Dwi Septi Yanti R.

P
E1D018033 / 6-TP1

Unit 5 : national languages and language planning.

 National and official languages
In sociolinguistics the distinction between a national language and an official
language is generally made along the affective–referential dimension, or more precisely
in this context, the ideological–instrumental dimension. A national language is the
language of a political, cultural and social unit. It is generally developed and used as a
symbol of national unity. Its functions are to identify the nation and unite its people. An
official language, by contrast, is simply a language which may be used for government
business. Its function is primarily utilitarian rather than symbolic. It is possible, of course,
for one language to serve both functions.
Not surprisingly, governments do not always recognise the distinctions made by
sociolinguists. They use the terms ‘official’ and ‘national’ to suit their political ends.
Many countries make no distinction between a national language and an official
language. In countries which regard themselves as monolingual nations, the same
language serves both purposes. In multilingual communities, however, all kinds of
permutations have been used in order to satisfy both political and social goals on the one
hand, and more practical and utilitarian needs on the other.
In multilingual countries, the government often declares a particular language to
be the national language for political reasons. The declaration may be a step in the
process of asserting the nationhood of a newly independent or established nation, for
instance, as in the case of Swahili in Tanzania, Hebrew in Israel, Malay in Malaysia and
Indonesian in Indonesia.
The identification of official languages may also be necessary when the choice of
national language is problematic. In multilingual India, for example, attempts to give
Hindi sole status as the national language have not succeeded. Fourteen regional Indian
languages are recognised as official languages alongside English and Hindi for the
country as a whole, and in addition different states each have their own official
languages.

 Official status and minority languages

Because of its colonial history, as well as its value as a world language
and international lingua franca, English is an official language in many countries
throughout the world, such as Pakistan, Fiji, Vanuatu, Jamaica and the Bahamas,
etc.
Often it shares this official status with an indigenous language, such as
Malay in Malaysia, Swahili in Tanzania and Gilbertese in Kiribati. But,
interestingly, English is not legally an official language of England, the USA, or
 New Zealand. In these countries it has not been considered necessary to legislate
that the language of the majority is an official language.
Many minorities would like to gain official status for their languages, but
the costs in terms of providing services and information in all official languages
are considerable, and most governments count them carefully. Providing services,
information, legal representation and, in some places, education in just two
official languages is an expensive business. It seems unlikely other minorities will
earn such rights easily.

 What price a national language?

Many countries have regarded the development of a single national language as a
way of symbolising the unity of a nation. ‘One nation, one language’ has been a
popular and effective slogan. In earlier centuries, the national language of a
political entity often emerged naturally and relatively unselfconsciously over a
period of time. English in England, French in France, Japanese in Japan, Spanish
in Spain seem obvious examples.
Where there is a single dominant group, the issue of which language to choose as
the official Language to represent the nation generally doesn’t arise. Numerical
Dominance is not always what counts, however. Political power is the crucial
factor.

 Planning for a national official language

 Form, functions and attitudes
What is involved in developing a code or variety (whether dialect or language) so that
is suitable for official use? Addressing this challenge involves issues relating to the
form of the variety, the functions it serves, and the attitudes that people hold towards
it.

There are generally four interrelated steps:

1. Selection : choosing the variety or code to be developed.

2. Codification : standardizing its structural or linguistic features. This kind of
‘linguistic processing’ is known as corpus planning.
3. Elaboration : extending its functions for use in new domains. This involves
developing the necessary linguistic resources for handling new concepts and
contexts.
4. Securing its acceptance. The status of the new variety is important, and so
people’s attitudes to the variety being developed must be considered. Steps may
be needed to enhance its prestige, for instance, and to encourage people to
develop pride in the language, or loyalty towards it. This is known as status
planning or prestige planning.
 Selecting the code to be developed is often an entirely political decision, though linguists
may point out the different linguistic problems presented by selecting one variety rather
than another. Acceptance by the people will generally require endorsement by politicians
and socially prestigious groups. So selection and acceptance are steps which involve
social and political factors. Codification and elaborating the code to handle a wider range
of functions are, by contrast, essentially linguistic processes. Producing a dictionary and
ensuring there are words available for teaching science in the variety, for instance, are
problems for linguists.

 The linguist’s role in language planning

More often these days, the nuts and bolts of language planning are handled by
committees, commissions or academies. Moreover, the focus of much language planning
activity has altered from the promotion of national and official languages in countries
trying to establish their autonomy, to include concern for minority and endangered
languages. The Kanak Languages Academy, for example, has been established to
preserve the indigenous languages of New Caledonia. Codification and vocabulary
expansion are typically of prime concern for language academies.

 Conclusion
Language planning is defined most simply as deliberate language change. This covers a
wide variety of activities including the introduction of new labels for fruit, the reform of
spelling systems and the provision of advice on non-sexist terminology. It also includes
the development of national languages and standard dialects, as illustrated in this chapter.
Language planners generally focus on specific language problems. Their role is to
develop a policy of language use which will solve the problems appropriately in
particular speech communities. This chapter has focused in some detail on a few specific
cases of language planning in order to exemplify some of the issues which have to be
resolved by language planners, and some of the ways which have been used to resolve
them. We have seen for instance that language planners may need to develop a variety
upwards into new H domains, as with Swahili, Tok Pisin, Indonesian and Nynorsk, or
alternatively downwards into new L domains as in the case of Hebrew, Bokmål and to
some extent Mandarin Chinese.
This chapter has been concerned mainly with the language policies of countries and states
rather than the language behaviour of individuals. Yet it has been clear that ultimately it
is the patterns of linguistic behaviour of individual language users that determines
whether a national policy will succeed or not. If people do not use an official language
then it will simply wither away. If recommendations about approved or preferred
spellings are ignored, they will become defunct. The reasons why people adopt one form
and not another are complicated. Language constructs aspects of identity and membership
of particular groups as well as nationhood.
Multilingualism highlights linguistic diversity and makes it easier to perceive, as we have
seen in the fi rst part of this book. But it is clear that there is rich linguistic diversity
within languages too. Members of monolingual speech communities use this diversity to
signal their attitudes and allegiances, and construct their social identities and
relationships, just as Multilingual people use their different languages for these purposes.