Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (26)
- Article (22)
- Review (4)
- Book (3)
- Conference Proceeding (3)
Keywords
- Sprachpolitik (28)
- Mehrsprachigkeit (27)
- Linguistic Landscape (20)
- Minderheitensprache (19)
- Deutsch (18)
- Lettisch (12)
- Baltikum (11)
- Bildung (10)
- Lettland (10)
- Gesellschaft (9)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (30)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (28)
- Postprint (20)
- Ahead of Print (1)
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (29)
- Peer-Review (28)
- (Verlag)-Lektorat (1)
Publisher
Latvia
(2019)
This chapter deals with current issues in bilingual education in the framework of language and educational policies in Latvia, and also outlines similarities or common tendencies in the two other Baltic states, Estonia and Lithuania. As commonly understood in the 21st century, the term ‘bilingual education’ includes ‘multilingual education, as the umbrella term to cover a wide spectrum of practice and policy’ (García, 2009: 9).
When we first started the project of looking at minority languages through a linguistic landscape lens, we felt that the visibility of minority languages in public space had been insufficiently dealt with in traditional minority language research. A linguistic landscape approach, as it had developed over the last years, would constitute a valuable path to explore, by looking at the ‘same old issues’ of language contact and language conflict from a specific angle. We were convinced that fresh linguistic landscape data would be able to provide innovative and useful insights into ‘patterns of language […] use, official language policies, prevalent language attitudes, [and] power relations between different linguistic groups’ (Backhaus 2007, p. 11). The linguistic landscape approach, as presented by the different authors in this volume, has clearly proven to be a heuristic appropriate and relevant for a wide range of minority language situations. More specifically, the ideas and analyses in the different chapters do contribute to a further understanding of minority languages and their speakers. They deepen our comprehension of language policies, power relations and ideologies in minority language settings.
Our paper discusses family language policies among multilingual families in Latvia with Russian as home language. The presentation is based on three case studies, i.e. interviews conducted with Russophones who have chosen to send their children to Latvian-medium pre-schools and schools. The main aim is to understand practices and regards among such families “from below,” i.e. which family-internal and family-external factors influenced the choice of Latvian-medium education and what impact this choice has on linguistic practices.
The paper shows that there have been critical events which both encouraged and discouraged the choice of Latvian-medium education. The wish to integrate into mainstream society has been met by obstacles both from ethnic Russians and Latvians. Yet, the three families consider their choices to be the right ones for the future development of their children in a multiethnic Latvia in which Latvian serves as the unifying language of society.
Aims and objectives:
Language debates in Latvia often focus on the role of Latvian as official and main societal language. Yet, Latvian society is highly multilingual, and families with home languages other than Latvian have to choose between different educational trajectories for their children. In this context, this paper discusses the results of two studies which addressed the question of why families with Russian as a home language choose (pre)schools with languages other than Russian as medium of instruction (MOI). The first study analyses family narratives which provide insight into attitudes and practices which lead to the decision to send children to Latvian-MOI institutions. The second study investigates language attitudes and practices by families in the international community of Riga German School.
Methodology:
The paper discusses data gathered during two studies: for the first, semi-structed interviews were conducted with Russian-speaking families who choose Latvian-medium schools for their children. For the second study, a survey was carried out in the community of an international school in Riga, sided by ethnographic observations and interviews with teachers and the school leadership.
Data and analysis:
Interviews and ethnographic observations were subjected to a discourse analysis with a focus on critical events and structures of life trajectory narratives. Survey data were processed following simple statistical analysis and qualitative content analysis.
Findings/conclusions:
Our data reveal that families highly embrace multilingualism and see the development of individual plurilingualism as important for integration into Latvian society as well as for educational and professional opportunities in the multilingual societies of Latvia and Europe. At the same time, multilingualism and multiculturalism, including Russian, are seen as a value in itself. In addition, our studies reflect the bidirectionality of family language policies in interplay with practices in educational institutions: family decisions influence children’s language acquisition at school, but the school also has an impact on the families’ language practices at home. In sum, we argue that educational policies should therefore pay justice to the wishes of families in Latvia to incorporate different language aspects into individual educational trajectories.
Originality:
Language policy is a frequent topic of investigation in the Baltic states. However, there has been a lack in research on family language policy and school choices. In this vein, our paper adds to the understanding of educational choices and language policy processes among Russian-speaking families and the international community in Latvia.
Der vorliegende, in das Themenheft einführende Text will einen Überblick über die Ursprünge, die wesentlichen Entwicklungen und die Perspektiven dieses jungen Forschungsgebietes geben. Er ist zunächst wissenschaftshistorisch angelegt, wird also zu Beginn auf einige Vorläuferstudien verweisen und dann versuchen, die Entwicklung der Auseinandersetzung mit den LL in ihren Grundlinien darzustellen und zentrale Themen und Anwendungsfelder, Methoden sowie Begriffe und Termini vorstellen. Im letzten Teil wird auf Forschungsdesiderate bzw. -perspektiven verwiesen. Dabei wird auch immer wieder die Relevanz dieses Ansatzes für den Deutschunterricht und andere Lehrsituationen angesprochen.
