A graphic representation of language distribution in multilingual societies *

Gerd Jendraschek Universit de Toulouse-Le Mirail

Most Europeans are monolingual, but multilingualism is a frequent phenomenon in other world regions, and there are important exceptions in Europe itself. Multilingualism arises in societies where different languages or language communities coexist in specific constellations. One such pattern of language distribution is diglossia, where languages (or varieties of one language) are chosen depending on the formality of the situation and the intimacy with the interlocutor. Alternatively, there can be segregation, where individual speakers or communities have a preferential language which they aim to use exclusively as long as they do not transgress community borders. The two parameters register and population allow for a graphic representation of different multilingual situations. The basic patterns are minorized languages, prestige languages, mixed patterns, unstable patterns, official languages as lingua franca, or several languages for formal purposes. Since the important works of Ferguson (1959), Fishman (1967), Stewart (1968), and others, the situation has changed drastically in some of Europes multilingual corners. We will look at the situation in Luxembourg, where the traditional pattern of language distribution has become unstable, and we will see an example from outside Europe, the ABC islands, where Papiamentu, Dutch, English and Spanish co-exist. My graphic representation aims at schematizing this complex interplay between linguistic varieties in multilingual societies for a general audience. Finally, a global outlook will show that languages can be classified into five groups with respect to their chances to be used in formal situations. In such a hierarchy, English is at the top, followed by a handful of prestigious languages, whereas thousands of small languages have no access at all to formal situations.

1 DEFINING FORMAL VS INFORMAL DOMAINS There is a continuum between informal and formal language use. When we speak about everyday matters, with people we know well, who have the same geographic origin, then we tend to use informal language. When we write about unfamiliar issues to people we havent met before, then our language tends to be more formal. There are several parameters for describing the distinction formal vs. informal. (1) Sociolinguistic parameters formal > informal written > spoken university > secondary > primary school official > public > private prestigious > popular international > national > regional > local > home exceptional > daily language learnt as adult > as a child > acquired in the family

Thanks to Fernand Fehlen for comments on the situation in Luxembourg. I would also like to thank the Gottlieb Daimler and Karl Benz foundation for financial support. 2004 by Gerd Jendraschek CamLing 2004.

Gerd Jendraschek

In a society with two languages, one may be used for writing, the other for speaking. If both languages are written, one may be used in universities, and another one in primary schools, and so on. Several parameters may interact, others may be irrelevant in a given multilingual context. 2 BASIC PATTERNS WITH TWO LANGUAGES

2.1 Diglossia One pattern of language distribution is diglossia, where languages (or varieties of one language) are chosen depending on the formality of the situation and the intimacy with the interlocutor. The informal variety is the first language for most people. The formal variety is more standardized and has to be learnt during childhood, which entails that people with better access to the education system will have better knowledge of the formal variety. This knowledge is a prerequisite for social mobility, i.e. access to all spheres of public life. Examples for diglossic societies are Luxembourg and the Germanic part of Switzerland. Diglossia is also very frequent in creole societies, with the creole being the native variety and the corresponding colonial language the high variety used in schools, administration, and the media. More generally, most societies have some kind of diglossia, as lower and higher registers display differences in lexicon and grammar. (2) diglossia formal informal population 2.2 Segregation Alternatively, there can be segregation, where individual speakers or communities have a preferential language which they aim to use exclusively as long as they do not transgress community borders. Linguistic communities can be segregated according to the territorial principle or to the personal principle. The territorial principle states that different areas have different official languages, which means that people moving to another area lose the right to use their first language. The personal principle applies when areas are considered as being linguistically heterogeneous: everybody should then have the right to use his language in public. In both cases, given individuals use a single language in both informal and formal situations. Common institutions shared by both communities have to offer services in both languages. (3) segregation formal informal population

A graphic representation of language distribution in multilingual societies 2.3 Minorized language

