Language is much more than a mere tool for communication; it embodies culture, identity, and community. More than 7,000 languages are spoken worldwide, each carrying its own wealth of history, nuances, and social implications. As diverse as these languages are, the drive towards language standardisation remains a significant force, often at the expense of linguistic diversity. In this post, we are going to discuss the intricacies of language standardisation and its social ramifications by focusing on the tensions between formal language norms, linguistic diversity, and social justice.
A Brief History of Language Standardisation
Understanding Language Standardisation
Language standardisation can be defined as the process through which a particular linguistic variety is promoted as the norm for language use in formal contexts — namely literature, education, government, and media. This process often involves codifying grammar, vocabulary, and pronunciation to form a standardised version of a language.
Historical Context
Standardisation is not unique to any specific language. Its roots can often be traced back to the rise of nation-states, where a need for uniformity in communication became increasingly crucial. In England, for instance, standard English gained prominence during the late 15th and early 16th centuries, driven by the rise of literacy, printing presses, and the influence of the British Empire. Colonial powers such as Britain, France, and Spain established language policies favouring their languages, reinforcing the dominance of these languages and marginalising others.
In India, the situation is no different. With the British colonisation of India, English was established as a language of administration and education, leading to the marginalisation of local languages and dialects. Although India’s constitution recognises 22 languages, policies that favour Hindi and English often neglect the linguistic rights of speakers of regional languages, making standardisation a political as well as a culturally contentious issue.
The Impact of Language Standardisation on Marginalised Communities
Language and Social Stratification
Standard language norms often indicate social standing; those who do not conform may face marginalisation. Marginalised communities who speak non-standard languages or dialects are often stigmatised, seen as uneducated or uncultured. This creates a vicious cycle where individuals may feel pressured to suppress their linguistic heritage to gain social acceptance.
Case in Point: African American Vernacular English (AAVE)
In the United States, AAVE has faced significant stigma, often deemed ‘ungrammatical’ by speakers of Standard American English (SAE). This social bias against speakers of AAVE has had negative repercussions in educational and employment settings. In schools, students who speak AAVE may struggle to thrive in an educational system that favours SAE, leading to lower academic performance and, subsequently, limited career opportunities.
Regional Languages in India
The imposition of Standard Hindi in India has ongoing implications for speakers of regional languages such as Maithili, Konkani, and Odia. For example, in the state of Bihar, where Maithili is widely spoken, the local government has made efforts to preserve and promote Maithili through cultural initiatives and education. However, in official contexts where Hindi or English are favoured, Maithili speakers may feel marginalised or overlooked, as their native language is not given equal importance in government communications or institutions.
Taking the example of my own people, I come from a state where the dominant cultural groups have had either Garhwali or Kumaoni as their language of communication. However, the government uses either Hindi or English for its official communication, which has led to the survival of these languages becoming increasingly endangered. In fact, my native language, Garhwali, is recognised as being vulnerable by the UNESCO Atlas of the World’s Languages in Danger.
The Emotional Toll
The emotional impact of language standardisation cannot be overlooked. Individuals who are forced to suppress their native languages often experience a sense of loss, alienation, and cultural disconnection. The suppression of linguistic diversity is not merely an abstract social injustice; it deeply affects individual identities and, by extension, entire communities.
The Role of Language in Social and Economic Inequality
Language as a Barrier
Language serves as a gatekeeper to many resources, including education, employment, and social services. Individuals from lower socio-economic backgrounds may struggle to access opportunities simply because their language practices are viewed as ‘non-standard.’ This creates a substantial gap in social mobility, as language proficiency is often linked to educational achievement and economic opportunity.
Education
In educational settings, language standardisation often leads to silencing students who are not proficient in the dominant language. This phenomenon is particularly pronounced in countries like India, where students may be taught in a language that is not their mother tongue. For instance, Hindi-speaking children enrolled in English-medium schools may wrestle with concepts and ideas while simultaneously grappling with a foreign language, placing them at a disadvantage compared to their peers educated in their native languages.
In more extreme cases, the education system may fail entirely for students who cannot speak or write in the standard language. This can lead to high dropout rates among linguistic minorities, perpetuating cycles of poverty and disenfranchisement.
Employment
Employers often favour candidates who exhibit proficiency in the standard language. This favouritism can marginalise skilled workers who are proficient in non-standard dialects but lack familiarity with formal language norms. For instance, many service-sector jobs in India require English proficiency, but candidates from rural or lower-income backgrounds may find themselves at a disadvantage when competing against urban counterparts who have had more access to English education.
Case Studies: Language Policy and Social Justice
The intersection of social justice and language is rather intricate. Let us look at a few real-world examples that would serve to provide valuable insights into the complexities surrounding language standardisation and social justice.
