Refine
Document Type
- Part of a Book (5)
- Article (4)
- Conference Proceeding (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (10)
Keywords
- Mehrsprachigkeit (6)
- Sprachpolitik (4)
- Deutsch (3)
- Gesellschaft (3)
- Latvia (3)
- Lettisch (3)
- Lettland (3)
- Linguistic Landscape (3)
- Minderheitensprache (3)
- Russisch (3)
Publicationstate
- Zweitveröffentlichung (10) (remove)
Reviewstate
- Peer-Review (10) (remove)
Publisher
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.
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.
This paper seeks to apply the principles of the famous 3-Circle-Model devised for the description of the ecolinguistic position of English world-wide to the position of German around the world.
On the one hand, the 3-Circle-Model for English with its "Inner", "Outer" and "Extended/Expanding" Circles was invented by Kachru in the 1980s and has since then been adopted, refined and criticised by numerous authors. The situation of German world-wide, on the other hand, has only been scarcely discussed in the past 20 years. While the global extension of German is obviously by far weaker than that of English, there are also a number of noteworthy similarities in terms of historical spread and the current position of these two languages.
This paper therefore discusses the analogies of global English and German by establishing three circles for German: the Inner Circle for the core German-speaking area, i.e. Germany, Austria and Switzerland; the Outer Circle including a number of German minority areas (mostly in Europe), and finally the Extended Circle which may be denoted as "Crumbling" rather than "Expanding". The latter comprises traditional German diaspora communities in different parts of the world which either result from migration, but also reflect the previous functions of German as a language of culture and as a lingua franca in regions like Eastern Europe. The paper argues that there are some striking structural similarities, but also shows the limits of this comparison.
This paper discusses how the regional language of Latgalian in Latvia has benefitted from societal discourse on the antagonism between speakers of Latvian and Russian in Latvia. Triggered by the 2012 referendum on Russian as a possible second state language of Latvia, Latvian politics (exemplified by politicians' statements since 2012 as well as by 2014 election manifestoes) as well as society at large (displayed by e.g. increased attention in the educational sector and the media) have started to devote considerably more attention to the region of Latgale, including its cultural and linguistic heritage. The paper thereby argues that speakers of Latgalian have gained a noteworthy increase in voice, even though the future of the variety is still considered to be uncertain.
Sprachliche Zeichen im öffentlichen Raum (Linguistic Landscape - LL) tragen neben ihrer primären Bedeutung und Funktion wie Auskunft und Werbung auch sekundäre Informationen zur Sprachenhierarchie, zur Repräsentation von Minderheitensprachen, zur sprachlichen Toleranz gegenüber der Mehrsprachigkeit in diesem Raum, etc. Diese Vielschichtigkeit macht die sprachlichen Zeichen im öffentlichen Raum zu wertvollen Lernobjekten, an denen die im Berufsleben so bedeutende diskursive Lesefähigkeit der Studierenden trainiert werden kann. Der Beitrag öffnet Perspektiven auf die Möglichkeiten der Verknüpfung der LL-Analyse mit den Inhalten der traditionellen germanistischen Curricula wie auch benachbarter Fachbereiche und verweist auf bisherige Studien in diesem Bereich.
This chapter discusses functions of the German language in the Linguistic Landscape (LL) of the Baltic states, with a focus on the Latvian capital Riga. For this end, it applies the "Spot German" approach (cf. Heimrath 2017) in the context of debates on the international role of German (cf. Ammon 2015). It argues that German is an "additional language of society" (cf. Marten 2017b), i.e. it is not a dominant language in the Baltics but can regularly be found in a variety of functions. These relate both to the historical role of German in the region (including its contemporary commodification) and to current relations between the Baltics and the German-speaking countries. These include tourism, business, or educational and political institutions, but also point to, e.g., discourses on the quality assigned to products from the German-speaking region. In this sense, the Baltic states are part of what may, in accordance with Kachru's (1985) 3-circle-model for English, be labelled as "extended circle" of German. At the same time, the chapter discusses how conclusions from Linguistic Landscape research can be used for understanding marketing both in and for the German language: On the one hand, German carries the potential of persuading customers to opt for a certain product. On the other hand, the abundance of situations where German can be "spotted" suggests that the LL may successfully be used for language-marketing purposes, as exemplified by a brochure and a poster created by the DAAD Information Centre for the Baltic states in Riga.