted way among themselves. Speech
communities can be members of a profession with a specialized jargon, distinct social groups like
high school students or hip hop fans. In addition, online and other computer mediated communities,
such as internet forums, often constitute speech communities. Members of speech communities will
often develop a slang or jargon to serve the group's special purposes and priorities. In addition to this,
Gumperz (1968) defines a speech community as “Any human aggregate characterized by regular and
frequent interaction by means of a shared body of verbal signs and set off from similar aggregates by
significant differences in language usage”. A speech community is a group of people speaking a
common dialect.
Though the relative importance and exact definitions of speech communities vary, some would
argue that a speech community must be a 'real' community, i.e. a group of people living in the same
location (such as a city or a neighborhood), while more recent thinking proposes that all people are
indeed part of several communities (through home location, occupation, gender, class, religious
belonging, and more), and that they are thus also part of simultaneous speech communities.
Similarly, what shared linguistic communication entails is also a variable concept. Some would
argue that a shared first language, even dialect, is necessary, while for others the ability to
communicate and interact (even across language barriers) is sufficient.
A speech community is a distinct group of people who use language in a unique and mutually
accepted way among themselves, who speak a common dialect. To be considered part of a speech

8
community, one must have a communicative competence. That is, the speaker has the ability to use
language in a way that is appropriate in the given situation such as members of a profession with a
specialized jargon, distinct social groups such as vandal‟s, high school students, soldiers, fans, the
family, etc. In this field, interactional sociolinguistics looks at different styles of interaction by
speech communities.

1.2.3. Language Planning

Language planning, either be called language policy is making deliberate well calculated efforts to
influence the function, structure and acquisition of languages within a speech community and a
country/state. It takes the educators‟ philosophy, “To fail to plan is to plan to fail”.

1.2.4. Dialect
In sociolinguistics dialect is the collection of phonetic, phonological, syntactic, morphological and
semantic attributes that make one group of speakers noticeably different from another group of
speakers of the same language (Lewandowski, 2010). Dialectologists study dialect, but variationist
sociolinguists are very much interested in looking at social variation within dialects and examine
how variation is rule governed.

1.2.5. The Dialect Continuum and the Dilemma

If we have ten dialects (1-10) in a row 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10, each dialect is highly similar
to its immediately adjacent neighbors; conversely, when we move farther away from each type the
similarities become fewer and fewer. That is, dialect one 1 is very similar to 2, less similar to 3, even
less similar to 4, and by the time we get to 8, 9 or 10, 1 is no longer mutually intelligible with these.
By the criterion of mutual intelligibility, we can thus say that dialect 1 and 10 belong to different
languages. But if we take dialect 5, which may be mutually intelligible with both 1 and 10, which
language does 5 belong to?

1.2.6. Idiolect
Just as there is variation among groups of speakers of a language, there is variation from speaker to
speaker. No two speakers of a language speak identically. Each speaks her or his own particular
variety of that language. Hence, an idiolect is the variety of language spoken by each individual
speaker of the language. It is, therefore, one person‟s language.

1.2.7. Sociolect
Acording to Lewandowski (2010), the term sociolect is often used interchangeably with social
dialect (the latter form seems to be more commonly used and preferred). It is concisely defined as „a
variety or lect which is thought of as being related to its speakers‟ social background rather
9
geographical background‟ (Trudgill, 2003; Grabias, 2001 in Lewandowski, 2010). In other words, it
is the language spoken by a particular social group, class or subculture, whose determinants include
such parameters as: gender, age, occupation, and possibly a few others for the purposes of secrecy,
professionalism, expressiveness, etc.

1.2.8. Regional dialects

This is linguistic differentiation based upon on membership in a longstanding geographically-
isolated or separate group. In other words, a group of people are more or less isolated or are
prevented from freely mingling with nearby populations due to mountains, rivers, forests, etc., and
then those populations will develop unique linguistic characteristics which will eventually become
distinguishing elements of their regional dialects.
There are some common misperceptions about dialects. These common misperceptions are: dialect
is substandard, dialect is incorrect and dialect is slang. However the sociolinguistics fact is that
“everybody speaks a dialect. Sometimes people get confused to differentiate language from dialects.
There is linguistic criterion to differentiate language from dialect. Most linguists suggested that
dialect is mutually intelligible while language is not. For instance, American English, British and
Australian English are mutually intelligible as they are the dialects of the same language- English.

1.2.9. Register.
According to Halliday (1978) mentioned in Lewandowski (2010), register is a „diatypic variety‟ or
variety „according to the use‟. A register is what you are speaking (at the time) which is determined
by what you are doing (nature of social activity being engaged in) and expressing diversity of social
process (social division of labor). So in principle registers are ways of saying different things and
tend to differ in semantics (and hence in lexicogrammar, and sometimes phonology, as realization of
this). As extreme cases, they are restricted languages, languages for special purposes; and at typical
instances, they are occupational varieties (technical, semi-technical). In addition, the principal
controlling variables are field (type of social action), tenor (role relationships) and mode (symbolic
organization).

1.2.10. LINGUA FRANCA

A term first known in use in 1619, it is a language: standard or a pidgin used for communication
between two or more groups that have different native languages. The term lingua franca (Latin:
“Frankish language”) was first applied to a pidgin based on French and Italian developed in the
Mediterranean. Alternative names given to this language are a working language, a language of

10
commerce (trade), a language of diplomatic and administrative convenience, the language of
scholars and scientists, a bridge language, a vehicular language or a unifying language.
What is more, people who speak different languages are forced to come into contact for some
purposes of communications. This situation creates the use of Lingual Franca. UNESCO in 1953
defined a lingua franca as „a language which is used habitually by people whose mother tongues are
different in order to facilitate communication between them.‟ similarly, Meyerhoff (2006:245)
explained lingua franca as Language used as a common means of communication among people
whose native languages are mutually unintelligible. For example, Swahili is the lingua Francas of
East Africa and English is the Lingua Francas of the world and Arabic is the Lingua Franca of
religion etc.

1.2.11. Prestige, Standard and Non-Standard Dialect

This is one of the complex issues of sociolinguistics that focuses on the social value, acceptability or
stigmatization reference to a certain dialect existed due to geography, ethnicity and class. For
example, prestigious dialects are standard dialects which are not stigmatized in the society where
they are spoken.

1.2.12. Diglossia
Diglossia, an interesting concept in a bilingual, multilingual community, as for Lewandowski
(2010), is a situation where two languages or dialects are used differently according to different
social situations-job interview, telling a joke, giving a speech in a serious meeting, news briefing,
giving a speech in a birthday party, communication at a church ceremony, etc.
1.2.13. Accent
An accent is a certain form of a language spoken by a subgroup of speakers of that language which
is defined by phonological features (webpage). Everyone has an accent just as everyone has a
dialect. It is not a question of “having” or “not having” an accent or dialect, it is a question of which
accent or dialect you speak with. In short you can speak the same dialect as someone else while
using a different accent (though frequently the two vary together). For instance, Afaan Oromo
speakers from Borana and Gujii use the same dialect but their accents are radically different
In general terms an accent is the way a person sounds when he/she speaks. There are two different
kinds of accents. One is foreign accent which occurs when a person speaks one language using
some of the rules or sounds of another one. For instance, if a person has trouble pronouncing some
of the sounds of a second language he/she is learning he /she may substitute similar sounds that
occur in his/ her first language. This sounds wrong or foreign to the native speakers of the language.
11
The other kind of accent is simply the way a group of people speak their native language. This is
determined by where they live and what social groups they belong to. People who live in close
contact grow to share a way of speaking, or accent, which will differ from the way other groups in
other places speak. Someone has a Macca Oromo accent or Hararge accent. You notice it because it
is a different from the way they speak. In reality like a dialect everybody has an accent.

1.2.14. Language Contact

Language contact exists when different languages, accents and dialects come into contact. This was
very common when communication and ease of travel improves national and international relations.
Language contacts have, historically, taken place in large part under conditions of social inequality
resulting from wars, conquests, colonialism, slavery, and migrations-forced and otherwise.
Relatively benign contacts involving urbanization or trade as a contact motivation are also
documented, as are some situations of relative equality (Sorensen 1967, Sankoff 1980). Language
contacts have in some times and places been short-lived, with language loss and assimilation a
relatively short-term result, whereas other historical situations have produced relative long-term
stability and acceptance by the bi- or multilingual population.
According to Sarah language contact is defined in the simplest term as the use of more than one
language in the same place at the same time. There are different linguistic out comes a result of
language contacts.
2.2.1. Language Maintenance and Shift
Broadly speaking when languages contact many linguistic situations occurs. From these, language
maintenance and shift are common linguistics situations. Language maintenance and shift are
language situations which are usually inseparable. These situations also related with language choice,
endanger, death and extinction and revival. The language choice of certain speech community
members to reflect their cultural lead them add up to shift maintenance in the community.
A. Language maintenance
Language maintenance is a co-existence of a fairly stable relationship, with speakers of the less
dominant language managing to hold on to it and to pass it on their children. In such situations the
community collectively chooses to use a language or languages which are already serving.
In maintenance the speakers keep up usage of specific language entirely or in one or more domains
(Fasold, 1984, 213; Coulms, 1997).
Language maintenance most likely happens if the speakers wish to affirm their separate identity. For
example, if they strongly value maintaining their language for cultural or religious reason. The

12
chance of language maintenance are also enhanced if the speakers from a significant speech
community and belong to cohesive social networks.
It is also advantage if the economic imperative- the desire to get on – can be satisfied without ditch
their language. This is most likely to be the case if the less influential has media, economic,
educational, and political institutions that are capable of counter-balancing the power the dominant
language.
Speech communities have their own belief about their language. This condition as part of the social
condition, also affect the maintenance and transmission of that language. E.g. the belief on the
antiquity and purity of Tamil by its‟ community, which leads to maintain it by resisting to any
change in the corpus or status.
In monolingual speech community, especially which don‟t collectively acquiring any other
languages, have possibility of maintaining their language use pattern as it is. On the other hand, in
bilingual or multilingual communities‟ language maintenance appear usually when the community is
diglossic. In such communities languages reserved for different domains. With very little violation
one language on the domains of the others, the community maintains the languages.
When two speech communities live in the same geographical area, one community might maintain
the two languages and the other only one, with neither community shifted (Fasold, 1984, 213).

3.1 Factors influencing language maintenance

Maintaining a minority language in various domains might be impeded by some factors. The major
factors that might lead to the process of language shift are summarized by Apple, R and Muysken, P.
(2005:33-37) as follows.

 Economic status: this is when groups of minority language speakers have a relatively low
economic status. e. g. Masay in Kenya
 Economic changes: i.e. modernization, industrialization and urbanization.
 Social status: this is when a majority language is considered as a language of high status or
prestigious language. Quechua in Peru, Ecuador and Bolivia have considered themselves to
have low social status, and tend to shift towards Spanish.
 Socio-historical status: when speakers are inspired to struggle for their common interests as
members of an Ethno linguistic group, as group members in the past did.
 Language status: seeking for the use of a language with international communication;
especially in a multilingual community.
 Demographic factors & Mass media.
13
 A. Language Shift
Language shift appeared when increasing number of speakers of the less influential language give
way to the pressure of the dominant language, their language which would have been used
previously in their homes and communities is replaced from these very important domains by the
dominant language. So the community gives up a language completely in favor of the other one
(Fasold, 1984, 213).
The term language shift refers to a process in which the speakers of one language begin
to use a second language for more and more function until they eventually use only the
second language, even in personal and intimate context. Language shift become total
when the second language become a symbol of the socio-cultural identity of the speakers
(Webb and Edward, 2000, 13).
Language shift, sometimes referred to as language transfer or language replacement or assimilation,
is the progressive process whereby a speech community of a language shifts to speaking another
language. The rate of assimilation is the percentage of individuals with a given mother tongue who
speak another language more often in the home. The data is used to measure the use of a given
language in the lifetime of a person, or most often across generations within a linguistic community.
In relation with language shift there is a situation in which members of the community experiencing
language shift began to loss fluency in their native language, which is known as language loss. This
doesn‟t mean language death because the language could still exist in a vigorous state elsewhere.
Therefore language loss and death are successive stages after language shift. (Webb and Edward,
2000, 113)
Holmes (1992) presents two forms of language shifts. One shift will be that of indigenous societies
abandoning their language altogether in favour of the dominant group‟s language. A case in point is
the Maori in New Zealand and some North American Indian tribes. These societies have adopted the
language of the colonizers for the reasons given above. Language shift can be voluntary or
involuntary. But the trend is that it begins involuntarily when a language is imposed on the
dominated group and then it becomes monolingual as a result their own language dies out. In
illustrating the Maori case, Holmes points out that the indigenous people were swamped by English,
the language of the dominant group. The result of colonial and economic control was not diglossia
with varying degrees of bilingualism as found in many African, Asian and South American countries,
but the complete eradication of the many indigenous languages. Over time the communities shifted
to the colonizer's English, and their own language died out.

14
Dorian contends that language shift is “the gradual displacement of one language by another in the
lives of community members” cited in Huebner1987). He further adds that language shift can be
either partial or complete. Complete societal language shift results in an additional language
becoming the mother tongue of community members. A partial language shift may be manifested in
the displacement of one language by another for specific functions. Partial language shift sometimes
is accompanied by language skill attrition, the loss of proficiency in one or more of the language
skills: writing, reading, speaking or understanding. Language shift can occur rapidly, sometimes
within a generation. Another shift will be that of the need to necessarily have command of a
language used by the dominant group without eradicating your own.
According to Janet Holmes, when language shifts occur, it almost always shifts towards the language
of the dominant powerful group. A dominant group has no incentive to adopt the language of a
minority. The dominant language is associated with status, prestige and social success. It is used in
the "glamour" contexts in the wider society – for formal speeches and ceremonial occasions, by
newsreaders and radio, and by those whom young people admire - pop stars, fashion models and disc
jockeys. It is scarcely surprising that many young minority group speakers should see its advantages
and abandon their own language (1992:60).
In language shift process there are always strong and weak languages. In multilingual society these
strong and weak languages might goes in certain attrition process. The process is usually as follow.
First, the weaker language (economically and politically) speakers become bilingual and if there is
choice they show increasing preference for the stronger language. This leads the weaker language to
be used in fewer domains and get negative meaning.
After that, the speakers of the weaker language lose faith in it and start to think it is worthless, in
significant in learning and finding employments. Eventually, they conclude it is not necessary to
spent time and energy on their language. Through this, the languages become less and less used.
First it fades from public domain, then from private and primary domains. After these steps,
language attrition stage occurred. The weaker language become functionally and stylistically
reduced loss vocabulary, morphology, and syntactic structure. This followed by in efficient inter-
generational transfer (Transmission), in which parents would not be ready to transmit their language
to their new born children. The next stage will be language obsolescence. In this case the language
exists but it is used really or not at all. When it reached at this level the natives speak it hesitantly
and tend to use a simplified form of it by losing some of its rule. If the status of the language looks
like this it can be classified as endangered language, this in turn leads to language death unless
something is done to revival of the language (Webb and Edward, 2000).
15
Partial Language shift >>> Bilingualism >>> Favoring the strong language >>> Language Attrition
>>> Language Obsolescence >>> Language Endangerment >>> Language Death >>> Extinct
Language.
2.2.2. Language Endangerment
An endangered language is a language that it is at risk of falling out of use, generally because it has
few surviving speakers. If it loses all of its native speakers, it becomes an extinct language. Some
languages, such as those in Indonesia, may have tens of thousands of speakers but be endangered
because children are no longer learning them, and speakers are in the process of shifting to using the
national language Indonesian (or a local Malay variety) in place of local languages. In contrast, a
language with only 100 speakers might be considered very much alive if it is the primary language
of a community, and is the first (or only) language of all children in that community (Webb and
Edward, 2000).
2.2.3. Language Death
Language death is another phenomena related to language contact. Following language contact
language shift may occur, this usually leads to language death as many scholars agreed on (Fasold,
1984: 213). Death occurs when a certain speech community shifts to a new language totally. When
the community shifts to the new one there will be no user of that language any more. Since language
and culture are closely connected, the occurrence of linguistic shift may lead to a cultural identity,
and eventually, the „death‟ of particular way of life (Webb and Edward, 2000:13). Language death is
an old phenomenon in the history of language but it is the new field of study for linguistics and
sociolinguistics. It started to be studied after mid eighteens. Different scholars label language death
with different some frame these labels; language demise, language drift, language shift, language
replacement are common. Language death is a complete disappearance of a language. This
disappearance can be caused by the sudden death of the whole community of speakers, which is a
rare case or in a situation of language in contact (competition) and shifting (Columas, 1997: 257).