This refers to linguistic varieties which are spoken by only part of the population and, moreover, are not used in formal situations. Examples are all regional languages of France, Kurdish in Turkey, Low German, and some regional varieties of major European languages. Even if not considered to be different languages, these regional varieties can be considerably different from the standard, especially in phonology and morphology, so that people have to switch in order to adapt to formal situations. (4) minorized language formal informal population 2.4 Prestige language Prestige languages are used in formal contexts, although they are not native varieties in the concerned societies. They are used alongside the native language, which can be used in both formal and informal situations (irrespective of whether the native variety may make use of different registers). This pattern can be found in Maghreb countries (Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco) where French is used in some formal domains, in Malta (where Maltese is the majority language and English the prestige language), and it emerges in Germanic-speaking northern Europe, where English is making inroads into more and more formal domains: In a relatively small nation such as Sweden an increasing number of people speak, read and write English of good quality. Indeed, most Ph.D. theses at Swedish universities are submitted in English. (Dixon 1997:148). (5) prestige language formal informal population 2.5 Mixed pattern Here, the population is divided into two linguistic communities. However, most people are bilingual, and both languages can be found in formal domains. Depending on the context, people choose the language which seems most appropriate. This pattern applies in Catalonia. (6) mixed pattern formal informal population

Gerd Jendraschek

2.6 Unstable patterns When different languages coexist, they are generally assigned either to different domains (diglossia, minorized languages, prestige languages) or to different populations (segregation, but also minorized languages). When assignation is not clear, languages compete for domains and speakers (or the other way round). Diglossia, for example, becomes unstable, when the formal variety nativizes, i.e. is acquired as a first language by more and more people: This entails that the informal variety is attacked in its domain and likely to be minorized. If it has sufficient support among the population, it may counter-attack by invading formal domains. This process is known as normalization, and it generally involves standardization and officialization. The new native speakers of the formal variety will use it in every situation, deeming the informal variety unworthy of learning, whereas native speakers of the informal variety will claim their right to use their language in formal situations. The result is segregation or, at least, the mixed pattern. (7) from diglossia to segregation formal informal population

3 BASIC PATTERNS WITH MORE THAN TWO LANGUAGES

3.1 Official language as lingua franca The population is divided into several linguistic communities. The official language is not a native variety (but may become one when communities dissolve and mix, especially in urban areas) and therefore mainly used in formal contexts. The official language serves as a lingua franca between the different linguistic communities. This pattern is frequent in Subsaharan Africa. (8) lingua franca formal informal population 3.2 Several languages for formal purposes In this constellation, the population is linguistically homogeneous, but refrains from using its native variety in the most formal contexts. For formal purposes, people can choose among

A graphic representation of language distribution in multilingual societies

several languages. This is close to the situation of Luxembourg, where French and German are preferred over Luxembourgish for formal purposes. This pattern is not very frequent, as linguistic diversity is more prominent in informal contexts, whereas formal contexts tend towards reduction of diversity. (9) several languages for formal purposes formal informal population

4 CASE STUDIES IN SOCIOLINGUISTIC TYPOLOGY

4.1 Luxembourg All native Luxembourgers have Luxembourgish, a West-Germanic language, as their first language. The traditional elite language in Luxembourg is French. French is therefore the preferred language for the most formal situations. However, as good command of French requires substantial educational efforts for a Germanic-speaking population, the majority generally prefers German for reading and writing. Until recently, Luxembourgish was basically an oral variety and therefore absent from most formal contexts. This situation could be described as double diglossia: if we subsume Luxembourgish and German under the label Germanic, then we can speak of diglossia between Germanic and French. The second diglossia exists within Germanic, Luxembourgish being the spoken, German the written variety. (10) Luxembourg: old pattern formal GERMAN informal LUX However, things have changed in Luxembourg in the last decades: 1. Foreigners now account for 38% of the population; newcomers often prefer communicating in French and only those long enough in the country learn Luxembourgish (Fehlen 2002:92-93); 2. In 1984, Luxembourgish has been declared the national language and has been promoted to a written language on a pair with French and German; 3. Due to the internationalization of Luxembourgs economy, English is becoming an important elite language alongside French. FRENCH

Gerd Jendraschek Luxembourg: new pattern formal ENG GER LUX FRE

(11)

informal

OTHER

4.2 ABC islands (Aruba, Bonaire, Curaao) The three islands Aruba, Bonaire and Curaao are located in the South Caribbean off the coast of Venezuela. Belonging to the Kingdom of the Netherlands, their official language is Dutch. The native variety of the majority is Papiamentu, a creole based mainly on Spanish and Portuguese. The vicinity of Spanish-speaking countries has introduced Spanish into the ABC islands linguistic landscape, and English is widespread due to its role as a global lingua franca. Dutch being a) not the native variety of the population, and b) a language without international use, it is under pressure from English in the formal domains. (12) ABC islands formal ENGLISH SPANISH informal PAPIAMENTU DUTCH