This paper discusses contemporary societal roles of German in the Baltic states (Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania). Speaker and learner statistics and a summary of sociolinguistic research (Linguistic Landscapes, language learning motivation, language policies, international roles of languages) suggest that German has by far fewer speakers and functions than the national languages, English, and Russian, and it is not a dominant language in the contemporary Baltics anymore. However, German is ahead of ‘any other language’ in terms of users and societal roles as a frequent language in education, of economic relations, as a historical lingua franca, and a language of traditional and new minorities. Highly diverse groups of users and language policy actors form a ‘coalition of interested parties’ which creates niches which guarantee German a frequent use. In the light of the abundance of its functions, the paper suggests the concept ‘additional language of society’ for a variety such as German in the Baltics – since there seems to be no adequate alternative labelling which would do justice to all societal roles. The paper argues that this concept may also be used for languages in similar societal situations and, not least, be useful in language marketing and the promotion of multilingualism.
In the context of a Nordic Conference on Bilingualism, it can be a rewarding task to look at issues such as language planning, policy and legislation from a perspective of the southern neighbours of the Nordic world. This paper therefore intends to point attention towards a case of societal multilingualism at the periphery of the Nordic world by dealing with recent developments in language policy and legislation with regard to the North Frisian speech community in the German Land of Schleswig-Holstein. As I will show, it is striking to what degree there are considerable differences in the discourse on minority protection and language legislation between the Nordic countries and a cultural area which may arguably be considered to be part of the Nordic fringe - and which itself occasionally takes Scandinavia as a reference point, e.g. in the recent adoption of a pan-Frisian flag modelled on the Nordic cross (Falkena 2006).
The main focus of the paper will be on the Frisian Act which was passed in the Parliament of Schleswig-Holstein in late 2004. It provides a certain legal basis for some political activities with regard to Frisian, but falls short of creating a true spirit of minority language protection and/or revitalisation. In contrast to the traditions of the German and Danish minorities along the German-Danish border and to minority protection in Northern Scandinavia (in particular to Sámi language rights), the approach chosen in the Frisian Act is extremely weak and has no connotation of long-term oriented language-planning, let alone a rights-based perspective.
The paper will then look at policy developments in the time since the Act was passed, e.g. in the Schleswig-Holstein election campaign in 2005, and on latest perceptions of the Frisian language situation in the discourse on North Frisian Policy in Schleswig-Holstein majority society. In the final part of the paper, I will discuss reasons for the differences in minority language policy discourse between Germany and the Nordic countries, and try to provide an outlook on how Frisian could benefit from its geographic proximity to the Nordic world.
2008. godā tyka veikts pietejums, kura golvonais mierkis beja raksturuot niulenejū latgalīšu volūdys lūmu izgleiteibys sistemā. Itys roksts prezeņtej byutiskuokūs pietejuma rezultatus. Pietejuma īrūsme sajimta nu „Mercator Education Centre“ (Merkatora izgleiteibys centra), kas dorbojās Nīderlaņdē Ļuvortā (frīzu volūdā — Ljouwert), Frīzejis proviņcis golvyspiļsātā. Piļneigs pietejuma izvārsums ar Merkatora izgleiteibys centra atbolstu publicāts izdavumu serejā „Regional Dossier Series“ (Regionalūs dosje sereja) angļu volūdā. Itys roksts golvonom kuortom dūmuots taidam adresatam, kas mozuok ir saisteits ar Eiropys volūdu izpietis institucejom i kam roksti angļu volūdā var saguoduot izpratnis voi atrasšonys gryuteibys. Partū pietejuma suokumā teik dūts seikuoks metožu i mierķu raksturuojums, paskaidrojūt pietejuma strukturu i rezultatu apkūpuojuma veidu, kai ari dūts puorskots par latgalīšu volūdys lūmu myusdīnu izgleiteibys sistemā. Sacynuojumūs ir īzeimātys nuokūtnis perspektivis i prīšklykumi dabuotūs rezultatu izmontuojumam.
Raksta mērķis ir izvērtēt lingvistiskās ainavas laukā paveikto, apkopojot piecu gadu pieredzi un ieskicējot nākotnes perspektīvas turpmākajos pētījumos un studiju procesa satura plānojumā. Rakstā pamatā ir izmantota deskriptīvā pētniecības metode un kontentanalīze. Būtiskākie secinājumi: Lingvistiskās ainavas izpēte dažādās teritoriālajās vienībās Baltijas valstīs ir notikusi kopš 2008. gada, iesaistot arī studentus un vidusskolēnus. Lingvistiskās ainavas izpētes un metodoloģijas pilnveides rezultātā Rēzeknes Augstskolā (turpmāk – RA) ir izveidota kvantitatīvo un kvalitatīvo datu bāze, izstrādāti daudzveidīgi individuālie un kolektīvie pētījumi.Turpmāk ir plānots lielāku uzmanību veltīt Latgales skolu ainavai un citu iestāžu mikrovides izpētei, Latgales pilsētu datu salīdzinājumam ar citu Eiropas valstu reģionu lingvistisko ainavu, korelējot kvantitatīvos datus ar diskursa analīzes daudzveidīgo pieeju iespējām.