4.1 Types of language death

There are four major types of identified language death, each of which has linguistic and socio-
linguistic consequences (Campbell and Muntzel, 1989 cited in Chambers, J. K. Trudgill, P. and
Schilling-Estes, N., 2003:573-574). These types include:

A. Sudden language death-this occurring when a language death occurs when a language abruptly
disappears because its speakers die or are killed. In such cases (e.g. Tasmanian; Nicloeno, a Native

16
American Indian language in California), the transitional phase is so abrupt that there are few if any
structural consequences as the language dies.

B. Radical language death-this type is distinguished from sudden death by the shift to another
language rather the complete disappearance of the speakers of a language. In this death, speakers
simply stop speaking the language as a matter of survival in the face of political repression and
genocide (e.g. Salvadorians).

C. Gradual language death-this is the most common type of language death which might be
resulted due to gradual shift to the dominant language in a contact situation (e.g. Gaffat, Zay, etc in
Ethiopia) .

D. Bottom-to-top language death-this type is distinguished for it is the result of the situational
contraction of language use. In most instances this death results when the dying language will be
retained in more casual and informal contexts while it is not used in formal settings (e.g. Ge‟ez in
Ethiopia; Sanskrit in India).

4.2. Causes of language death

In most instances the likely factors which resulted in language death are non-linguistic rather than
linguistic. The major causes of the death can be categorized of economic, political ideological,
ecological, cultural etc. In this regard the specific factors which can be embedded in major causes
mentioned are listed by Cambel, (1994:1963) cited in Chambers J. K. Trudgill, P. and Schilling-
Estes., (2003: 575) as follows:

Discrimination, repression, rapid population collapse,

lack of economic opportunities, ongoing industrialization,

rapid economic transformation, work patterns, migrant labor,

communication with outside regions, resettlement,

dispersion, migration,

literacy, compulsory education,

official language policies, military service,

marriage patterns, famine,

epidemics,

religious proselytizing resource depletion and forced changes in substance patterns,

17
 lack of social cohesion, lack of physical proximity among speakers,

symbolism of the dominant language stigmatization, low prestige of the dying variety,

absence of institutions that establish norms ( schools, academics, texts) particular historical events,

etc.

Hence from all what has been posed as the possible factors of language death, we might deduce that
the dangers of language death at the disposal of every languages.

2.2.4. Language Extinction

According to some definitions an extinct language is a language which no longer has any speakers,
whereas a dead language is a language which is no longer spoken by anyone as their main language.
Normally extinct language occurs when a language undergoes language death while being directly
replaced by a different one. For example: Coptic, which was replaced by Arabic, and many Native
African and American languages, which were replaced by English, French, Spanish, or Portuguese.
Language extinction also occurs when a language undergoes rapid evolution or assimilation until it
eventually gives birth to an offspring, i.e., a dissimilar language or family of languages. Such is the
case with Old English which is the parent of Modern English.
In some cases, an extinct language remains in use for scientific, legal, or ecclesiastical functions. Old
Church Slavonic, Avestan and Old Tibetan are among the many extinct languages used as sacred
languages.

2.2.5. Code Alternation (Code switching and code mixing)

The difference between code switching and code mixing is one of the most baffling arguments in the
study of code alternation. Clyne (1991:161) argues that code switching and code mixing refer to the
same phenomena in “which the speaker stops using language „A‟ and employs language „B‟.
Romaine (1995) views code switching as a phenomenon that occurs in a continuum where both
inter-sentential and intra-sentential code alternation takes place. Other researchers make the
distinction between code switching and code mixing based on the place where the alternation occurs.
Wei (1998) notes that if code alternation occurs at or above clause level, it is considered code
switching, but if it occurs below clause level then it is considered code mixing. Moreover, there are
different explanations forwarded by different sociolinguists as follows:
Code switching or inter-sentential code-alternation occurs when a bilingual speaker uses more than
one language in a single utterance above the clause level to appropriately convey his/her intents.
Similarly, Hymes (1974) defines only code-switching as “a common term for alternative use of two
18
or more languages, varieties of a language or even speech styles.” Code-switching is thus a term in
linguistics referring to the use of more than one language or variety in conversation. Bilinguals, who
can speak at least two languages, have the ability to use elements of both languages when conversing
with another bilingual. Code-switching is; therefore, the syntactically and phonologically appropriate
use of multiple varieties.
Code-mixing refers to any admixture of linguistic elements of two or more language systems in the
same utterance at various levels: phonological, lexical, grammatical and orthographical. (Oha, A.C.
etal 2010). Code mixing also called intra-sentential code switching or intra-sentential code-
alternation occurs when speakers use two or more languages below clause level within one social
situation.
Code switching is language alternations in a certain communicative event in a multi-bi-lingual
society. It is altering or selecting linguistics elements so as to contextualize talk in interaction. For
example, Gulzar (2010) identified that many teachers in an a foreign language classroom code
switch for one of the following reasons: Clarification, Giving instructions effectively, Translation,
Socializing, Linguistics competence, Topic shift, Ease of expression, Emphasis, Checking
understanding, Repetitive function or Creating a sense of belongingness. What is very clear,
Bokamba (1989) cited in Ayehomoni (2006:91) defined both concepts in that:
Code-switching is the mixing of words, phrases and sentences from two distinct
grammatical (sub) systems across sentence boundaries within the same speech event…
code-mixing is the embedding of various linguistic units such as affixes (bound
morphemes), words (unbound morphemes), phrases and clauses from a co-operative
activity where the participants, in order to infer what is intended, must reconcile what
they hear with what they understand.

Carlos (2009:68) citing Fischer (1972) suggests that language or code choice in communities where
bilingualism or multilingualism is the norm should be analyzed in the context where the speech is
produced. Fischer notes that three contextual factors should be taken into account: 1) the relationship
amongst speakers; 2) the setting where the talk takes place and; 3) the topic being discussed. In this
respect, Myers-Scotton (1992) notes that not only contextual factors play a role in the code choice,
but factors such as social identity and educational background also affect the speaker‟s choice of
code. Huang (2004) adds up the medium used with a number of factors believed to trigger code
alternation.

19
 2.2.6. Pidgins and Creole
Pidgins and creoles are new varieties of language generated in situations of language contact
(Rickford and McWhorter (1998:163). A pidgin is sharply restricted in social role, used for limited
communication between speakers of two or more languages who have repeated or extended contacts
with each other, for instance, through trade, enslavement, or migration. A pidgin usually combines
elements of the native languages of its users and is typically simpler than those native languages
insofar as it has fewer words, less morphology, and a more restricted range of phonological and
syntactic options (Rickford, 1992: 224).
Generally, a language variety that is not very linguistically complex or elaborated and is used in
fairly restricted social domains and for limited social or interpersonal functions. Like a creole, arises
from language contact; often seen as a precursor or early stage to a creole. It is often said that pidgin
can be distinguished from a creole in having no native speakers Meyerhoff (2006:247).
Wardhaugh (2006:61) explained “a pidgin is a language with no native speakers: it is no one‟s first
language but is a contact language. That is, it is the product of a multilingual situation in which those
who wish to communicate must find or improvise a simple language system that will enable them to
do so.” In addition, Holm (1988: 4–5) defines a pidgin as a reduced language that results from
extended contact between groups of people with no language in common; it evolves when they need
some means of verbal communication, perhaps for trade, but no group learns the native language of
any other group for social reasons that may include lack of trust or of close contact.
A Creole is a language variety arising out of a situation of language contact (usually involving more
than two languages). A Creole can be distinguished from a pidgin: (i) on the grounds that it is the
first language of some community or group of speakers, or (ii) on the grounds that it is used for the
entire range of social functions that a language can be used for Meyerhoff (2006:247). In contrast,
Wardhaugh (2006:63) tried to define a creole as a pidgin that has become the first language of a new
generation of speakers. Holmes (1992: 95) says that “A creole is a pidgin which has expanded in
structure and vocabulary to express the range of meanings and serve the range of functions required
of a first language.”
A creole, in the classical sense of Hall (1966), is a pidgin that has acquired native speakers, usually,
the descendants of pidgin speakers who grow up using the pidgin as their first language. In keeping
with their extended social role, creoles typically have a larger vocabulary and more complicated
grammatical resources than pidgins. However, some extended pidgins which serve as the primary
language of their speakers (e.g., Tok Pisin in New Guinea, Sango in the Central African Republic)

20
are already quite complex, and seem relatively unaffected by the acquisition of native speakers
(Sankoff, 1979; Samarin, 1995).
Meyerhoff (2006:62) argued that pidgins and creoles are languages that emerge out of the contact
between the speakers of (usually) more than two different languages. There are usually quite marked
social conditions associated with that contact. For example, the speakers may only be in contact in a
reduced set of social interactions, such as trading or work. Because of the limited social contact
between the speakers, they seldom have extensive access to native speaker models of each other‟s
languages. Moreover, they may not even be particularly motivated to try to acquire native speaker-
like skills in the other languages. As a consequence of all these facts, the mode of communication
that emerges may be something that owes a little bit to all the sources of input and that also falls
back on some features of language learners‟ speech in general. (There is a whole literature debating
how and why pidgins and creoles end up looking the way they do, and further reading is suggested at
the end of this chapter. The most widely held view among creolists is that they represent a synthesis
of many factors.
Traditionally, linguists distinguish pidgins and creoles on the grounds of how they are learnt, with a
pidgin being defined as a contact language that is nobody‟s first language, and a creole as a contact
language that does have native speakers. A community of native speakers can stabilise if there has
been widespread language shift to the emerging creole language or if the emerging creole is added to
the community repertoire, resulting in bilingualism.
This difference between pidgins and creoles necessarily entails differences in how and where they
are used. A pidgin, lacking native speakers, is a contact language that has very restricted social
functions within a community, while a creole serves most or all of the functions that any natural
human language must serve.

1.2.15. Factors Influencing Language Use in Society

A regional variation of language can give a lot of information about the place the speaker is from;
social variation tells about the roles performed by a given speaker within one community, or country.
Sociolinguistics also reveals the relationship between language use and the social basis for such use.
Accordingly, sociolinguists have identified various factors that influence language use in the society,
among which the following are the major ones:

A. Social class: the position of the speaker in the society, measured by the level of education,
parental background, profession and their effect on syntax and lexis used by the speaker;

21
 B. Social context: the register of the language used depending on changing situations, formal
language in formal meetings and informal during meetings with friends for example;
C. Geographical origins: slight differences in pronunciation between speakers that point at the
geographical region which the speakers come from;
D. Ethnicity: differences between the use of a given language by its native speakers and other
ethnic groups;
E. Nationality: clearly visible in the case of the English language: British English differs from
American English, or Canadian English;
F. Gender: differences in patterns of language use between men and women, such as quantity
of speech, intonation patterns;
G. Age: the influence of age of the speaker on the use of vocabulary and grammar complexity
(Wiśniewski, 2007, and Oha et al, 2010).

Conclusion
The search for the relationship between language and linguistics seems easy but difficult; it is the
search for the „light of a warm‟ during a scorching sun. However, the funniest parts of the
exploration bring satisfaction in that they end in the identification of tricky, but similar conceptions
and misunderstandings.

22
 CHAPTER TWO
LANGUAGE DIVERSITY AND DEVELOPMENT

 What is the development agenda in:

- Monolingual countries? Is it safe or curse to development?
- Bilingual countries?
- Multilingual countries? Is it safe or curse to development and peace/stability?
- Their constitution?
 Is there a relationship between numerical strength and language “dominant”?
 What is wise handling of language (s)?
 The X-lingualismness can exist at the following levels:
 Document
 Individual
 Small group
 Large group
 Societal
 Regional
 National
 Continental …………………………………………………….
 Factors for such-and-so are:
 Migration
 Colonization
 Policy interventions
 Willingness
 International / National boundaries
 Ethno-linguistic enclaves (Sprachinseln; e.g. Dorze in Entoto Area)
 Federation
 Employment

23
  Science & Technology
 Education
 Religion
 Linguistic imperialism
 Pidgin:
 No naïve speaker
 No one„s„ language
 Fewer words; little lexis
 Less morphology
 Simplified grammar
 Punched from a native and another foreign language /two foreign languages
 Limited function
 Often stigmatized
 Can easily die out
 Cloele:
o Evolves due to language contact
o It is the first language in some countries
o Cab be used entirely in a society
o Has wider functions
o Not much stigmatized
o Has “adequate” lexis and morphology
o Has some advanced grammar and communicative value
 PIDGIN > CROELE > LANGUAGE
 Language diversity, how diverse? The world is diverse! Our universe is a polyglot!!!
 Bilingualism:
 It must be seen clearly and separately from multilingualism.
 Two and more than two are totally different.
 There is no precisely, genuinely bilingual country.

24
  In its strict, traditional sense, bilingualism is the native like use of two languages
(Compounded / Balanced bilingualism; Bloomfield, 1930s).
 In its extended, laissez-faire sense, bilingualism is the use of two languages with a
minimum competence in the four language skills alternatively (McNamaraa, 1980s).
 -Child bilingualism (Compounded/ Balanced bilingualism; Very competent),
-Adolescent bilingualism (Competent) and
-Adult bilingualism (Less competent)
That is, with age, competence level vice-versa: as age increases, competence level
decreases.
 African, Oceanian and Caribbean borders are very rich in Pidgins and Croeles.
 Language development = revitalization, standardization, retrieval, etc.
 Language of development = language choice for development
 Language in development = the issues of language in development pipelines

D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D

2.0. INTRODUCTION
There are more than 6000 languages spoken by about 6 billion people in the world today. However,
those languages are not evenly divided among the world‟s population-over 90% of people globally
speak only about 300 majority languages and the remaining 5700 languages are termed as „minority
languages‟. These languages represent the ethno-linguistic diversity of our world and the rich
cultural heritage embedded within cultural communities and the development or modernization
(Dakker &Young, 2007). But here is the big question; is it multilingualism or monolingualism that
facilities development in a certain country? In the following section, we will raise the experiences of
different countries‟ monolingual or (bi-) multilingual structure and their contribution to development
or failure.
Language diversity has been a much discussed and studied problem by elites in the field. By
language diversity we mean the number of different languages spoken in a given area as is the case
in Asia and Africa ranging 2269 (32.8%) and 2092 (30.3%) respectively of the world languages,
where a much larger number of languages are spoken (Pool, 1972 and Grauwe, 2006). The
connection between language diversity and development had long been a subject of hot debate
25
between scholars. The link between language diversity and development is complex in that it is a
bidirectional causal relationship. There is a causal flow of connection from development to language
diversity. This pattern of relationship is well described by Grauwe (2006:2) as follows:

Economic development is based on specialization and trade. Individuals who specialize

and trade must develop common means of communication. This in turn leads to the use
of a common language. Thus as countries move on the ladder of economic development
and increase the network of trade both within and outside the country, a common
language will impose itself and will be used by an increasing number of individuals.
This then puts pressure on the local languages, and in the long run will push many of
these into extinction. Thus in the long run economic development will lead to a decline
in the number of languages and in language diversity.

