Statements and outcomes of the Fall Semester of 2020

 In the fall semester of 2020 in the framework of the course “Linguitic Rights - Law of Coexisting Languages” we examined several European linguistic group whether the language policy has impact on the contemporary language protection policies. 

The co-operating students, who developed the following statements were: 

Emma Barbeau, Manon Bousmia, Márk Dudás, Inês Kendall de Azevedo Campos, Léa Laurenti, Laura Marques, Aneta Olszewska, Sofia Quirós Gonzalez-Palacio, Dorottya Seenger, Maja Simigh. 

The examined languages and linguistic regions were the following:

Manx (UK), Irish (UK), Scottish (UK), German (BE),German (DE), German (HU),  Romansch and other languages in Switzerland, Turkish (D), Monténégro, Sami (FI), Hungarian (SK), Basque (SP).

The research included: 

1. General introduction to the social structure and specialties of the state

2. General introduction to the chosen language in the state

3. ICCPR - What does it say for the given language (State Reports, Recommendations, Comments)

4. ECRML - What does it say for the given language (State Reports, Recommendations, Comments)

5. Is there any case in the ECtHR case law that is in relation with that language?

6. Findings: what are the contemporary problems? What would you suggest to the parties? What are the legal and non-legal (diplomatic, political, sociological, ect) measures that you would suggest to solve the problem? Why?

At the end of the semester all attending students presented the findings of her/his research. The individual researches were followed by a common discussion and debate where we found some common outcomes that we consider important for the further research of the peaceful coexistence of different languages. 

Here below we highlight two aspects that arose during the discussions: (1) Globalization and (2) the source of language protection.

1. Globalization and Language protection

Globalization has a deep and apparent effect on the use of languages. During the semester unfolding the different linguistic regimes, we found important elements that enlarges the scope of language protection. We found that globalization both supports and obstructs the protection of minority languages. 

We highlight some elements: 

• International stricti iuris documents (here: ICCPR and ECRML) are important standards that affect the internal law as well as the language policy of the state. 
• Generating digital surfaces are not always attainable by minority languages either due to the lack of resources, professionalism or the interest for the certain language on digital platforms.
• Endangered minority languages are sometimes spoken in rural and remote communities. As a result, people of these minority languages can hardly promulgate their own minority language on a global level.
• Young minority generation are put at risk to lose their mother tongue in urban environment, however aging remote societies are endangered as well.

• Globalisation can also work in minority languages’ favour. It can contribute to make them reachable. Through technological surfaces such as Youtube, Social Media or other ICT tools, we are able to listen to or to read minority languages. In this regard means of globalisation can keep a language alive.
• Among Sámi people and especially in the case of Inari Sámi language nests have always held a paramount importance regarding effective Sámi tuition at an early age. The method itself is an immersion-based way of revitalising languages through early-childhood education. In this manner, small children are socialised and taught in such ambience which secures Sámi as the mother tongue of the children. The language nest method was developed in New Zealand in the hope of reviving the Māori language in the 1980s. Thereby it is outstandingly fascinating to have a method based on learning in smaller communities used on the other side of the world. (Dudás Márk)
• Global environmental damages, such as climate change may affect the use of a language, as we saw, since they are making animal species disappear. If this happens, if the reindeer begin to disappear, the tradition of the Sámi herders will begin to disappear, forcing them to look for other more urban jobs, in which Sámi is not spoken, since the official language of Finland must be used. Furthermore, global environmental problems can be mitigated by investing enough time and money, but that is exactly what is not granted to the Sámi. Those who live mainly from nature, notice much more in their day to day the destructive effects of climate change, but on the other hand, the Parliament of Finland does not listen to them, nor does it leave them autonomy to face the climate. The Sámi have proposals for ways to adapt to climate change, but their ideas rarely reach political or academic circles. They should be owners of their land, they should be able to apply their knowledge, herders should be free to manage the structure of their herds. All this makes the new generations lose the Sámi traditions, and give up, opting before for other more urban jobs, where I have already indicated before, the Sámi language is not used. (Sofia).
• We consider the few ECHR cases that are in relation to protecting languages are highly important (example of the Belgian case of 1967).
• Scotland might preserve its language also by the product it is most famous for - Scotch Whisky, which appears on the global market. The word „whisky” comes from the Gaelic language „uisge” which means water. Scotch Whisky is often referred to as the water of life. What’s more the names of the more popular Whisky comes from regions where they were produced. The fun fact of that is that the names of those Cities/ Regions/Villages comes also from Scottish Gaelic and have a meaning in that language, for example: Bruichladdich means “stony bank by the shore”; Bunnahabhain means “foot of the river”’ Craigellachie means rocky hill. In this way this lesser used language appears on every continent today. 
• Thanks to joint initiatives with European bodies, Irish language has been revived within the European Commission.

2. Top-Down vs Bottom-Up language protection

We found that minority language protection often appears in government action plans and strategies or policies. On the other hand, we found other regimes where NGOs or local advocacy groups initiate projects among the protection of a minority or regional language. We think both tools may have an important role.

• Introducing The Gaelic Language (Scotland) Act 2005 and other regulations is a way to use Scottish Gaelic in daily lives again, as it used to be in the past. Government tries to preserve this language as a unique aspect of Scotland's heritage. But still the biggest problem with keeping it alive is that Scottish Gaelic is known by older people who can speak it fluently. Unfortunately we can't spot the same pattern within younger age groups. This is in connection with the social prestige of a language. The further implementation of the government language policy with regard to the Scottish Gaelic language is hindered by the least knowledge of the language. Bottom-up approach might be a better option, starting teaching this language in smaller places. 
• As regards to the protection of Scottish Gaelic language, Scotland is trying to promote it on a large scale. The ways to do that are many, like creating acts and lots of courses which teach this language or starting to use it in official documents and on official meetings. What is also interesting is the way to introduce it, by using applications on smartphones, which might more appeal to younger generations.
• Actions taken by the official bodies are often raised by the ECLRM Committee. This encourages the government policy-makers to take more effective measures.
• Today, Irish language-protection is based on both policies. The best, if these work hand-in-hand. 
• German Language in Belgium: Laws were made in order to have a more peaceful relation between the languages. To have more peaceful relations between languages, Facilities for German speakers are compulsory in the French community, at the border, and vice versa. 
• In former Yugoslavian countries language may be protected in constitutional regulation in order to show the importance of the respect and peaceful coexistence of different languages.
• Language Policy of 2010 in Denmark: It was issued in a special (kin-state related) Top-Down way by the Assembly of Delegates of the Federation of German North Schleswig-Holstein. The act provided long-term financial security for the facilities and activities of the German ethnic group, including for the production of German-language radio news and television programs. There was improvement and expansion of bilingual signage, including the setting up of bilingual place-name signs in the four major cities. There was the consideration of the German language on the websites of state, regional and local authorities like the general possibility to submit relevant documents in German to the public administration and the courts. They made a provision of funds for the financing of language projects in the German-Danish region. The act also demanded earlier and better German lessons in the public Danish schools.