This chapter explores the Linguistic Landscape of six medium-size towns in the Baltic States with regard to languages of tourism and to the role of English and Russian as linguae francae. A quantitative analysis of signs and of tourism web sites shows that, next to the state languages, English is the most dominant language. Yet, interviews reveal that underneath the surface, Russian still stands strong. Therefore, possible claims that English might take over the role of the main lingua franca in the Baltic States cannot be maintained. English has a strong position for attracting international tourists, but only alongside Russian which remains important both as a language of international communication and for local needs.
This article looks at Latgalian from a perspective of a classification of languages. It starts by discussing relevant terms relating to sociolinguistic language types. It argues that Latgalian and its speakers show considerable similarities with many languages in Europe which are considered to be regional languages – hence, also Latgalian should be classified as such. In a second part, the article uses sociolinguistic data to indicate that the perceptions of speakers confirm this classification. Therefore, Latgalian should also officially be treated with the respect that other regional languages in Europe enjoy.
This chapter will present results of a linguistic landscape (LL) project in the regional centre of Rēzekne in the region of Latgale in Eastern Latvia. Latvia was de facto a part of the Soviet Union until 1991, and this has given it a highly multilingual society. In the essentially post-colonial situation since 1991, strict language policies have been in place, which aim to reverse the language shift from Russian, the dominant language of Soviet times, back to Latvian. Thus, the main interests of the research were how the complex pattern of multilingualism in Latvia is reflected in the LL; how people relate to current language legislation; and what motivations, attitudes and emotions inform their behaviour.
In der akademischen Diskussion zum Global English hat sich seit den 1980er Jahren ein Modell etabliert, das die Staaten, in denen Englisch gesprochen wird, idealtypisch in drei Kreise einteilt: Den Inneren Kreis, in dem Englisch wichtigste Sprache der Gesellschaft sowie L1 eines Großteils der Bevölkerung ist, den Äußeren Kreis, wo Englisch L2 und eine wichtige Sprache unter mehreren ist, sowie den Erweiterten oder Expandierenden Kreis, in dem Englisch als Fremdsprache und als Lingua Franca dominiert (Kachru, 1985). Dieser Beitrag zeigt anhand einer Bestandsaufnahme gesellschaftlicher Funktionen des Deutschen weltweit, dass dieses Modell auch auf das Deutsche übertragen werden kann. Allerdings unterscheidet sich das Deutsche in einigen erheblichen Aspekten vom Englischen: Zum Inneren Kreis gehören die Länder des deutschsprachigen Kerngebietes, zum Äußeren Kreis Länder, in denen Deutsch anerkannte Minderheitensprache ist, und zum Erweiterten (oder im Falle des Deutschen eher Bröckelnden) Kreis Länder, in denen es einzelne deutsche Sprachinseln oder eine deutschsprachige Diaspora gibt, wobei letztere auch erst in jüngster Zeit entstanden sein kann. Schließlich diskutiert der Aufsatz die Position des Baltikums in diesem Modell.
Durch den Dezentralisierungsprozess in Großbritannien gibt es seit etwa einem Jahr neue Hoffnung für ein dauerhaftes Überleben der gälischen Sprache in Schottland. Mit der Einrichtung eines schottischen Parlaments, das seit Mai 1999 für innere Belange Schottlands verantwortlich ist, ist die gälischsprachige Bevölkerung viel näher an das Machtzentrum heran gerückt.
The establishment of Scottish Parliament: What difference does it make for the Gaelic language?
(2004)
After the Labour government takeover in Westminster in 1997, followed by the referendum on establishing a Scottish Parliament, hopes for more support for the Gaelic language in Scotland were nourished. In the election campaign to the Scottish Parliament in 1999, all parties which were elected to Parliament had mentioned Gaelic, and all parties except the Conservatives had promised an increase in support for Gaelic (cf. Scottish parties’ election manifestoes, obtainable from the parties or via their web sites). Now that the new Scottish Executive, formed by Labour and the Liberal Democrats, has been in power for some time, it is interesting to see if these hopes have been fulfilled.
The two core questions of this paper will thus be:
1. What is the status of Scottish Gaelic after the devolution process?
2. What difference does the existence of the Scottish Parliament make for the status of Gaelic?
It is important to note that this paper refers to language status and Gaelic’s position from a mere language policy perspective. The results are mostly based on an analysis of Parliament documents, the method of investigation being strictly philological. Empirical research has not yet been undertaken. The reference time of my paper will be the first year of Scottish Parliament and the new executive. Even though this is an arbitrary time break, the first year is a symbolic point of time. As the first legislation period as a possibly more natural reference point is not over yet, this choice seems legitimate.