So, development imposes dynamic pressure on language diversity; because, as one language
increases in size, its communication value increases. As a result, the encouragements made to shift to
its use by those who do not speak that language increases. This process can, in some conditions,
result in a situation where everybody uses that common language. Therefore, the increase in the size
of the common language may adversely cause the local languages tend to disappear and the language
diversity declines. There is also an opposite causal relationship. The use of a common language
strengthens trade because it facilitates communication. That is countries that use the same language
tend to do more business with each other than those countries without a common language. Hence,
the use of the same/common language creates conducive situation for international trade which
promotes economic growth and development.

In general, economic development encourages the use of a common language by different countries
and/or nations, thus, declines language diversity; and the use of a common language between
different countries in turn leads to more growth and development. This can be better understood
from the following empirical data:

It is striking to find that the (economically) least developed parts of the world (Africa and
Oceania) are the habitat of about 50% of the spoken languages, while these regions
represent only 12% of world population. Conversely, Europe that belongs to the most
developed part of the world only has 3.5% of the world languages while it represents
about 13% of world population (Grauwe, 2006:2)

26
 2.1. MONOLINGUALISM OR MULTILINGUALISM?
2.1.1. Language Situations in a Society
For the purpose of studying the relationship between language and society from the view of
sociolinguistics, we would like to see the three major concepts, namely monolinguailsm,
bilingualism, and multilingualism based on the number of languages a certain society or individual
speaks. Today, linguists have used each of the terms „monolingual‟, „bilingual‟, and „multilingual‟ in
a number of ways. Two noticeable divergences are how many languages they refer to for „bilingual‟
and „multilingual‟; and whether each term refers to the language use of both individuals and
communities of individuals in society or societal use alone.

2.1.1.1. What is Monolingualism?

Monolinguals are individuals who use one language and may be proficient at using a number of
different varieties of the language together with different registers in the variety of varieties they
know, and of switching between varieties and between registers in the appropriate context. Another
native term occasionally used is „monoglot‟. It is the condition of being able to speak only a single
language at individual or societal level. It is a common phenomenon at individual level in the world.
There are also many de jure monolingual countries in the world (Wardhaugh, 2006:96). America,
French, Botswana and Somalia can be mentioned as few examples.
Monolingual or unilingual is also said of a text, dictionary, or conversation written or conducted in
only one language, and of an entity in or at which a single language is either used or officially
recognized (in particular when being compared with bilingual or multilingual entities or in the
presence of individuals speaking different languages) ( Oha et al 2010).
Many think monolingualism as an asset but it has its own shortcoming. In monolingual countries
there may be both indigenous and non-indigenous minorities languages which are dispossessed of
their being national belonging officially. This officially marginalizing of the language and culture of
minorities is assumed as on „internal colonization‟ and political scientists and linguists called the
situation the „fourth world‟ (Romaine, 1994).

2.1.1.2. What is Bilingualism?

Bilinguals are often described as person/people who use two languages, and bilingualism is the
ability to speak two languages, or the habitual use of two languages colloquially (R.Ellis 1994).
Bilingualism is the ability to master the use of two languages. According to Apple and
Mysken(1987:1), language contact inevitably leads to bilingualism. Generally two types of

27
bilingualism are distinguished: societal and individual bilingualism. Societal bilingualism occurs
when in a given society two or more languages are spoken. In this sense, nearly all societies are
bilingual, but they can differ with regard to the degree of the form of bilingualism.
Apple and Mysken (1987:3) further pointed out that "any definition of bilingualism has to come up
with a central problem in the social sciences: that of scale and aggregation". They go on to express
two definitions of bilingualism. They state that Bloomfield made the highest demands. According to
him a bilingual should possess native-like control of two or more languages. At the other extreme,
they point out that McNamara (1969), proposed that somebody should be called bilingual if he has
some second language skills in one of the four modalities (speaking, listening, writing and reading),
in addition to his first language skills (1987:3).

A. Parameters to Determine the Degree of Individual Bilingualism

i. Relative competence: the situation in which the ability of language competence of an individual
compared with the native speaker of the other language. Based on this there might be either
balanced bilinguals or dominated bilinguals. Balanced billing are if an individuals who are
capable of using two languages equally, whereas dominated is if there is a dominated language
he/she has.

ii. Cognitive organization: is the situation in which how one perceive his/her environment. Based
on this there one either compound or coordinate bilingualism. Compound bilingualism is if one
has only one mental representation for one object in the two languages. A compound bilingual is
also balanced bilingual. If there is d/t image creation or different proficiency for individual,
he/she is said to be coordinate bilingual.

iii. Age of acquisition: if the age bilingual person is in a childhood there is a probability the being
either simultaneous bilingual or consecutive bilingual. Simultaneous biliniguality is if the person
acquired the both languages at the same time and constructive biliniguality is when a person
learn the languages at different time. Based on this therefore, a person could be a childhood or
adolescent or an adult bilingual.
iv. Exogenity Vs Endogenity- the Presence of second language speech community.

v. The Socio-cultural status of the two languages: - if one think of the language has value and
his/her intention is to be improved in language the situation is said to be additional bilingualism. If
the native speaker or second language speaker assume the language has lets value and not use it

28
much is said to be subtractive bilingual person. The value the person related with may be religion,
poverty, ethnic identity etc.

2.1.1.3. Diglossia
According to Wardhaugh(2006:89) “A diglossic situation exists in a society when it has two distinct
codes which show clear functional separation; that is, one code is employed in one set of
circumstances and the other in an entirely different set.” Ferguson (1959:336) has defined diglossia
as the existence of a “divergent, highly codified” variety of language, which is used only in
particular situations.
Wardhaugh (2006:90) further explained that the characteristic feature of diglossia is that the two
varieties are kept quite apart in their functions. For example, the high varieties may not be used for
delivering sermons and formal lectures, especially in parliament or legislative body, for giving
political speeches, for broadcasting the news on radio and television, and for writing poetry, fine
literature, and editorials in newspapers. In contrast, the low varieties may be used in giving
instructions to workers in low prestige occupations or to household servants, in conversation with
familiars, in „soap operas‟ and popular programs on the radio, in captions on political cartoons in
newspapers, and in „folk literature.‟ On occasion, a person may lecture in an H variety but answer
questions about its contents or explain parts of it in an L variety so as to ensure understanding.
Diglossia refers to a situation in which two languages or varieties of a language are used in a
community for different functions. As Ferguson (1995) defines it is a use of different languages or
varieties of the same language for different functions and develop corresponding pattern of language
behaviour, often along a high-low continuum related to social stratification and hierarchy refers as
„diglossia‟. Diglossia often noted as factor for language shift. This is especially in a speech
community, in which the minority languages have diglossic relationship with the majority language.
In many Africa countries, for example, the distinction between official language, possible various
national languages and a number of local, ethnic, vernacular languages tends to reflect a particular
high-low continuum in which the high variety is identified with the official language this is quiet
often that of the former colonial master in Africa (English, French, Portuguese). In Northern Africa,
the Arabic, the high variety is associated with classical Arabic that is the Quran Arabic; where as
there are many vernacular, colloquial or dialectal Arabic varieties characteristically associated with
the low variety on the diglossia scale and with speaking. Together with those some intermediate
varieties are emerged(Webb and Kembo-Sure, 2000).

29
It is useful to distinguish multilingualism and diglossia in African context clearly. Multilingualism
is a general ability (habit) of individual or society where as diglossia is a specific usage of different
varieties of the some language or different language for different functional purposes. Originally
diglossia would exclude the use of the high variety in everyday conversation.

Diglossia is used to describe any situation where two different languages or varieties are used in
everyday life for different usually complementary functions is a speech co complementary functions
is a speech community, however from these two languages or varieties the one is
sociolinguisitically high, the other is with low function. The high considered as more prestigious
then the other.
In Africa official ex-colonial languages often refers as high and vernacular languages as low. This is
because of many reasons, from these the languages standardization and codification is one. The
standardized and codified languages considered as high because it associated with upward social
mobility, money getting & political power. On the other hand, the low languages or varieties find it
difficult to compete in function& prestige, even though some Africa languages are being
standardized and codified and increasingly develop written literature. Even in some countries like
South Africa dominant numbers of the indigenous languages are official language but still they
located at low scale sociolingustically (ibid).

2.1.1.4. Multilingualism
“A multilingual is a person who has the ability to use three or more languages, either separately or in
various degrees of code mixing. Different languages are used for different purposes, competence in
each varying according to such factors as register, occupation and education”(McArthur 1992). In
other words, multilingualism is mastery of multiple languages. A person is multilingual if he or she
knows several languages; a document or message is multilingual if it is presented in multiple
languages. For example, Ethiopia is one of the multilingual countries in Africa. Multilingualism
refers to an occurrence regarding an individual speaker who uses two or more languages, a
community of speakers where two or more languages are used, or between speakers of different
languages. Multilingual speakers outnumber monolingual speakers in the world's population. A
multilingual person, in the broadest definition, is anyone who can communicate in more than one
language, be it active (through speaking and writing) or passive (through listening and reading).
More specifically, the terms bilingual and trilingual are used to describe comparable situations in
which two or three languages are involved. A generic term for multilingual persons is polyglot.
30
Multilingualism could be rigidly defined as being native-like in two or more languages. It could also
be loosely defined as being less than native-like but still able to communicate in two or more
languages. Multilinguals may not have equal proficiency in or control over all the languages they
know.

B. Individual multilingualism:
In a multilingual or monolingual situation, individuals might be multilingual (i.e. can speak more
than one language) this is called Individual multilingualism.
The data gathered from survey in Nigeria, subjects of the speech communities studied spoken a
number of languages. 60% of them spoke two languages, 30% three and 10% more than four. This is
the case of many African countries. Individual multilingualism is very usual in Africa than in any
other continent because there are functional, social and the like factors which enhance the situation
(Nurse and Bernd, 2000 and Webb and Kembo-Sure, 2000).
Individual multilingualism is not well studied in Africa. Though it is known the degree of
competence among the speakers varies depend on; educational, societal, geographical mobility,
interlock social factors and formal education. Depending on the above facts it is possible to guess at
least 50% of Africans are multilingual. In these countries, in most of them, the official language is
the language of the former colonial country; surprisingly less than 10-25% of the national population
only understood and actively used it (Nurse and Bernd, 2000).
Very common phenomena which are closely linked with Individual multilingualism and
bilingualism are code choice, code changing, code mixing and code switching.

B. Societal/national multilingualism
Languages have different functions in a society, and multilingual societies‟ languages may be found
it divide functions among them. In multilingual setting different languages have different legal status,
in this situation some societies‟ institutions may use one or two languages to serve in its domain, this
is institutional multilingualism. Institutional multilingualism also refer to – usage of language for
certain function in the societies or states by low. The constitution or decrees give this status,
irrespective of the degree of implementation or actual usage by people. Depending on this we can
divide societal multilingualism in two:

31
a. De Jure (Official) multilingual states or societies
These are nations or societies which have legal declaration of being a multilingual nation because
they use different languages for different function. For example, we can take South Africa; it is an
official multilingual country which has eleven official languages.

b. De Facto multilingual states or societies

These are nations or societies which are not legally multilingual but practically they are. For
example Canada is a de facto multilingual country. Officially it is a bilingual country, in which
English and French is the official languages by constitution. But most Canadians have regular
contact with only one of these. Together with this there are many languages spoken by different
speech community (ibid).
For example, almost all nations of Africa are multilingual, with different degree of varieties. For
example in Nigeria there are 450 languages spoken by 110 million populations, in Cameroon 180
languages spoken by 13.5 million populations and in Tanzania 30 million populations there are 120
languages. On the other hand some countries have very few languages. For example in Mauritania
there is only four languages, Niger has only ten languages and Benin with two million. As a
continent Africa, is a multilingual continent which has more than 2000 varieties (it includes
languages and dialects) (Nurse and Bernd, 2000).

C. Contextual Factors for Multilingualism

Factors that create societal multilingualism might be the following ((Nurse and Bernd, 2000):
 Migration: societies migrate in large or small number. Such kind of community usually tends
to be able to speak the language of other.
 Colonoialism: is a situation in which relatively large numbers of people from a given
nationality move into a certain geographical area and take control of them. This social
situation leads the colonized nation and individuals to multilingualism.
 International boreders : there is diversified language situations in boarders. The members of
the same speech community might live in different countries at borders with different speech
community. This situation leads individuals and both adjacent countries to be multilingual.
 Sprachinseln (ethinolinguistic enclaves)- when the speaker of a certain language enclave by
another speech community, the community might going to be multilingual by acquiring the
language of the other community.

32
  The spread of international languages- in this globalization era knowing international
languages like English is very vital. Such kind of spread lead individuals and nations to
multilingualism.
 Federation- it is the unity of diverse ethnic groups or nationalities under the political control
of one state particularly in forced federation countries that become colonies of other country
had no the same sociocultural and linguistic group for each other. Therefore when they
become independent they made a federation with having other. Therefore when they become
independent they made a federation with having a common language.
Some more factors for Multilingualism are:

 Historical political movements such as imperialism or colonialism; for example, the spread
of Spanish to Latin America
 Increasing communications among different parts of the world and the need to be competent
in languages of wider communication.
 Social and cultural identify and the interest of maintenance and revival of minority languages.
 Education: Second and foreign languages are part of the curriculum in many countries
 Religion movements that result in people moving to a new country.

D. Is Multilingualism a blessing or a curse?

Multilingualism has its own advantages and disadvantages. Many scholars argue on these ideas.
Those who argue for its disadvantage, like Fishiman, raise the following points.
i. It is a problem for nationism
If a country is a newly independent of a certain colony and need government language immediately
obligated to accept the old colonial languages. However, this situation for nationalism ground is
difficult to accept. So making influence on the nationalists will be the only choice of the
government.
ii. It is a Problem for nationalism
Multilingualism is an impediment for multilingual states than a nation state. From the very nature
of nationalism the nationalist work toward the development of their own mother tongue language
together with the culture, religion and history they are in. Basically, language for nationality means
the very way of manifestation of its holistic identity. But given the importance of language for
nationalism it is difficult for multinational state to develop a sense of nation.