5 THE SITUATION IN THE WORLD Patterns of language distribution vary depending on the scale to which they are applied. This means, for example, that the Basque city of San Sebastian has another pattern than the province of which it is the capital, Gipuzkoa. Gipuzkoa has another pattern than the Autonomous Community of the Basque Country, which, in turn, has another pattern than Spain as a whole. What happens when we try to establish the pattern of some higher administrative entity, say the European Union, or the whole world? For a linguistic territory to be describable in terms of sociolinguistic typology, there has to be some communicative interaction among its members. 1. This is most true for international events. Leaving the possibility of translation facilities apart, international events are almost always in English. It should therefore be safe to consider English as the global lingua franca. 2. On the second level, we have languages that are often learnt as second languages and may therefore be used between speakers of different native languages: French, Spanish, German, Russian, Italian, and maybe some more, but the list is very limited and should not exceed ten. 3. On the third level, we could locate all the official languages of independent states. This should not exceed a hundred languages. Europe and Southern Asia are exceptional for having linguistic diversity on an official level. English, Spanish, French, Arabic, and possibly Russian, are dominant in the rest of the world. 4. The fourth level would comprise all languages which are regularly written and produce literature, including print media. Writtenness is an important distinctive feature for the sociolinguistic description of linguistic varieties. According to this criterion, there

A graphic representation of language distribution in multilingual societies

should be several hundred written languages, but at any rate, their number is between a hundred and thousand. 5. On the fifth level, we would include all languages with native speakers. Of the more than 6000 languages inventorized, many are no longer transmitted to children and will disappear in the near future. Lets say that the number of languages on the fifth and most informal level is between 1000 and 5000. (13) The World most formal 1 2 3 4 most informal 5

ENGLISH up to ten several dozen several hundred several thousand

REFERENCES
Baggioni, Daniel (1997) Langues et nations en Europe. Paris: Payot. Barbour, Stephen and Cathie Carmichael (2002) Language and Nationalism in Europe. Oxford University Press. Calvet, Louis-Jean (2002) Le march aux langues. Les effets linguistiques de la mondialisation. Paris: Plon. Davis, Kathryn A. (1994) Language Planning in Multilingual Contexts. Policies, communities, and schools in Luxembourg. John Benjamins. (Studies in Bilingualism, 8) Dixon, Robert M. W. (1997) The rise and fall of languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Eusko Jaurlaritza/Gobierno Vasco (2001) The Continuity of the Basque Language III. Sociolinguistic Survey of the Basque Country 2001. Fehlen, Fernand 2002, Luxembourg, a multilingual society at the Romance/Germanic language border. Language contact at the Romance-Germanic language border. Special issue of the Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 23:80-98. Ferguson, Charles F. (1959) Diglossia. Word 15:2.325-40. Repr. in Hymes (1964) pp.429-39. Fishman, Joshua (1967) Bilingualism with and without diglossia; diglossia with and without bilingualism. Journal of Social Issues 23:2.29-38. Revised and reprinted as Societal bilingualism: stable and transitional. In Sociolinguistics: a brief introduction. pp.78-89. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House (1970). Hymes, Dell (1964) Language in Culture and Society. New York: Harper and Row. Leclerc, Jacques, Lamnagement linguistique dans le monde, Qubec, TLFQ, Universit Laval, http://www.tlfq.ulaval.ca/axl/index.shtml Stewart, William A. (1968) A sociolinguistic typology for describing national multilingualism. Fishman, In Joshua A. (ed.) Readings in the Sociology of Languages. The Hague/Paris/New York: Mouton, pp.531545.

Gerd Jendraschek ERSS - UMR 5610 (Equipe de Recherche en Syntaxe et Smantique) Maison de la Recherche Universit de Toulouse-Le Mirail 5, Alles Antonio Machado 31058 Toulouse Cedex9 FRANCE jendraschek@hotmail.com

Gerd Jendraschek