New Zealand: A Success Story of Language Revitalisation
In 1987, the Maori language was declared an official language of New Zealand. While the language was at risk of becoming extinct because of language shift and suppression, revitalisation efforts have since gained momentum. Maori language immersion schools, known as Kura Kaupapa Maori, have fostered a sense of pride and identity among young Maori speakers. The revival of the Maori language not only reclaims cultural heritage but also emphasises the importance of acknowledging and valuing linguistic diversity as an integral part of nationhood.
Catalonia: Navigating Language Rights and Identity
In Catalonia, a region in northeastern Spain, Catalan is a co-official language alongside Spanish. Catalan nationalism has surged in recent years, fuelled by language issues. The Catalan Language Law mandates the use of Catalan in education and public administration, leading to increased visibility and status for the language.
However, the push for standardised Catalan has raised questions about inclusivity. The divergence between various regional dialects can be contentious, with some communities feeling left out of the standard language narrative. This situation demonstrates that even in language movements aimed at preserving cultural identity, tensions can arise concerning who gets to decide what is ‘standard.’
Australia: Language Rights for Indigenous Communities
Indigenous languages in Australia offer another compelling case study. Many Aboriginal languages have faced near-extinction because of colonisation and language suppression. Today, the Australian government has announced several initiatives aimed at the revitalisation of Indigenous languages through funding, community engagement, and educational programmes.
However, despite these efforts, the implementation of Indigenous language education is often inconsistent, leading to ongoing struggles for social justice among Indigenous communities. The challenges related to language revitalisation showcase that progress requires not only policy changes but also societal commitment to recognising cultural and linguistic diversity.
Alternatives to Traditional Language Standardisation
As we scrutinise the politics of language standardisation, it is critical to consider alternatives that emphasise linguistic diversity, inclusion, and social justice.
Advocating for Multilingualism
One of the most effective alternatives is promoting multilingualism in schools and public life. Educators can design curricula that utilise students’ mother tongues, enabling them to learn core subjects while validating their linguistic heritage. Multilingual education fosters cognitive diversity and equips students with skills to navigate an increasingly interconnected world.
Example from Luxembourg
Luxembourg presents a successful example of multilingual policy. The country’s education system incorporates multiple languages: Luxembourgish, French, and German are all used as mediums of instruction. This multilingual foundation allows students to cultivate linguistic versatility that prepares them for a globalised world.
Language Revitalisation Initiatives
Language revitalisation efforts play a crucial role in preserving linguistic diversity. These initiatives can include the following:
Community Engagement: Communities can develop language preservation programmes that engage native speakers, teaching younger generations the importance of cultural heritage.
Cultural Immersion Programmes: Immersion programmes can help individuals connect with their language and culture, fostering pride in their linguistic identity.
Digital Platforms: The use of apps, websites, and online resources can facilitate language learning and preservation, making language education accessible to wider audiences.
Case in Point: The Cherokee Nation
The Cherokee Nation in the United States has implemented language revitalisation programmes that utilise technology to teach the Cherokee language to younger generations. Through language classes and immersive community experiences, the Nation fosters pride in its linguistic heritage while simultaneously addressing social inequalities faced by its members.
Language Inclusivity Policies
Advocating for language-inclusive policies can radically alter the landscape of societal norms surrounding language usage. Its key elements include the following:
Government Education Programmes: Ensuring that governmental announcements, educational materials, and healthcare information are available in multiple languages minimises language barriers for marginalised communities.
Employment and Hiring Policies: Organisations can utilise standardised language proficiency tests that account for multilingual candidates, integrating language diversity into their employment practices.
Public Awareness Campaigns: Campaigns aimed at changing societal attitudes towards non-standard languages can decrease stigma and promote acceptance of linguistic diversity.
Code-Switching: A Natural Practice
Code-switching, the practice of alternating between languages or dialects, is a reflection of linguistic adaptability. This occurs naturally in bilingual and multilingual communities, allowing individuals to navigate different social contexts.
While traditionally viewed as a linguistic deficiency, code-switching can be promoted as a valuable skill that enhances communication and fosters understanding among diverse groups. Encouraging code-switching in both educational settings and workplaces could validate linguistic diversity and recognise the richness that it brings to society.
Conclusion
Navigating the complexities of language standardisation involves understanding its influence on social structures, identities, and community cohesion. While standardisation often promotes unity and saves administrative costs, it can marginalise linguistically diverse communities and exacerbate social inequalities. As we explore alternatives to traditional language standardisation, we must be mindful of employing inclusive practices that celebrate linguistic diversity and uphold social justice.
Our collective approach towards language policy needs to prioritise multilingualism, language revitalisation, and language inclusivity, creating a more equitable society that values all languages and their speakers. Just like a multi-flavoured curry, a society that appreciates its diverse languages can create an enriching cultural experience for everyone.
Discover more from Methods and Musings
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.