33
Therefore it is obliged either to develop a national language which need again promoting its
acceptance by those who are not native speakers and make the language to satisfy the need of citizen
or advocate nationalism.
iii. It is a cause for economical problem
As a result of researches carried out by Fishman (1968) and Pool (1972) (quoted by Fasold, 1984)
nations with every high level of multilingualism were addressed with a very low score of economic
well being As Pool‟s result of research carried out depending on GDP value of 133 countries; a
country can have any degree of language uniformity or fragmentation and Still be underdeveloped;
and a country whose entire population, more or less, speaks the same language can anywhere from
very rich to very poor. But a country that is linguistically highly heterogeneous is always
underdeveloped or semi-developed, and a country that is highly developed always has considerable
language uniformity (Fashold ,1984,7)
Fishman also has the same idea with Pool. He said linguistically heterogeneous countries are
educationally not advanced, economically back warded, socially, politically . . . unstable. But
scholars like Fasold(1984) disagree on such kind of general conclusion. As to Fasold, high
multilinguality doesn‟t always preventing economic development but uniformity of language and
economic well-being might reinforce each other. However their relation is not causal. On the other
hand, people who take multilingualism as a resource (advantage), like Fasold, raise their own ideas.
i. It is a solution to nationist and nationalist policy conflict
It is possible to solve a problem that might be raised from a nationalist and a nationist by using the
very colonial language and a national language respectively as official governmental languages.
From educational point of view there may be disagreement on either using ethnic languages as
medium of instruction that claimed by nationists reasons of efficiency or using national language for
nationalists reasons of unity. On this kind of problem government can use as a resolution using the
ethnic language for primary education and the national language for advanced education.

ii. It creates more dynamic society

Multilinguality has contribution in a multiethnic society to bring a richer society than a nation with
only one dominant ethnic group. It creates diversified way of life and more world outlook. Countries
with such kind of composition are more exciting and thought-provoking places. Sometimes
multilingualism might bring solutions for some problem of multilingual nations.

34
 iii. It can use as individual interactional resource
In a multilingual society people assign different languages for different tasks. One language
normally may be used as home language and with close friends where as the other language for
business and governmental issues. Without such identification and usage of languages individuals
might not understand each other properly.

2.1.2. Monolingualism and Development

Monolingualism is a tendency of an individual or a community/country using only one language as a
means of social communication. The survey of literature about monlingualism shows that the
concept is widely accepted by the scholars and the individual monolinguals themselves in many
parts of the world, especially the Western societies, as a norm and a less challenging sociolinguistic
phenomenon, thus was given little attention as subject of sociolinguistic inquiry (Ellis, 2006 and
Wardhaugh, 2006). Hence, we can rarely find scholarly sociolinguistics publications with
monolingualism as a title.
Monolingualism can be acquired from birth as a mother tongue or by adherence to the high status
language identified by a country‟s language policy marginalizing the other minority languages.
According to the traditional view, the ideal model of a society in a whole country or territories in a
country is characterised as monolingual, monoethnic, monoreligious, monoideological. Hence,
monolingualism is considered as one of the key characteristics of a well-functioning and „sound‟
nation state. (Ellis, 2006 and Gogolin, 2011).

Therefore monolingualism is the result of the rise of the European nation state that was later spread
to their colonies, and another is that powerful English-speaking nations are both the originators and
beneficiaries of English as a global language, and they tend to be monolingual.

This adherence to the “dogma of monolingualsim” has dangerous effects. Firstly, the view that
monolingualism is a common state of human individual, which is mainly prevalent in Western, and
English speaking societies, by itself overlooks the fact that the majority of the world‟s population is
estimated to be bilingual or multilingual. Secondly, monolingualism results in the absence of the
benefits of learning a second language summarised as enrichment (cultural and intellectual),
economic (relating to vocations and foreign trade), equality (social justice and overcoming
disadvantage), external (relating to ones country‟s role in the world), “intellectual stimulus” and
“new ways of thinking and learning and organising knowledge. Thirdly, monolingualism was
described as a “pathology” or a “disability” because the monolingual individual has suffered from

35
lack of opportunity to learn (or maintain) a second language due to discriminatory policies and
practices which ignored how language shapes and reflects both thought and social structures, and
failed to see how monolingualism as an ideology is creating restrictions, barriers, and conflicts for
the society (Auer and Wei, 2007, and Ellis, 2006).
The summary of the arguments implies that language minorities in Western societies have been
marginalised and patronised and had their potential limited for too long and that now it is the
monolinguals‟ turn. To conclude, monolingualism is by any means a loss to the individuals or the
country as a whole.

2.1.3. Multilingualism and Development

In multilingual and multiethnic countries and states like America, Asia, Africa, Australia, etc.
language use is not just a private matter, since a particular language is used in any public
communication. The central issue is which language or languages are used officially in the public
sphere, i.e., in public education, state administration, the army, the courts and so on. As a rule, ethnic
harmony can be promoted if multiethnic, multilingual and multicultural countries adopt a policy of
pluralism that recognizes the language rights of minorities while at the same time to form a common
civic and cultural identity, yet circumstances and ethnic groups differ. What is more, language
pluralism is the most democratic approach for multilingual societies. Language pluralism begins
with the assumption that assimilation is likely to lead to a hostile response from the minorities. It
assumes that every group - as a group wants to retain its identity, has the right to do so, and will fight
to do so. To avoid the conflict (fighting) and to create civic consensus, pluralists argue that, parallel
with creating a joint identity, policy-makers need to grant convincing guarantees for the retention of
sub-cultures and languages. Pluralists safeguard the parallel use of two or more languages by saying
"let us each retain our own language in certain spheres, such as schools, but let us also have a
common language for joint activities, especially in civic life".
Language is a core issue in the politics of ethnicity; fortunately, it is an easier issue to deal with than
some other ethnic issues because language allows for multiple identities. Language knowledge is not
an exclusive or immutable ethnic "given" similar to religion or race. People can speak several
languages, and several languages can coexist. Specific arrangements differ from case to case, but all
involve a two-track policy whereby one track gives space and guarantees for minority languages,
and the other track promotes the learning of one or several state languages to allow communication
and enhance mutual understanding towards a common goal-development.

36
 2.1.4. Challenges of Multilingualism (Pluralist Policy) and the Remedy
First, one of the potential debilitating problems of multilingualism and the associated policy is that
language differentiation can be perceived as negative discrimination. As a result, the politics of
plurality must make sure that separate ethnic institutions, such as minority schools or separate
administrative offices, preserve rather than undermine the rights of minorities. Ethnic accord is most
likely to be enhanced if such arrangements are voluntary and if ethnic groups are autonomous in
deciding on specific programs and approaches.
Second, language pluralism can turn into language separatism-the undermining of a common
language, e.g. refusing to learn and speak (use) local languages. As a remedy, the citizenry needs a
common language, both literally and figuratively, to promote mutual understanding and to form and
nurture one civic nation. Pluralist language policies require a careful balancing of state support for
both the distinct languages of minorities and the common state language.

2.2. EXPERIENCES OF LANGUAGE DIVERSITY AND

DEVELOPMENT IN THE WORLD

2.2.1. N o r t h America’s Languages and Development

In Canada, the demand of change in the status of French and an attempt to give it status in higher
domains than before had started sometime before with a top-down decision (policy) from the
government of Canada (Schiffman, 1996). It was a „not something speakers of French demand‟.
Hence, the province of Québec (French Speaking Canadians) and (even, other provinces) were
supposed to implement this. Later, it resulted in the confusion in status of the French language; it
saw the English speaking Canadians failed to act (due to lack of incentives and absence of
jurisdiction); it facilitated the Canadian civil war; and the expected developments hampered. What is
more, the United States of America, for example, has presented the case of („Only English‟)
assimilation to make monolingual America for the sake of civic integration has been an explicit
policy that has resulted in great loss and failure in many socio-economic spheres.

2.2.2. Asian Languages and Development

The People‟s Republic of China, according to Zhou (2007), has employed two means of literacy
promotion: a campaign approach and a legislative approach to meet the needs of nation-state
building through education. From 1949 through to the late 1970s, the campaign approach was
motivated by a political rationale, but later an economic rationale also became important. From the
mid-1980s and continuing to the present, a legislative approach emerged which treats compulsory
education as the mainstream means for literacy development and illiteracy eradication as a
37
supplementary one. Meanwhile, China‟s language policy has also changed from allowing parallel
development of Chinese literacy and minority literacies to a linguistic hierarchy with Chinese
(Mandarin) as dominant and minority languages as subordinate. Minorities may challenge this order
and in these challenges can be seen differences between national legislation and local legislation.
The national laws generally take a „permission‟ stance towards literacy in minority languages,
whereas local laws adopt stances ranging from „promotion‟ to „permission‟ to „tolerance‟, with the
focus for contesting relative status concentrating on the area of literacy education rather than
illiteracy eradication. Further, Schiffman (2006), India has at least 17 languages and has a “three-
language formula” for development which indicates many „official‟ languages, but one „national‟
language (Hindi) and one other link language (English), and all citizens are supposed to learn all the
three (one in their respective linguistic state) and use them on demand.
Similarly but with a slight difference, the Sri Lanka‟s Sinhala-only law of 1956 disenfranchised the
Tamil language after many protests and a protracted civil war. Consequently, the 13th and 16th
amendments to the Constitution of 1978 made Sinhala and Tamil the two official languages, and
English the „link‟ language (Schiffman, 2006). In the process, the training of the Tamil typists and
interpreters, the funding for this training, the timetable for implementation, and penalties for failure
to implement and rewards for implementing the policy had cost Sri Lanka a lot. Likewise, the newly
independent Malaysia illustrated the successful negotiation multilingualism and development…,
according to which the Chinese settlers accepted the public dominance of the Malay language in
return for a liberal naturalization policy. In this case, it was also significant that the Chinese diaspora
has had alternative ways to safeguard the survival of their language, through contacts with Chinese
communities abroad, importing of books, and sending Chinese students to universities abroad.

2.2.3. European Languages and Development

France, once, has had an implicit policy of assimilation-a „monolingual‟ France. Since the French
revolution, becoming a French citizen has meant that French was the only language used in schools,
administration, the army, and public life in general. While the dominance of the French language in
France appears "natural" today, it is in fact the result of deliberate ethnic engineering. Despite some
minority protest, it has been a successful policy of assimilation. Similar examples of assimilationist
success can be found in other parts of the world, but one also can find just as many examples of
assimilationist failure. Assimilation is most likely to fail if it is involuntary and if it involves
territorially based minorities. Assimilation is not a universal remedy, as it involves the loss of one
identity for the sake of another.

38
The House of Parliaments has considered that multilingualism is an expression of the European
Union's cultural diversity, which must be preserved, and that, therefore, while the increasing number
of official languages calls for „pragmatic solutions‟ over the rising cost of interpretation and
translation, multilingualism must be guaranteed to ensure the legitimacy and diversity of the
European Union. As a result, most EU countries and candidate or neighboring states have a direct
country name-official language match; an indication for the recognition and fostering of
multilingualism in a “Union”-European Union. What is more, the collapse of the Soviet Union and
the death of Franco provide two recent examples of how democratization has led to more rights for
minority languages. The two previously dominant languages, Russian and Spanish respectively, had
to accommodate indigenous regional languages such as Latvian and Catalan. These cases also
illustrate that language changes take time since subgroups of the population have to learn new
languages.

2.2.4. The African Languages and Development

According to Abdulaziz (1977) mentioned in Lodhi (2003), the following national/language
typology emerges for Africa.
1. First, there are countries which have one African language spoken by the vast majority
of the population. Countries such as Botswana (Setswana), Burundi (Kirundi), Lesotho
(Sesotho), Rwanda (Kinyarwanda), Somalia (Somali) and Swaziland (Seswati) are using as
a Mother-Tongue. But, Central African Republic (Sango), Ethiopia (Amharic), Kenya and
Tanzania (Swahili), Mali (Bambara), Senegal (Wolof) and Sudan (Arabic) are using as a
LINGUA FRANCA. That is, countries in this group appear to have a favorable basis for
developing an African language and give it a national/official status and facilitate their
development in their own language (official).
2. Second, there are countries such as Ghana (Akan/Twi), Malawi (Chichewa), Niger (Hausa),
Togo (Ewe), Burkina Faso (Mosi/More) and Zimbabwe (Shona) which have predominant
African language.
3. Third, the groups of countries having several dominant indigenous African languages
competing with one another are Nigeria (Hausa/Fulani, Igbo, Yoruba, Kanuri), Sierra
Leone (Mende, Temme) and Zaire (Chiluba, Kikongo including Kituba, Kingwana i.e.
Kongo Swahili, Lingala and Standard Swahili).
4. What is more, in the fourth category, there are countries such as Cameroon, Ivory Coast and
Mozambique which have no predominant African language(s).

39
Let‟s raise a big question about South Africa‟s “Fashionable and Contemporary” language policy
with Eleven (11) languages which are given equal status in the country; is it workable and realistic
for development, or is it „compensatory‟-trying to make up for past wrongs? In our opinion, we have
seen the 20th century as marked by innumerable ethnic conflicts based on the quest for native
language rights. As with other issues of ethnicity, language diversity cannot simply be ignored.
Indeed, demands for pluralist language policy are likely to accelerate in the future, and policy-
makers will need to be prepared to accommodate language diversity while still promoting overall
integration.

 Comparative Analysis of Linguistically Homogeneous and Linguistically

Heterogeneous Countries

Apart from particular regional or national tendencies, there is a constant tension between the forces
of monolingualism and multilingualism. This may be observed in the history of the USA and
Australia, both of which gradually replaced policies accepting multilingualism which were in
existence for much of the 19th Century, first by tolerant but latter by restrictive ones, by rejecting
multilingualism or any kind of cultural pluralism during World War I. A shift to more accepting
policies started in the late 1960s in the USA and in the early 1970s in Australia.
Globally, there are corresponding waves of more positive and more negative policies towards
multilingualism, with the period before World War I and between the wars essentially negative
reflecting xenophobic and monoculturalism. In the 1960s and 1970s there was a positive tendency
reflecting quest for social equity, human rights, and a change for inhibiting structures. The tension
between mono and multilingualism may be observed in Europe today, massification within the
development of European integration is being outbalanced by national rivals, or especially in Eastern
and Central European countries which have regained their political autonomy in recent years, and
regional resurgence in West Europe, like Italy and Germany. However, the inevitable economic and
political interdependence may promote multilingualism and cultural autonomy. Population flow all
over the world is another important factor for promoting multilingualism(Clyne,2007).
A few examples may be drawn from Nambia, Singapore, Australia, Canada, and Switzerland. The
language policy of the new Namibia gives official status to English-only although it is the native
language of not more than 3% of the population. Its adoption as an official language is due to the
identification of the other two other prior official languages , Afrikaans and German, with colonial
and oppression. In contrast, Singapore has four official languages, three of which Mandarin, Malay,
and Tamil may be seen to represent the major ethnic groups ,Chinese ,Malay, and Indonesia. English

40
is used as a language of interethnic and international communication. Australia, while not declaring
an official language, uses English as its national language(de facto official language).Both the
National Policy on Languages and Australian Language and Literacy have followed the guiding
principles: Competence in English for all, Maintenance and development of languages other than
English, provision of services in language other than English, and opportunities to acquire second
languages. A variety of languages found in the country are used for education, media and public
notices(Clyne,2007).
In Canada, "official bilingualism" is intended to protect the balance between English and French.
However, facilities are being made available for the teaching of heritage languages after school
hours. In Switzerland, each of the national languages-French, Germany and Italy-is equal despite
substantial differences in the number of users. This same quality of status does not apply to
Singapore. Malay is the national language but its special function is limited the national anthem and
national motto. Mandarin has been propagated in the majority of Chinese community, and Tamil is
the official language undergoing the greatest language shift(Ibid).

In multiligual, heterogeneous societies language ideologies are constantly constructed and

reconstructed in discursive interactions at micro and macro levels. These interactions are always
subject to relations of power in society, relations which include, gender, class, face, ethnicity etc.

