400 Sprache, Linguistik
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (26)
- Article (19)
- Book (6)
- Conference Proceeding (3)
- Preprint (1)
- Review (1)
Keywords
- Sprachpolitik (56) (remove)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (37)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (16)
- Postprint (13)
- Ahead of Print (1)
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (32)
- Peer-Review (20)
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.
This paper focuses on language change based on shifting social norms, in particular with regard to the debate on language and gender. It is a recurring argument in this debate that language develops "naturally" and that "severe interventions" - such as gender-inclusive language is often claimed to be - in the allegedly "organic" language system are inappropriate and even "dangerous". Such interventions are, however, not unprecedented. Socially motivated processes of language change are neither unusual nor new. We focus in our contribution on one important political-social space in Germany, the German Bundestag. Taking other struggles about language and gender in the plenaries of the Bundestag as a starting point, our article illustrates that language and gender has been a recurring issue in the German Bundestag since the 1980s. We demonstrate how this is reflected in linguistic practices of the Bundestag, by the use of a) designations for gays and lesbians; b) pair forms such as Bürgerinnen und Bürger (female and male citizens); and c) female forms of addresses and personal nouns ('Präsidentin' in addition to 'Präsident'). Lastly, we will discuss implications of these earlier language battles for the currently very heated debate about gender-inclusive language, especially regarding new forms with gender symbols like the asterisk or the colon (Lehrer*innen, Lehrer:innen; male*female teachers) which are intended to encompass all gender identities.
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.
Despite being an official language of several countries in Central and Western Europe, German is not formally recognised as the official language of the Federal Republic of Germany. However, in certain situations the use of the German language, including the spelling rules, is subject to state regulation (by acts of Federal Parliament orby administrative decisions). This article presents the content of this regulation, its scope, and the historical context in which it was adopted.
Politisches Positionieren ist eine elementare sprachliche und soziale Praxis. Wo und wie wir uns und andere in der Gesellschaft verorten, ist eine alltäglich verhandelte Frage. Positionierungen werden dabei sowohl explizit thematisiert und kontrovers diskutiert als auch beiläufig durch sprachliche Praktiken hervorgebracht. Im Zentrum von Positionierungen stehen Aushandlungen sozialer Identität. Doch nicht nur persönliche Identitäten werden durch Positionierungen konstituiert, stabilisiert oder umgedeutet, auch die Gesellschaft ist durch die sprachlichen Positionierungspraktiken ihrer Mitglieder unmittelbar oder mittelbar betroffen.
Die Beiträge des Bandes betrachten diese Schnittstelle zwischen Interaktion und Diskurs aus unterschiedlichen disziplinären Perspektiven und erörtern, wie Positionierungen vollzogen werden, ob bzw. inwiefern sie politisch sind und in welchen wechselseitigen Zusammenhängen sie zu gesellschaftlichen, sozialen und politischen Arrangements und Ordnungen stehen.
Sprachpolitik war in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland seit 1949 nie ein größeres Thema in Wahlkämpfen. Seit der Bundestagswahl 2017 hat sich dies jedoch geändert. Damals waren unter dem Eindruck des großen Migrationsandrangs im Jahr 2016 von einigen Parteien Positionen zu sprachlicher Integration in die Wahlprogramme aufgenommen worden. Unter Positionen sei hier der explizite sprachliche Ausdruck einer Haltung zu einem politischen Thema bzw. Themenbereich zu verstehen, der unter anderem im Rahmen von parteilichen Grundsatz- und Wahlprogrammen Orientierung hinsichtlich des (zukünftig zu erwartenden) politischen Handelns parteilicher Akteur/-innen bieten soll. Und auch die zunehmende Diversität der deutschen Gesellschaft führte schon bei der Wahl im Jahr 2017 zu einer Berücksichtigung von Themen der sprachlichen Bildung in der Programmatik der Parteien. Dieser Beitrag untersucht somit die Grundsatz- und Wahlprogramme der größten Parteien anhand der sprachpolitischen Ausdrucksweise.
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.