41
 CHAPTER THREE
LANGUAGE POLICY AND DEVELOPMENT
1. Pluralistic

2. Coercive assimilation

3. Voluntary assimilation

4. Non-interventionism

==========================
5. Territorial

6. Non-territorial

7. Promotive

8. Tolerance

9. Permissive

==========================
10. Egalitarian

11. Non-egalitarian (restrictivism)

12. Overt

13. Covert

14. De facto

15. De jure

16. Top-down

17. Bottom-up

================================
18. Monolingualism

19. Multilingualism

20. Bilingualism

21. Endoglossic

22. Exoglossic

23. International

24. Vernacular
42
25. Lingua franca

============================================
26. Symmetrical

27. Asymmetrical

28. Purism

29. Artificialism

30. Hierarchical

31. Mixed

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

 Language policies may fail if they are too ambitious, or try to be too egalitarian:

 ‘Ambitious’: trying to work with too many languages, or convert L-

varieties to H-varieties by legislative fiat

 Mostly they fail because they fail to implement the policy, or because of

hidden agendas.

 Q: Are there any effective language policies?

A Policy which has:
 Explicit and realistic goals
 Adequate Budget
 Timetable and schedules
 Periodic evaluation and Monitoring
 Rewards for achieving goals
 Penalties for failure

 Language Planning shall be:

 Revitalizations

 Codification

 Standardization

 Modernization
43
  Corpus Planning (Injecting words)

 Terminologization

 Status Decisions

 Scope /Role Identification and Limitations

D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D

3.0. INTRODUCTION
Many language intellectuals contend that language policy, what governments do officially-through
legislation, court decisions, executive action, or other means to determine how languages are used in
public contexts; to cultivate language skills needed to meet national priorities; to establish the rights
of individuals or groups to learn, use, and maintain languages, to restrict the number of characters in
general sue, etc. is an issue of critical importance in the world today. In this regard, Spolsky (2004:
ix) believes that “…no consensus has emerged about the scope and nature of the field of language
policy, its theories or its terminology.” However, it is clear that language has always been one of the
main symbols of cultural identity within a community.

Throughout modern history, different countries have developed and implemented various language
policies designed to promote one or more official language(s) or defend the rights of minority
languages and varieties. Today, we observe that language policies still remain on top of the agenda
for many policy makers, scholars and politicians. For Spolsky four principal factors have been
identified so far as fundamental factors in determining the language policy of a nation. These are the
sociolinguistic situation, the national ideology, the existence of English as a world language and the
notions of language rights. Consequently, Spolsky (2005) explained that many of the countries in the
world have to develop a language policy for people speak various languages and dialects at different
continents, countries, regions/states and provinces. In most of the world today, there‟s the pressure
of learning English and some more other foreign language (s).
In the following section, we will discuss the basic concepts of language policy and the
comprehensive summary of peculiar language policies from around the world.

44
 3.1. Language policy and development
The levels of policy makers and of users (those affected by policies) indicate the potential
complexity of language policy and its implementation in development. People wish to improve
themselves (it seems a natural human inclination for people to wish to have better lives, however
defined) but their development will be made more or less difficult depending on whether local
contexts enable or prevent their wish to develop. One challenge is to implement policy to create a
match between people‟s aspirations and the context in which they live and work; even if that means
that the policy may have to change them in some way (Chris and Kennedy, 2010:2-3).
Development implies greater far-reaching participant benefits including an equitable sharing of
resources and a distribution of socio-political and economic power and influence. And language
policy is regarded very much as a part of socio-economic and political context.
Scholars who think that language policy is a form of social development planning, argue rather than
immediately defining language problems, that need solving through language policy. We should
look at local social needs first and only then see where language policy might or might not assist in
achieving social objectives (Tupas, 2009, Djite, 2008). According to these scholars, language policy
is part of social development. In line with this, Chris, Kennedy (2010: 6) informed that it is useful to
have access to a model of development against which we could measure the appropriacies of
language policy interventions. He proposed three stages or classifications of society: (A) Traditional
(B) contemporary and (C) Emergent. And he further stated three stages of social development
overtime, corresponding very roughly to the first half of the 20th c (A), the latter half of the 20thc (B)
and the beginning of the 21stc. (C). (See the details of each stages in the following table).
Table1: Three stages of social development

Stages of Soc ia l D e velo pmen t

(A)Traditional (B)Contemporary (C) Emergent
Rationalist economics Behavioral economics Knowledge society
Rational Romantic Criticality
Highly structured Neo-liberalism Distributed knowledge
Top down Soft power Collaboration
Centralization Decentralization Micro- agency
Nationalism/ nationism Globalization Diversity
State power Localization Public /private partnership

45
 Predictability Un certainty Fuzziness /complexity
Mass production „fordism‟ Choice or market -driven Mobility /flexibility
Stratified society Less stratified society Multiple identity
Collectivist Individualism Participation
Source: (Tupas, 2009, Djite, 2008).
For the above researchers, from the historical viewpoint, the social development is expressed from
left to right of the table (i.e. from stage A to B to C) is one from simplicity to complexity; from
mono –to multi-dimensions; from structure to fluidity; from macro to micro.

3.2. Present and future of Language Policy and development

Language policy as a discipline is not different from other disciplines such as social planning,
economics and linguistics itself; all of which have changed through the late 20th and early 21st
centuries as the cultures from which they are derived have changed (reflected in a move from
column A to columns B and C in Table 1).

The earlier language plan case studies and investigations built up a descriptive database from which
we were able to produce models of language planning based on the questions of „what actors attempt
to influence what behaviors of which people for what ends under what conditions by what means
through which decision-making processes with what effect?‟(Cooper, 1989:98). Now, although
descriptive studies continue to be made, there is a much broader concern for a deeper more critical
interpretation of the processes of language policy and for looking at it from several viewpoints.).

3.3. Macro and micro issues in language policy and development

A meso level lies between the macro (supranational or national) and the micro (individual, group or
institution). One example of the macro-micro distinction is that which looks at levels of educational
policy and implementation from government to classroom and how agents at the different levels
implement the policy which is handed down to them. This approach describes micro implementation
of a macro policy and is concerned with linkages between the levels and issues such as
decentralization and centralization (Kennedy, 2001).

A second view takes a more overtly political stance and is influenced by Foucault‟s notion of
governmentality (Foucault, 1991). This approach examines the actions and strategies of agents of
planning and development – whether politicians, advisers or educators – and in particular the
discourses they adopt to implement micro aspects of macro-policy. The third element of micro-

46
policy is the concern with individuals, groups or institutions who create their own language policy
without being directly linked to a macro-policy handed down to them for implementation.

3…THE LANGUAGE POLICIES ANALYSIS

3.1.1. Pluralistic and Assimilative Language Policy

Canagarajah (2005) explained that certain discourses of globalization make us assume a pluralistic
model of a world where all communities enjoy relative autonomy, with empowered local identities,
values, and knowledge. The idea is that it is possible to develop a pluralistic mode of thinking where
we celebrate different cultures and identities, and yet engage in projects common to our shared
humanity. Hence, in appropriating the global discourse of a pluralistic language policy, it is essential
for learners to be able to assert their selves in cross-cultural global interactions so that multiple
language user identities could be constructed. In addition, any research finding, for Canagarajah
(2005), points out to the need for language practitioners in multilingual countries, to reexamine their
practices, particularly in the light of the recent boom in information technology, the globalization of
the world economy, changes in economic and employment trends, and new requirements of literacy.
The need to master a global language is all too obvious and in the process of appropriating the global
discourse, they need language learning curricula that are not only based strictly on tasks which offer
practice on narrowly defined and controlled syntactic or functional elements. They need curricula
that could enable learners to develop their global discourse competence by manifesting their
pluralistic cultural and linguistic identities. However, Canagarajah (2005) expressed his fear that the
way knowledge is spread disproves the notion of pluralistic language policy by displaying a one-
sided imposition of homogeneous discourses and intellectual traditions by a few dominant
communities form the developed world or the wise few elites. Pennycook (2002:108) also unveiled
her suspension that “…more liberal and pluralistic approaches to language policy necessarily have
less governmental implications.”
On the other hand, an assimilation language policy, which could be either coercive or harmless and
could naturally, breeds resistance and determination to defend the target culture and language under
attack, is a policy that denies the native (first), indigenous language and culture in an attempt for
similarity, unity, and monolingualism. For example China, US America, Japan, and many of the „big‟
European and Middle-East countries have used an extreme-menace assimilation language policy
towards minorities and immigrants.
47
3.1.2. International Vs Vernacular Policies

Internationalism is the ideology which favors adopting of a non indigenous language of wider
communication either as an official language or as language of instruction. This is exoglossic
language policy which is similar with the language planning policies of several postcolonial
countries. For example, in Gabon, French is the sole official language, in Cameroon, both French
and English are official languages, in Haiti both the Creole and French are official languages.
Verncularization is the situation in which indigenous or national languages are restored or
modernized and officially recognized instead of or alongside an international language of wider
communication. This ideology governs the language policies of countries which have endoglossic
policy. For example, In Madagascar, both French and Malagasy enjoy official status. In Israel,
Hebrew was revived and installed as a national language.

3.1.3. Overt Versus Covert Language Policy

A language policy can be characterized as a covert policy when it has never been clearly articulated
in an official declaration or decree, nor is it presented in any specific, official, governmental
document, and vice-versa for overt language policy. Many countries language policy is not written;
it is only understood, inferred and observed from reality. It is referred to in various documents such
as the Constitution, in Education reports, in the national development plans, as well as in several
curricular materials and in the media. These sources only refer to it, not defining it or making it the
subject of discussion; they refer to it when addressing other issues related to language and education
(Baldauf & Kaplan 2004). What is more clear, Schiffman(1996), covert policies make no mention of
any language in any legal document, administrative code, etc. where guarantees of linguistic rights
must be inferred from other policies, constitutional provisions or just the fact that the legal code is
composed in a certain language and not another, etc. We may also use the terms implicit, unstated,
common law, de facto, traditional, customary, unofficial, unwritten, grass-roots, ice-berg like, etc.
On the other hand, Schiffman said that overt language policies state explicitly the rights of any or all
linguistic groups to the use of their language in whatever domains they specify; such policies
strongly guarantee the freest tolerance policy, since they overtly state what is tolerated. We may also
use the terms explicit, specific, written, official, top-down, de jure, constitutional and statutory
(1996). For this author, covert policy may be something unintended-the seeds of the destruction or
failure of the policy are in the policy, but the policy-makers don‟t know it.
48
3.1.4. Promotive Versus Tolerance Language Policy
Schiffman (1996) identified that promotive policies encourage the use of particular language(s) by
constitutional, administrative and legal (statutory) guarantees; devote and/or guarantee resources
(money, personnel, space) for a language; specify and reserve domains of use (school, courts,
administration) for a language; may be non-explicit, promoting one (or more) languages without
explicitly mentioning them. Overt promotion policies name the language or languages in legal code,
constitution, etc. and what the rights and territories of the language or languages (or of the speakers)
shall be, etc. Tolerance policy, on the other hand, allow the use of language usually without
explicitly devoting resources, time, space etc. to them; no domains are reserved; can also be covert
(not mentioning anything) or overt (openly stating and naming which language will be tolerated,
perhaps with a time-limit).

3.1.5. Endoglossic Versus Exoglossic Language Policy

Spolsky (2004) identified that an endoglossic language policy is a policy denoting or relating to an
indigenous language that is used as the first or official language in a country or community. On
contrary, an exoglossic language policy is a policy which favors a non-indigenous language that is to
be used as an official or second language in a particular country or community. For example, let us
see the African Language policy experience according to Lodhi (1993:84)
1. Countries which have Endoglossic language policy: Ethiopia (Amharic, though Affan Oromo is
spoken by many people, Ethiopians Amharic is the widely spread lingua franca of the country),
Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda (Swahili), Somalia (Somali).
2. Countries which have Exoglossic language policy: Angola, Guinea Bissau, Mozambique
(Portuguise), Liberia (English),
3. Endoglossic countries with more than one indigenous language promoted: Ghana, Guinea,
Nigeria and Zaire.
4. Exoglossic countries with endoglossic tendency: Botswana, Burundi, Central African Republic,
Comoros, Lesotho, Malawi, Rwanda, Swaziland and Uganda.
5. Exoglossic countries where indigenous languages are used in some fields of activity e.g. lower
primary education, literacy programs, press and radio, lower courts, police and rural health care:
Gambia, Mozambique, Senegal, Siera Leone, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

49
3.1.6. Egalitarian Versus Non-Egalitarian (Restricted) Language Policy

Castiglione & Longman (2007) contended, in an „egalitarian plateau‟ of a language policy, the
policy makers and implementers all accept the minimal idea, explicitly or implicitly, that all persons
should be treated with equal concern and respect; all people are united and the same socially and in
recognition for making a country a fully democratic and egalitarian community. Allan Patten (2007)
asserted, the major belief here is that „harmonisation‟ can enhance equality of opportunity and
reduce social exclusion; facilitate discussion between all citizens and make democracy more
responsive to deliberation; encourage a shared political identity that fosters virtues and dispositions
hospitable to the creation of an egalitarian society; and make for a more efficient public sector, one
which frees up time and resources for allocation to other priorities (Castiglione & Longman, 2007).
In reality, however, significant linguistic convergence will not be achieved under a policy of equal
language recognition. This assumption ignores the fact that people frequently learn more than one
language (Patten, 2007). Patten argued that the basic commitment to a rational egalitarian language
policy could be “equal recognition: equal amounts of public institutional space and
capacity…devoted to the different languages used…; when this ideal is realized, speakers of
different…languages can reasonably feel that their public institutions are treating them with equal
concern and respect” (2007:34).
However, as “To err is human, to forgive is Devine”, it is very impractical to feasibly plan and
implement the egalitarian language policy in the universe, especially in multilingual countries which
has more than five, ten, twenty, fifty, hundred, etc. True Democracy and “perfect” unity cannot
come true in such countries where multilingualism cannot be nominated easily. As a result; it is a
necessary requirement to use the opposite, the non-egalitarian language policy with its drawbacks.

3.1.7. Assimilative Vs Non-Interventional Language Policies

A policy of assimilations‟ ultimate goal is to cultivate national unity inside a state. The idea based
that a single language in a country will favor that end. The measures taken by states enforcing such
policies may include banning the social use of a given language, the exclusion and social devaluation
of a language group and in extreme cases repression by force and even genocide. Policies of non-
intervention, on the other hand, allow the normal rapport between the main linguistic group and the
minorities evolve on its own. They take no form of intervention for language policy.

50
3.1.8. Mixed Language Policies
Mixed policies are essentially bilingual policies; which accommodate both indigenous and outside
languages. There are numerous examples of mixed states but very few in what is commonly called
the west. Quechua was declared an official language in Peru, co-equal with Spanish in 1975
(Hornberger 1988), yet tremendous problems of policy implementation remain. The only example of
mixed western state where the LWC has historically pre dominated is Australia, whose recent
National Language Policy promotes English along with a number of other languages, including
aboriginal languages (Lo Bianco, 1987).

3.2. LANGUAGE POLICY ANALYSIS OF DIFFERENT COUNTRIES’ EXPERIENCE

3.2.1. The Western World Language Policies

3.2.1.1. United States of America
The United States of America has „English Only‟ or „Official English‟ school language policies.
Although they are promoted as an effective way to teach English and thereby unify the country in
one language, in implementation, „English Only‟ policies deny language minority students access to
basic educational rights and opportunities. As a result, as Schmidt (2000) contends, the policy
instigated a movement that focuses on “educational policy for language minority children, linguistic
access to political and civil rights…and a constitutional amendment that would give English the
status of the sole official language of the United States”.
What is important in the US language policy, as England (2009) criticized, the lack of ideological
consistency evidenced by the shifting policies towards bilingual education has significantly impaired
the ability of language minorities in to obtain proficiency in English. As a result, a more cohesive
policy should be put in place to provide guidance to the states in promoting effective means to
educate minorities.

3.2.1.2. Europe
To begin with the Charter of the Fundamental Rights of European Union (EU), it is stipulated that:
Any discrimination based on sex, race, colour, ethnic or social origin, genetic features,
language, religion or belief, political or any other opinion, membership of a national
minority, property, birth, disability, age or sexual orientation shall be prohibited.
…Any discrimination on grounds of nationality shall be prohibited (Phillipson, 2003: 4).

51
Here we can understand that, this article commits the EU members to respect linguistic diversity and
seeks to prevent discrimination on grounds of language, nationality, or membership of a national
minority. Nevertheless, as Phillipson (2003) understood, the big forces of globalization and
„Americanization‟ may be moving the European language policy in the direction of monolingualism,
„…English may be seen as a kind of linguistic cuckoo‟.
In Europe (in European Union States and candidate nation-states), except Belgium (Dutch, French &
German), Ireland (Irish & English), Cyprus (Greek & Turkish), Luxemburg (Luxemburgish, French,
German) and Malta (Maltese & English), there is close connection between nation-state references
and official state language references. Besides, German, Turkish, French, English, Italian, Spanish
and Polish, respectively, belong to the six most widely spoken official state languages in the present
EU and the candidate nation-states.

3.2.1.3. The Jamaican, The Rastafari

Pollard (2003:60) said that “People evolve a language in order to describe and thus control their
circumstances or in order not to be submerged by a reality they cannot articulate.” Hence, certain
groups of the Jamaicans decided that the language available to them, Jamaican Creole, an English-
related Creole, could not adequately describe their circumstance. Due to this, as Pollard describes,
they created a code (the language of the Rastafari) sharpening the linguistic tools available to them
in the direction toward which they wanted them to point. Today the language of Rastafari has spread
not only beyond that group who created to the wider Jamaican society, but also beyond the
boundaries of Jamaica to the international community. Pollard added that;

The language of Rastafari is the expression of the philosophy of a movement, a way of

life which emerged in Jamaica in response to a social reality which placed the poor
Black man at the bottom of society. The intention was to give that man pride in himself
and his race. The Supreme Being was not to be the white Christian‟s Christ, but Haile
Selassi, Emperor of Ethiopia, sprung from the house which began, it is believed, when
the Queen of Sheba returned pregnant from King Solomon‟s court. The group took its
name from Selassi‟s earlier title “Ras Tafari.” The movement began around the year
1930, but the language emerged some two decades later (2003:60).

Generally, as many scholars mentioned in Pollard (2003) argued, it is clear that the sound, the word,
the music (Reggae), the style, the religion, the power and the message brings a keen need to „create‟
and spread the Rastafari language and use it for the whole system of communication.

52
3.2.2. The South-East & Far-East Asian Language Policies

3.2.2.1. Republic of Singapore

Singapore‟s language policy is highly affected by a tension between the ideologies associated with
English and those attached to Singapore‟s mother tongues. That is, it is crucial that Singaporeans
must safeguard their heritages, keeping themselves open to the places where their ancestors came
from by learning their designated mother tongues; as the same time, they are to master the English
language for political and economic reasons, but ideologically, they must remain Asian by rejecting
the cultural components of English, replacing them with Asian values. Hence, this East–West
dichotomisation of the Singaporean people envisages them as bilingual and bi-literate in English and
their mother tongues (Mandarin, Malay or Tamil), but mono-cultural. This function-focused policy,
when viewed through idealistic and ideological lenses, provides a site for developing conflicting
tensions among Singaporeans (Chua, 2007; Rappa & Wee, 2006). Malaysian‟s have the same story.

3.2.2.2. Republic of the Philippines

As Rappa & Wee (2006) discovered, perhaps because of the high degree of linguistic heterogeneity-
„linguistically heterogeneous with no absolute majority of speakers of any given indigenous
language‟ (there exist at least eight indigenous languages), the language policy in the Philippines, as
outlined in the current constitution of the country, focuses on only two languages: Filipino and
English. Article 14, Section 7 of the 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines dictates
that, "For purposes of communication and instruction, the official languages of the Philippines are
Filipino and, until otherwise provided by law, English". Generally, for Rappa and Wee, language
policy in the Philippines is contingent on the politics of clientelism [a „patron-client‟ relationship
politics where a few rich, powerful, and bourgeoisie Filipino speakers (the patron) takes care of the
majority working class (the clients)] that cuts across language, class, ethnicity, religion, and regional
affiliation in Philippine. This is because only a minority of Philippine presidents has taken the
initiative of making language policy a priority during their administrative terms of office, and
appears to be more powerful than they actually are. However, the Philippines today lags behind most
of Southeast Asia in terms of economic development and productivity despite its democratic
institutions, despite its connections and networks with North America and Europe. As many scholars
witnessed, a major factor in the Philippines failure to successfully negotiate the challenges of
development and modernity lies in its adherence to the politics of clientelism.

53
3.2.2.3. People’s Republic of China
Language policy in the People‟s Republic of China has been shaped by a variety of conflicting
interests, including the keen commitment to communist ideology, the goal of creating a strong nation
and state, the desire for rapid economic development and the need for social stability (Dreyer, 2003).
In China minority languages with writing systems are categorised as having official,
experimental, and non-official statuses that determine whether they can be used in
government and education or not and how extensively they can be used. Those with
official status secure the most recognition (Zhou, 2003: 99–152, mentioned in Zhou,
2007).
This is a favoritism language policy-giving some minorities preferential treatment, linguistic
favoritism-for minorities where higher status and recognition is given to Han (Sino-Korean language)
writing system and Putonghua (the largest family among the Chinese Minorities) as lingua franca
(Dreyer, 2003), Mandarin remains the official language of China. What is more, Zhou & Sun (2004)
explained that Chinese language policy, first began with traditionally dominant Mandarine, then
moved to allow the Russian language as a 1st foreign language, latter shifted to English, fourth
started Re-Education in Chinese (Mandarine), ultimately with a complete swaying back, highly
invested on English to serve the need of “four areas of modernization (agriculture, industry, national
defense, and science and technology). Finally, coupled with globalization and the forces of market
economy, China‟s modernization drive appears to favor only two dominant languages, Chinese as
the national commonly-used language and English as the world language (Ibid).

3.2.3. The Normative Language Policy of Australia

As Clyne (2011) expresses, in Australia-a multilingual country dominated by a monolingual mindset
(Xenophobia), languages are taught as if monolingualism were the norm, an obsession with
monolingual English literacy. That is, teachers tend to overlook the fact that bilingual or multilingual
learners of any target language are not the same as monolingual learners. Confronted with the daily
contingencies and challenges of administration, assessment and curriculum, educators lost sight of
„…a range of complex inter-relating issues around the promotion of multilingualism in educational
settings‟ (Creese & Martin, 2003: 161 cited in Clyne, 2011). Attitudes and policies as well as
imbalance in power relations influence the undervaluing of resources in the multilingual community
and classroom. The monolingual mindset wishes to protect bilingual children from more languages,
assuming that this will cause a deficit in English, instead of encouraging them to develop a general
interest in languages. As horse-mouth evidence, Clyne (2011: 175) revealed that:
The 2006 Australian Census records about 400 languages spoken in the homes of
Australians. In all, 151 are indigenous languages; there are also sign languages and
English-based creoles. Over 230 of the languages are immigrant languages, most of
54
 them the products of …migration from all over the world. Australia can truly be
described as a multilingual society. But alas, it is also afflicted with a monolingual
mindset. Most decisions are based on the belief that monolingualism is the norm and
multilingualism is exceptional or a problem.

In general, the preservative multilingual Australians have a monolingual-normative mindset of only

English as a language policy; xenophobia: racial intolerance, dislike of foreigners.

3.2.4. African Language Policies

3.2.4.1. Kenya
To begin with Kenya, Muthwii (2007) expressed that during independence Kenyans were given
reasons not to favor indigenous languages as languages of instruction or as languages for
communication in any public discourse. This is a prescription that contributed to many ills in Kenya,
in particular, the high levels of illiteracy that have persisted because a big portion of the Kenyan
population does not manage to attain meaningful literacy levels through the school system.
Consequently, many are not able to participate meaningfully in the important discourses and
thoughts which are by and large expressed in a foreign tongue. Muthwii said that the stated reason
for designating English as the official language and the Language of Instruction (LOI) was to unite
all the different ethnic groups into one nation. What is more, the Kenyan government generally
provides more resources for the teaching of English in schools in spite of all the rhetoric about
providing quality education that is relevant to the community and to local development. This is
largely because the government gets support funding from donor communities, some of whom are
reluctant to support the teaching of the first language. However, from the issues raised in many
literatures that indicate that children learn better in their first language and that multilingualism adds
value to our development efforts, it is only fair to consider how to give the first language a chance to
participate in development too.

3.2.4.2. The Republic of South Africa

Phaswana (2003) asserted that the South African language policy and use emerged from KhoiKhoi
and San to Dutch and Afrikaans. But after nearly half a century of apartheid rule in which only
English and Afrikaans were official languages, which “were used as gate-keepers for political power
and dominance, as instruments for preserving certain privileges for whites, and ultimately as tools
for unfair and unequal distribution of the country‟s economic resources…McLean (1992:152)”, the
Republic of South Africa adopted a new democratic Constitution that provides for eleven official
languages. The 1996 Constitution, a multilingualism constitution favoring the elevation of South

55
Africa‟s nine major African languages to the position of English and Afrikaans, stipulates that the
official languages of the Republic of South Africa are Sepedi, Sesotho, Setswana, siSwati,
Tshivenda, Xitsonga, Afrikaans, English, isiNdebele, isiXhosa, and isiZulu.
The real situation, however, is observed by Maartens (1998: 16) as presented in Phaswana (2003:122)
in the following text:
It is becoming increasingly apparent that a considerable mismatch appears to exist
between emerging language policy on the one hand, and actual language practice in
the spheres of government and education on the other. Whereas language policy
expressly professes to promote multilingualism in South Africa, language practitioners
in languages other than English are complaining more and more that their languages
are being marginalised to an even greater extent than in the past.

From this text we can conclude that most policies-African- are permitting but denying the practices
of bi- or multilingualism by favoring English or French as a sign of the dominant, „standard‟,
„educated‟, „elite‟ group. What is important, as For South Africa, the Constitution, though not
practical in reality, has been heralded as intellectually progressive and politically enlightened
because of the significance it attaches to human rights and its acknowledgment of multilingualism in
the African context. In giving official status to nine African languages, South Africa has charted a
course in opposition to that of other African countries, for example Malawi and Namibia, whose
constitutions stipulate English as the official language.

3.2.4.3. The Democratic Republic Ethiopia

To begin with, Teshome Wagaw (1999: 75) argued that:
the language policy provides for Ethiopia‟s more than 90 language groups to develop
and use their respective languages in the courts, in governmental and other political
entities, in cultural and business communications, and in education. The policies do
not, however, specify which, how many, or in what order the languages should enjoy
priority in governmental support for further development, nor do they hint at any limits
as to the number and extent of the languages.

According to Teshome, though Ethiopia has a language policy- a shilly-shally policy, the scope
granted to each language for the enjoyment of rights is not clearly demarcated and put into practice.
Likewise, Getachew & Derib (2006) explained that though there had been a change from having no
written policy to a policy that encourages the development and use of all the languages in Ethiopia,
the implementation showed a little change in time from the reigns of Tewodros II through the end of
the Derg regime. The language policies of Tewodros-II, Minilek-II, Hailesellasie-I and the Derg
regime had been similar on the grounds that „they all implemented a one-language use policy,
obviously Amharic‟. The language use policy of the current government (EPRDF), however, is quite

56
different in its approach and implementation. That is the implementation of a multilingual language
use policy has served the country in its „blessings and consequences‟.

What is more, a new phenomenon in Ethiopian history, as asserted by Getachew & Derib (2006), is a
movement towards the implementation of a multilingual language policy in Ethiopia since 1994 with
the rule of the Ethiopian People‟s Revolutionary Democratic Front. Today, about 5 languages in
addition to Amharic (Afar, Aderi(Harari), Afan Oromo, Tigrigna and Somali) are used as official
languages at regional level. There are also languages such as Sidama, Kambata, Kafa, Hadiya, Gamo,
Gofa, Wolayta, Dawro, Silti, Gedeo, Awigni, „etc? that are used as official languages at Zone and
Woreda levels. Primary education is also available in more than 20 languages; books, newspapers
and radio broadcasts are available in a lot of languages as well. In general, there is a possibility
(attempt) for the society to appreciate and use the language it chooses for any purpose as granted by
the national and regional constitutions. The FDRE‟s 1994 constitution Article 5 also guarantees the
multilingual language policy situation of the country. It says:

1. All Ethiopian languages shall enjoy equal state of recognition.

2. Amharic shall be the working language of the Federal Government.
3. Members of the Federation may determine their respective languages.

3.2.5. Experiences of Language Policy in Religious Institutions

The experiences of many countries in the world for the millennia tell us that religious institutions
and their evangelical expansions are associated to the maintenance or refusal (resistance) of
languages. For example, English, French, Italian, German and some other European languages have
been either resisted stiffly or quickly assimilated during their expansion with Catholicism,
Protestantism or any some other cult; Islam and Arabic language are inseparable; Hindu to Hinduism
(Omoniyi & Fishman, 2006); and so on. Further, it is historically true that „Ge‟ez is the liturgical and
devotional language of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church and the language of literature and learning
for those who pursue vocations in the church‟ (Teshome Wagaw, 1999: 76). This is obviously a
covert language policy. In addition, we can easily understand that Arabic language is a religious
language of the Islam and (its) education in the Arab (Muslim) world. In addition, the covertly
assimilative policy of Only English in the German-American Church is the indication of an
„enormous assimilative power of American civilization‟ Schiffman, 1996).

57
3….Language Policy and Planning
Some, like Schiffman (2005) and Ricento (2006) argue policy should be the output of planning, or
necessarily includes it. Others, like Spolsky (2003) argue policy subsumes planning. In whatever
direction they connected, all recognize they are linked and intertwined. Whenever the issue of
language policy rose, the issue of planning comes together. Both are working to show theoretical
foundations and practical concern in relation with managing linguistic ecosystems.
Language planning can be seen as the implementation of language policy in some cases, to the
extent practicable, across all the possible domains of language use referred in the policy (Wolff,
2000 and Baldauf, 1993). In other cases, language planning taken as it provides standards of
rationality and effectiveness while language policy tests the ideas against actual practice in order to
promote the development of better language planning models Hornberger (2006).
As Fashold (1984) describes language planning is determination of language(s) to be used for
specific purposes which is also the concerns of language policy. There are two common types of
language planning to deal with this. The first one, status planning, it is geared at establishing and
developing the functional usage of a particular language or language with a state. Its main concern is
changing the functions of a language(s) only. Status planning deals with the choice of languages to
be used as official languages (s) and of educational and other cultural purposes (media, religion).
The status of these languages may be found codified in the constitution of the country. For any
language variety, to be considered in language planning for the acquisition of particular functional
roles or status in the society, it must fulfill certain requirements in terms of standardization (Wolff,
2000).
The second, corpus planning, is geared at establishing and developing vocabulary, morphology and
spelling, or adoption of new scrip. It shows the planning of changes in the structure of the language
or language variety. Generally the main activities in corpus planning are activities of language
standardization. When one deals with language standardization, it targeted to turning linguistic
varieties into standard languages in two senses. First in a sense of approved and accepted norm
above all vernacular, colloquial and dialectal varieties for general and normative usage in certain
domains such as literature, science, education, the media, the churches and all public sectors. In the
second sense, it is a regular and codified normative system of reference supported by a standard
orthography, standard reference grammars and standard dictionaries (ibid).
However, language planning policy can never be corpus oriented or status oriented exclusively,
because corpus and status planning cannot be separated from each other.
58
3….Why language policy is needed
As May Stephen (2006) describes during the 1960s and 1970s the language policy aims was to solve
immediate language problems of newly emergent postcolonial states in Africa, Asia and the Middle
East. At this time thus, language status concerns or focused in particular on establishing stable
diaglossic language context in which majority language were promoted as public language of wider
communication. Minority languages were seen as being limited to private, family language domains.
As Herriman and Burnaby (1996:8) states the aims of language policy are different depend on the
context. However the following are the major aims in many parts of the world.

1. To prescribe language related problems- Problems of miscommunication, as trivial or series

as they might be, are not the focus of a need to language policy except in the broadest sense.
It is, instead, where rights, freedoms and power are associated with language that policies
become important. The most obvious case is where languages are prescribed, and the
deliberate (whether implicit or muted) support of indigenous languages in some countries.

2. To promote linguistic human right- In the short term we can think of persons without access
to satisfactory legal and medical treatment. In the long term, the obvious cases concern
access to education, literacy, and careers. Access to social goods depends to some extent on
the person‟s pleading his/her rights in that one is expected to know ones right. This presents a
conundrum when access to knowledge about those rights is couched only in the
official/standard language.

3. To explicitly declare the status of a language or languages- The policy (status planning)
issue concerns the consequences of developing an explicit policy to replace what is implicit
in practice. A central policy act is to declare one or more languages as official language(s).

The question „why have language policies?‟ must be answered by pointing out that even if there is
not something officially called a policy, a policy exists any way in as much as the linguistic status
quo becomes policy implicitly.
As reminder with the aims, many scholars suggested, language policy is one of the activities that
deserve proper handling especially in multilingual countries like Africa, because it may arises
conflict.
59
3….Nexus between language policy and development
The role of language in development of a nation cannot be over-stressed. As wider and more
satisfactory conception of national development advocate development should be seen as total
human development. The perspective emphasizes a full realization of human potential and a
maximum utilization of the nation„s resources for the benefit of all to take development as
development. Thus, language as resource should be standardized to be utilized properly. Every
developmental discourse has taken note of language‟s pragmatic and expressive values. Based on its
pragmatic value, language is the vehicle for the transmission of scientific knowledge and education.
And it is also the vehicle and manifestation of culture (i.e. the expressive value) (Oyetad, 2001: 20
Davie, 2006).
For realization of such a total human development with regard to language related issues, language
policies have vital role. Especially the need for having endoglossic, overt and pluralistic language
policy became imperative. Not having such a policy has meant that many indigenous languages are
under-developed and under-utilized whilst their speakers are marginalized or excluded from
participating properly in development activities. As it has been observed in many African countries
citizens denied from many of their rights because of language hurdles (Batibo, 2007).

Batibo (2007: 24) interestingly enlightens this issue as follow:

One need to acknowledge that all the world‟s developed countries have reached their present
positions on the basis of their own national languages; they have adopted and integrated
technology within their own culture and social values, thus making it possible for the
developments to reach all citizens. It is a fact that no development involves the participation
of all citizens in nation-building. It is noteworthy that the fast-developing countries of Asia,
such as China, Korea, Taiwan, Malaysia and Thailand, base their development strategies on
their indigenous languages as this is the only way to involve the whole population in the
development effort and to meaningfully bring technological advancement within the
country‟s cultural framework.

Generally, development ideas to take root in indigenous people and benefit from it the relevant
process and activities must involve the masses, not merely the elite. In addition, the goal of
involving the masses in development and governance activities cannot be achieved through a
national communication network (including education communication) based exclusively on non-
indigenous languages. Suitable policy of language use would insure that all or most languages in a
country are described, codified and even used in local literacy activities.

60
 CHAPTER FOUR
LANGUAGE ATTITUDE AND IDENTITY

 Why are attitudes and identities different?

 What are the attitudes of people to the language who oppressed/

colonized?

 How are identities and attitudes related to physical, psychological,

linguistics, geographical, etc statuses/conditions?

 Likes, dislikes, favors, preferences, tolerances, rationalization,

intolerances, hate/detest etc shows language attitude.

 Attitudes may be internal/implicit/covert or external/ explicit/ overt.

 Ways of Attitudization:

o Elegant: educated, literate, etc.

o Expressive (A language of speech, talk, art, education, science)

o Vulgar (ordinary, illiterate, lower class people)

o Guttural (harsh, soundly, language of the war/army; e.g. German)

o Romantic (e.g. French, Amharic)

o Aesthetically: pleasing or displeasing (Amharic)

o Musical (Amharic)

o Religious (Arabic-islam, Ge’ez-Orthodox, etc.)

o Commercial (e.g. English, German)

o Chatter

o Gossip

o Elite/Knight

61
 o Non-elite/non-knight

o Technology (English, Chinese, Japanese)

o Agriculture

o Literature (Latin, Greek)

o Security

 Identities can be perceived or given:

~ Political

~ Psychological

~ Physical

~ Professional

~ Age

~ Ethnic

~ Cultural

~ National

~ Religious

~ Economical

~ Geographical

~ Continental

~ Horn (e.g. Horn of Africa)

! etc Identities exist in life and no one cannot escape from it.

 Language reveals all your internal or external identities and attitudes.

DDhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

62
4.0. INTRODUCTION
A: What attitudes do you have toward language?
B: Huh? Whadya mean, attitudes? Language is. It exists. What is there to have an
attitude about?
A: Well, how do you feel about people who say „ain‟t „ and „don‟t hardly‟?
B: They are the salt of earth! They don‟t talk fancy; they just say what they mean.
-Gere & Smith; Attitudes, Language and Change

This opening excerpt by Gere and Smith tries to signify the acceptance of varieties to languages,
styles, dialects, registers, etc. as they call “… they are the salt of earth!”. Besides, for such category
of people attitude is nothing a counter, which may be blatant to some other factions of the society.
In the following section, we will present a brief summary on the key ideas and experiences of
language attitude and identity.
Language attitude has been defined by behavioral scientists, psycholinguists and sociolinguists from
different theoretical standpoints. We can find evidence of positive and negative attitudes in relation
to a wide range of linguistic issues, such as whole languages, varieties of a language, words and
discourse practices, pronunciation and accent, or anything perceived as different, new or changing
down the kinds of features that you like and/or dislike in other people‟s (or your own) speech. These
might include someone‟s accent, the words or expressions they use, the quality of their voice and so
on (Linda, T., 2004: 194). Attitudes to languages and language varieties can be related to social and
cultural identity, to power and control, to notions of prestige and solidarity, and that our attitudes are
often influenced by conventionally held stereotypes of language forms and their speakers. Our
attitudes to language are far from trivial and we have seen how they may be influential in our
assessments of the characteristics of individuals and social groups. These assessments can then be
carried over into the decisions that are made in important areas of our lives such as law and order,
employment, education and equality of opportunity. Awareness of how attitudes might be formed or
manipulated may not make us immune to them, but it may help us to evaluate their influence on our
own practices (ibid: 205).

According to Lambert (1972), cited in Dittmar (1976:181), attitude, comprises three components:
cognitive (knowledge, belief), affective (feeling, emotion), and conative (behavior, action)
components. Two theoretical approaches are distinguished in the course of studying of language
attitudes. The first one is the behaviorist view which explains that attitudes must be studied by
observing the responses to certain languages, i.e. to their use in actual interactions.

63
The other one is mentalist view which considers attitudes as an internal, mental state, which may
give rise to certain forms of behavior. Thus it can be described as an intervening variable between a
stimulus affecting a person and that person's response. Accordingly, attitudes cannot be observed
directly, but must be inferred from the subject‟s introspection (Dittmar, 1976:181 and Fasold, 1984:
147).
Everything that differentiates a group from another group constitutes the group's identity (Appel, R.
and Muysken, P., 1987:24). Identity is a characteristic in an individual or group which distinguishes
one individual or group from another. There are various types of identities: physical identity,
linguistic identity, cultural identity, geographical identity, ethnic identity social identity, and identity
is marked through different means like materials: cloth, rings, bracelets etc. and symbols such as
flags, cross etc., those things which help us to include or exclude individuals as members. Apart
from all language is the most important marker of identity because language and identity have strong
relationship (John, E., 2009:1-13).

4.1. Language use and Attitudes

First, Giles et al (1983), Baker (1992), Ryan et al (1982) Fishman (1991) cited in O‟Rourke (2011)
comprehensively defined attitude as the cognitive beliefs, affective feelings and behavioral
promotive, encouraging or discouraging actions developed about the world, an object or an action. In
a relationship, tone is the attitude that a person lays over the situation, interact-ants, story, message,
etc.; and the tone of voice we hear from a person could be serious or comedic, distant or intimate,
direct or roundabout, restrained or emotional, ominous or lighthearted, straightforward or ironic, etc.
these are the types of attitudes we develop towards a language for numerous factors of
determinations per see.
Language attitudes are the feelings people have about their own language variety or the languages or
language varieties of others. People usually have an attitude, either positive or negative, about
languages. They may feel one language is expressive and prestigious and the other as immature and
has low-status. However, from a linguistic point of view, all languages or language varieties are
equal in serving the speakers of the language (Burns, Matthews and Nolan-Conroy, 2001 and Crystal,
1992).
People generally do not hold opinions about languages in a vacuum. They develop attitudes towards
language which reflect their views about the speakers of the language and the contents and functions
they associate the speakers with (Le page and Tabouret- Keller, 1985).

64
 4.2. Factors Affecting Language Attitude
The attitudes people develop towards a language(s) are usually results of social judgments that
manifested by the social status of the speakers. Thus attitude to language may reflect attitude to
the users and the uses of that language (Le page and Tabouret- Keller, 1985 and Meyerhoff, 2006).
Attitudes are also strongly influenced by social and political factors (Romaine, 1989 and Crystal,
1992). The acceptance of the speakers of a language, their political status also the politics of the
language are important factors in influencing attitude. Language provides many windows on
speakers‟ attitudes to themselves and others (Meyerhoff, 2006:55).

In addition, language attitude can be associated with two human desires. These motivational factors
determine to develop positive or negative attitude towards certain language. These are:
A. Instrumental motivation- it is for personal gain one needs to learn a language or varieties of
language. Thus, a person or a group of people develop mostly positive attitude towards the
language(s) that provide with this opportunity. For example, many Africans highly motivated
to learn European languages to gain better job opportunities. The positive attitude and
learning majority language in Africa is generally motivated by instrumental desire (Davie,
2006). In most African countries there is significant number of majority language (ex-
colonial languages) speakers, therefore no significant integrative motivation (Burns,
Matthews and Nolan-Conroy, 2001).

B. Integrative motivation- when subjects need to know languages or varieties to be accepted by

others. To gain these benefits speakers of minority languages learn a majority language faster
especially when they are motivated by the desire to integrate. And sometime they tend to
learn and maintain their minority language to ensure emotional security. For Example,
African languages are mainly associated with back wardedness, poverty, inferiority and etc.
So the speakers usually don‟t prefer to be integrated with these languages. On the other hand,
they would like to be taken as speakers of the European languages which are associated with
modernity, superiority and richness (Davie, 2006).

4.3. Language Attitude and Its Effect

Since language attitudes are complex psychological entities, they can influence language use and the
choices of a person in different domains (Le page and Tabouret- Keller, 1985).

65
In a society, social or ethnic groups have certain attitudes towards each other, relating to their
differing positions. These attitudes affect attitudes towards cultural institutions or patterns
characterizing these groups such as language, and carry over to and are reflected in attitudes towards
individual members of the group. Mutual intelligibility of language varieties is also affected by
attitudes, so people find it easier to understand languages and dialects spoken by people they like or
admire (Holmes, 1992:16). For example, the Chinese language varieties speakers assume the
varieties are mutually intelligible, but practically the varieties spoken in the north and south are
hardly intelligible. Consequently, it is common to find people writing up in the streets of china cities
to understand each other (Le page and Tabouret- Keller, 1985). On the other hand, people speaking
the same language and variety might reject intelligibility based on their unfavorable attitude towards
the speakers.
Language attitude also affect language choice of an individual and a society which in turn causes
language maintenance and shift. The one who have positive attitude tend to maintain the language,
conversely shift occurs when negative attitude developed about own language.
Language preference in education is another area affected by attitude to a language. People tend to
prefer languages of the powerful. For example: many parents in Africa perceive English or French
(or European languages) are the get way to success socially, politically and economically. The use of
African languages education viewed as a drop in standard and a depreciation in value. Therefore
their negative attitude towards African languages leads them to prefer European languages in
education (Mutasa, 2006).
It is also common that people are highly motivated and consequently often more successful in
acquiring a second language when they feel positive towards those who use it.
Generally, the language attitude affects many aspects of language use and it may lead to serious
problems like language death and conflict among speakers.

4.4. Measurements of Language Attitude

One of the important aspects of language attitude study is its measurement. There are two different
theoretical stand points to measure attitude. These are mentalist and behaviorist positions Dittmar
(1976).

For mentalists’, attitudes are a mental and neural state of readiness. They cannot be observed
directly, but must be inferred from the subject‟s introspection. Thus, attitude as a hypothetical
construct it can be revealed by verbal responses to a given set of stimuli.

66
In this aspect attitude considered as a multi-layered componential structure that consists of three
components: the cognitive (knowledge), affective (evaluation) and conative (action) components.
However attitude primarily composed of beliefs from which cognitive, affective and behavioral
attitude types can be formed.
On the other hand, the behaviorist notion regards attitude as a dependent variable that can be
determined statically by observing actual behavior in social situations. Thus attitude is
unicomponential and its component is only the affective one.

4.5. The Language Attitude Experience of Morocco

For ancient Moroccans Brunot wrote that:
"North Africa, which has the psychological peculiarity of being rebellious against any
differentiation, has not been able to separate language and religion. All social or
individual progress is inevitably achieved in the direction of a more complete
islamization which goes together with a more thorough knowledge of the Arabic
language" (1950:10, in Bentahila, 1983).

For Brunot language attitude and the accepted superiority over another language is much closely tied
to religion. Hence, religion and the service giving language (be it „standard‟ or non-standard) greatly
affect the resultant attitude attached to that foreign or indigenous language as long as its grammar
never demolish. In a latter study, Bentahil (1983) discovered that professionalism, the appreciation
of fine arts, the increase in the number of speakers, the adopted modern style of life, the availability
of jobs, and so on in a certain language (foreign or native) could drastically shift the attitude of
indigenous people or migrants. For example, in the recent Morocco, French language has dominated
everyday life style from the back-off-house routine to the big diplomacy and technology. As a result,
the tension between the „old Arabic‟ and „the modern French‟ has clearly existed in Morocco. What
is more, Moroccans were easily attracted by the „high‟ culture of the French which ultimately
dragged them to learn and speak French. That the belief to the „highness and lowness‟ of a culture
creates another dilemma in the attitude to a certain language.

4.6. Language Attitude Experience of Ireland

O‟Rourke (2011) identified that the attitudes if Irish people towards the Irish language is blatantly
weakened for various historical: political (a laissez-faire government), socio-economical,
modernization, etc. reasons. As a result, they dive into a serious dilemma of identity choice between
the “Original Irish” and the dominant English.

67
 4.7. The Belief towards Monolingualism and Multilingualism
According to different scholars, many people do not like to learn more than one language, they want
to monolingual for countless reasons. On the other hand, there are intellectual people who like to
learn/acquire 1+ N language; they want to be bilingual or multilingual. There have existed people
who can speak more than ten languages at difference competence levels. Besides, the social
acceptance of a person who speaks different languages at different situations: with peers/ colleagues,
in a work-place, at home, etc could also create attitude to be multilingual or monolingual; that is the
world view perceived by a certain language determines the x-lingualism attitude we will develop
(Bentahil, 1983; Gallagher, 1968, Bentahila, 1981 & Hasselemo, 1970 mentioned in Bentahil, 1983).
These researchers identified that your political orientation, the marriage relationship, media coverage,
and some related factors also contribute to the expected attitude (negative or positive) to be
developed. Hasselmo (1970) cited in Bentahila (1983) explored that the choice of language is
dependent on whom the speaker is addressing, what channel he is using, in what setting he finds
himself, what he is communicating about, what are the functions of his communication, and what are
the linguistic resources at his disposal. Hence, various sociolinguistic variables in a certain country,
state are the manacles of language attitude and choice.

4.8. Language Identity

Kuipers (1998) explained that identity is the stable and fixed aspects of selfhood; these are things
that you check off on census forms such as race/ethnicity, nationality, social class, gender, age, etc.
So identity is an accomplishment, not a thing which is fragmentary and in flux; people change
identities to suit the needs of the moment. Though identities are stable features of persons that exist
prior to any particular situation, they are dynamic and situated accomplishments, enacted through
talk, and changing from one occasion to the next. Besides, for Kuipers the approach suggested by
Gumperz (1982) and interactional sociolinguistics in general invert the terms of the language-
identity equation and interprets linguistic use (including choice and switching languages) as a series
of communicative strategies that speakers develop to demonstrate their links with various social
groups.
Language is not neutral. The moment we speak we give away a whole range of personal and social
information which in turn invites conscious and unconscious judgements from people around us. In
essence, the way we speak is like a fingerprint that marks our identity as we go through life. We
evaluates language in different ways. For instance English as a high status, prestige, pleasant
language, and say Tigrigna as low status, low status and unpleasant. Perhaps such attitudes might be

68
associated with the identity of individuals who speak the languages.

People assign various attributes to language forms; they may feel that a language or variety of a
language is „elegant‟, „expressive‟, „vulgar‟, „guttural‟ or „musical‟, or that one language form is
„more polite‟ or more „aesthetically pleasing or displeasing‟ than another one. All levels of language
use are subject to such notions, and we invest some language forms with prestige while others are
stigmatized. Prestige and stigma are connected with speakers of languages and have to do with social
class and social or national identity, and with ideas about status, solidarity and unity. Popular
evidence from the media and academic surveys of language attitudes reveal the same underlying and
recurrent patterns of values and value judgments within a community about the languages and
varieties of language within it, and such judgments affect our social and cultural lives in important
and influential ways (Linda, T., 2004:194). Moreover, Fasold, R., (1984:147) poses a summary of
the academic research into people‟s language attitudes around the world, by showing for example,
how bilingual or multilingual speakers may regard one language as more suitable to a particular
topic than another, or may regard one language as aesthetically more pleasing than another, or have
clearly expressed feelings about their languages in relation to their social and cultural identities.
Attitudes to linguistic behavior can also vary cross-culturally. In confirming this, (Holtgraves &
Dulin, J., 1994: 282) have stated the following:

For European Americans, positive self-statements seem to violate a rule prescribing modesty, and
this result in an overall negative evaluation of someone who brags . . . African American rules
regarding positive self-statements are more complex . . . Boasts and truthful bragging are relatively
acceptable and this results in a less overall negative evaluation of someone who brags truthfully.

Cultural differences in attitudes towards linguistic behavior like this one can therefore contribute to
cross-cultural misunderstanding or even communication breakdown. People may also have opinions
about preferred linguistic behavior for different groups. For instance Linda, T. (2004:200) has
stated that when women do speak, attitudes towards their talk are often negative; women‟s talk is
labeled as „chatter‟ or „gossip‟ about „inconsequential‟ or „trivial‟ topics. Whereas for Cameron
(1995: 170) the connection between gender and lack of intelligence is signified not only by accent
but also by patterns of stress and intonation, as can often be seen in film and television
characterizations of silly women. Negative attitudes to female voices are so strong that the former
British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher took great pains to change her own voice: making it lower
in pitch, less „swoopy‟ in range and slower in rate. This collection of deliberate modifications can
best be understood as a response to the perceived disadvantages suffered by the unreconstructed

69
female speaker, who is stigmatized as „shrill‟ (high pitch), „emotional‟ (broad intonational range)
and „lacking in authority‟.

Moreover, Lippi-Green, R. (1997:215) added that we use accent to talk about bundles of properties
which we would rather not mention directly. When a northerner appropriates a pan-southern accent
to make a joke or a point, he or she is drawing on a strategy of condescension and trivialization that
cues into those stereotypes so carefully structured and nurtured: southerners who do not assimilate to
northern norms are backward but friendly, racist but polite, obsessed with the past and un enamored
of the finer points of higher education.

4.9. Language and social identity

There is causal relationship between language and social identity. Language influences social
identity and social identity influences language. Various social characteristics like age, sex,
educational and geographical background influence language. For example in the context of
Ethiopia, one who comes from western part of Oromiya or northern part of Tigray may manifest
one variation, another one who comes from eastern Oromiya or from southern Tigray also possibly,
manifest another variation. Moreover people often tend to identify people as elite or not based on the
language use. In this regard in some contexts of Ethiopia intellectual‟s speech is distinct from non-
intellectuals in that the intellectuals mix Amharic and English in the course of interaction.

In the same way social structure might influence language use. For example, differences in age, sex,
ethnicity, socio-economic, and political power may influence language use in society. In addition to
this, language expresses cultural differences of a particular society. For example, it is possible to
note the case in Ethiopia. Chaha is the language which is used by the society which are known for
enset cultivation. Duly, it is possible to encounter more vocabularies which are related with enset
employed by Chaha speakers in the day to day interaction. Whereas English is a language which is at
the disposal of various technologies; hence the frequent use of some vocabularies related with
technology would be common within English language speaking communities.

Many scholars have explained the interrelationship between language and social identity depending
on their background. In bilingual/multilingual communities, language is often considered as one of
the fundamental social resources. It is thought as such for language, besides communicative function,
has symbolic association. It usually associates with ethno-cultural identity, power and influence, and
prestige. And like any other social objects, it is subject to various opinions, evaluations, or emotional
reactions and since in bilingual or multilingual settings different languages assume different roles,
70
members of such societies inevitably develop some kind of attitudes (positive, negative, or
ambivalent) towards the languages at their disposal or towards their own language and towards
others. The attitudes are thus derived from the social contexts and functions with which the
languages are associated (Holmes, J. 1992:345-346, Appel, R. and Muysken, P., 1987:16).

Lynda, M. (1995) describes the loss of „r‟ in England and attitudes towards its loss during the
nineteenth century. Speakers without „r‟ were variously described as „vulgar‟, „illiterate‟ and „lower-
class‟ whereas those with „r‟ were „elegant‟, „polished‟ and „educated‟. As Holmes, J. (1992: 356)
has explained, “Sociolinguistic information on the social basis of attitudes to languages and their
uses helps explain why children from lower socio- economic groups and children from minority
cultural backgrounds often do not succeed in middle class classroom and sociolinguistic research can
assist in identifying potential points and suggesting alternative styles of interaction which may be
successful.

According to Linda, T. (2004: 203-204), tests carried out in the UK reveal attitudes which
consistently attribute speakers with RP accents with qualities such as intelligence and confidence,
while speakers with regional accents are attributed with qualities such as sincerity or friendliness.
Attitudes to the Welsh language (the resentment and mistrust) are tied up with these attitudes to the
people themselves, and we talk about the language as a cover for talking about the people. In line
with this, Lippi-Green (1997: 215) explains the relationship with reference to stereotypes associated
with southern accents in the US as follows:
We use accent to talk about bundles of properties which we would rather not mention directly.
When a northerner appropriates a pan-southern accent to make a joke or a point, he or she is
drawing on a strategy of condescension and trivialization that cues into those stereotypes so care-
fully structured and nurtured: southerners who do not assimilate to northern norms are backward
but friendly, racist but polite, obsessed with the past and un enamored of the finer points of higher
education.

4.10. How are Language and Identity Related?

Pujola (2008) brought very important points about the relationship between language and identity.
First, language would be the expression of a collective identity which in some way already comes
predefined in individuals as a result of their socialization (generally associated with the territory) and
which connects them (or not) with certain “origins”. Second, language is a living thing that precedes
and is defined irrespective of its speakers, thus constituting an internally coherent system that must
be protected from external influences; and therefore, third, the “natural” expression of identity is to
speak “one‟s own” language; speaking another or speaking it with “interference” from others is a
sign of abnormality that requires explanations and excuses.
71
 4.11. Kinds of Identities (Schmidt, 2000)
4.11.1. Master Identities.
First, master identities are relatively stable and unchanging: gender, ethnicity, age, national and
regional origins; the meanings of master identities change across time and space.

4.11.2. Interactional Identities

Second, interactional identities refer to roles that people take on in a communicative context with
specific other people. Naming-how do you name yourself to your parents, friends, professors, best
friend, and partner? How do these people name you? Has your name changed over time? Many
languages have different second-person pronouns; some other languages have honorifics.

4.11.3. Personal Identities

Third, personal identities are expected to be relatively stable and unique; they are reference ways in
which people talk and behave toward others: hot-headed, honest, forthright, reasonable, overbearing,
a gossip, a brown-nose.

4.11.4. Relational Identities

Fourth, relational identities refer to the kind of relationship that a person enacts with a particular
conversational partner in a specific situation that are negotiated from moment to moment and are
highly variable.

Identity, whether on an individual, social, or institutional level, is something that we are constantly
building and negotiating throughout our lives through our interaction with others. The emphasis is
on identities not essentially given but actively produced – whether through deliberate, strategic
manipulation, or through-out-of awareness practices. This both captures the agency of speakers and
views language as social action. The focus on an individual‟s freedom to manipulate a flexible
system of identities fails to adequately take into account that some identities-notably race and caste-
are imposed and coercively applied. There are political economic constraints on processes of
identity-making.

4.12. Language Politics and Linguistic Identity

An American senator Bilbray once said bitterly that "Look at the strife in Canada caused by people
who are divided based on the languages they use because they do not have the common bond that we
have practiced for so long in America ...." There is the psychological role that language plays: it ties
into the self-esteem and pride of groups and individuals. This is especially true for smaller
nationalities. Experts on the politics of multilingualism note that the status of the indigenous
72
language is seen by emerging nations as a symbol of a new-found group dignity. The fate of a
language has consequences for entire cultures, which may become endangered if that language is not
used. In order for a language to survive, it must be used in many domains, including schools, the
media and public interaction. Yet, while it is important to avoid raising cultural anxiety, it is also
important to realize that the status of cultures reflects overall political power. Ethnic groups, and
especially larger nationalities or sub-nations, want to exercise some degree of self-rule and avoid
subordination. Native speakers of a dominant language gain certain social and career benefits;
minorities, too, want equal opportunities.

Although language often is seen as having primarily a cultural significance, it also has a more
practical value in a modern state. Language policy affects social and political access to careers and
public goods. Which language is used when a citizen encounters public servants, and which
language is used in tax forms or other papers produced by the state bureaucracy? Which language is
used if one needs to call an ambulance or a fire fighter or seek assistance from police or social
services? In modern states the sphere of interaction between citizens and the state is getting broader
rather than narrower, and thus the scope of language use is expanding as well. The language that is
used on electoral ballots, in parliamentary debates, or when the state publishes laws and regulations
is also important, as it impacts on a citizen's ability to participate in his or her community. In other
words, if a citizen has to use a non-native language in interactions with the state, this will influence
the extent of his or her attachment to or alienation from the state.

Other language issues, regulated by the state and tied to identity, include the naming of streets or
public buildings, and the use of personal names. The latter seems like an innocuous issue, but it can
be a very sensitive topic. For example, the forced "Bulgarization" of Turkic and Muslim names by
the communist government of Bulgaria in the 1970s incited ethnic conflict that culminated in the
exodus of a large part of the Turkic minority. A less dramatic case involved the bureaucratic
"Russianization" of personal names in the Soviet Union by requiring non-Russian minorities to
adhere to the Russian tradition of using a patronymic (a name derived from one's father). Italy's
outlawing of the German spelling of personal names in South Tyrol encouraged terrorism.
Interestingly, the same policy applied in the Alsace region of France was relatively uncontroversial.
This illustrates that the same policy can trigger different reactions in different contexts and that it is
essential to examine the local context when analysing the importance of a particular issue in a
specific state. In sum, there are a number of political, economic, and psychological factors that must

73
be taken into account in forming language policy. In addition, it should be noted that official policy
can do little to influence what happens when languages are used informally, in personal interactions.

4.13. Language Education and Identity

Mougeon,R., Nadasdi, T. & Rehner, K. ( 2010:1) identified a big concern that “…considerably less
research has been devoted to French immersion students‟ sociolinguistic competence- the receptive
and productive knowledge of sociolinguistic variants and of the linguistic, social and stylistic factors
that govern their usage”. They agreed that immersion language education would result in social
unintelligibility in a native culture.
4.14. The Dynamics of Identity
At any given time a person‟s identity is a heterogonous set made up of all the names or identities,
given to and taken up by him/her. But in a lifelong process, identity is endlessly created a new,
according to various social constraints (historical, institutional, economic etc.), social interaction,
encounters, and wishes that may happen to be very subjective and unique. We called identification
processes those psychological processes in which identity are established.
There is a language-embedded identity that rest on strictly symbolic mean and identifies of scopic
materials, sensory elements among which visual features seem to occupy a pre-eminent place.
Every person exploits different layers of identities by making more or less intricate and encased net
works, some parts of which are prone to frequent change and replacement and others being more or
less permanent throughout the life span and across social ad cultures space. We identifies ourselves
with in different groups -institutional, professional- we belong to, within the surroundings of our
home, out office etc. Therefore our overt and covert identities blend of symbolic and nonverbal
means.

4.15. How many Languages can a Person Learn (Speak)?

When we say „learning a language‟ are referring to being able to have a fluent conversation with
minimal mistakes; in other words, being able to live and work comfortably in that language. For
these questions, there are living examples of people whose achievements surprised the world. First,
Alexander Arguelles, an American polyglot claims to have knowledge of 33 languages. He speaks
fluently about 18 of those. He‟s made dictionaries in German, Spanish, and French, and written
books on learning Korean. Second, Ziad Fazah, a Lebanese man living in Brazil, claims to speak 56
languages. Third, Giuseppe Caspar Mezzofanti, an Italian cardinal from the 19th century, was said to
be fluent in at least 29 languages, could speak 38, but knew more than 70 languages. Fourth, John
Bowring was a British literary translator, economist, politician and diplomat whose service included
74
being the fourth governor of Hong Kong. He claimed that he knew 200 languages and that he could
speak 100 of them. In our day, the Brazilian linguist Dr. Carlos do Amaral Freire claims to know
over 100 languages. People may find these numbers hard to believe but each one of these
hyperpolyglots has publications or video recordings that suggest that their claims are true.

75