|
Recommendations
National and supranational language policy infrastructure
1. Academics and
policy-makers from 11 countries are convinced that ‘Europe urgently needs a transparent public discussion
on language policy with the aim of developing guidelines
for European and national language policies. Therefore it
is necessary to set up forums … for developing a new
European approach to the language issue in which as many
players as possible should participate (from the political
and economic arenas, the media, NGOs)’ (Vienna Manifesto
of June 2001, first recommendation, see Appendix 5 ). There
is a need for infrastructure and consultative procedures
to facilitate this.
2. Dialogue between key stake-holders in language policy
work, politicians, journalists, researchers, administrators
in the national and EU civil service, NGOs, and users of
language services, is a prerequisite for more informed policy
formation. It must draw on the existing scholarly evidence
worldwide, which at present appears to have little impact
on policy.
3. Each national government must have well qualified civil
servants specializing in language policy, with responsibility
for integrating language policies in commerce, culture, education,
research, the media, international relations, and in the
supranational institutions of the EU system.
4. There is a need for an equivalent strengthening of the
EU Commission with expertise in all aspects of language policy,
and with a mandate to strengthen the ‘general interest’ in
the sense of cross-cutting policies that ensure the vitality
of languages globally.
5. The Vienna Manifesto also suggests (Recommendation 3)
that ‘All governments should use a fixed percentage
of their GDP for promoting multilingualism in education,
research, politics, administration and the economic sector.’ Such
a proposal could provoke a major re-think of the value of
existing efforts and investment in this field, a reconsideration
of goals and priorities, and fruitful dialogue between the
public and private sectors.
6. A primary function of the national and supranational specialists
would be to bring language policy higher up on relevant political,
academic, and media agendas, to conduct awareness campaigns,
and produce pamphlets that debunk common myths (about the
excessive cost of EU language services, the need for a single ‘world’ language,
monolingualism as something normal, or age being the most
important factor in learning a foreign language), ignorance
(about personal or societal bilingualism, language X having
no grammar, or language Y too much), and prejudices (linguistic
xenophobia, Esperanto not being a ‘real’ language)
etc. They should also collect and disseminate information
on good practice in multilingualism nationally (e.g. Luxembourg
maintaining its national language proudly but using French
and German extensively in state affairs), and internationally
(instances of national and international languages being
in healthy equilibrium).
7. There should be urgent development of MA programmes in
currently neglected language fields, particularly multilingualism,
the sociology and ecology of languages, language rights,
the auditing of language needs, language planning and policy,
language and economics. A huge amount of scholarly literature
has been produced in recent years, in virtually all parts
of the world . The related fields of applied linguistics
and foreign language pedagogy, which tend to focus on the
forms of language, and theories and practices of learning
and teaching, are already well established in some countries.
8. MA and PhD degrees that are given the ‘European’ label
should set a good example of multilingual practice by following
criteria agreed on by the federation of university rectors
and vice-chancellors, and in particular require that the
programme of study is conducted in at least two languages,
and evaluation undertaken by assessors from at least two
EU countries .
9. In-depth analysis of the relationship between economic
policies and languages, at local/regional, national, and
international levels, and the extent to which the education
system is able to respond to changing needs, should be linked
to studies of linguistic diversity and its maintenance, and
to how economic policies for threatened languages can be
not merely defensive but more proactive and preventive.
10. One of the concerns of specialists in language policy
should be to ensure that the language factor is explicitly
addressed in all policy fields where it may be relevant,
rather than language being seen as something special and
distinct, or only a matter for education, law, and commerce.
At the other extreme, a narrow focus on language rather than
its embedding in social and cultural contexts needs to be
monitored, so as to avoid the risk of ‘the medium becoming
the message’ .
11. Measures are needed to counteract Hollywood dominance
on the screen, so that cinemas and TV companies diversify
culturally and linguistically in ways that promote exposure
to a range of European cultures and languages. Policy needs
to be shaped so as to ensure that such channels attract a
broad public .
12. Awareness campaigns should aim at informing the public
about languages in supranational affairs, language rights
as human rights, arguments in favour of a diversification
of the languages learned, big and small, and explaining how
multilingualism connects with cultural and biological diversity
and sustainability .
13. A Language Policies Handbook should be elaborated that
can serve as a source of inspiration for many routes to equitable
communication, through sensitive policies that respect linguistic
diversity, with examples of the provision of language services,
including those for people with special needs, examples of
how successful minority language policies can be undertaken,
and suggestions for how guidelines for European and national
policies could be formulated.
14. There is a need for networks that bring together the
various associations concerned with individual languages,
NGOs and para-statal bodies which have the interests of each
of the EU official languages at heart (French, Swedish etc),
so as to coordinate strategy internationally.
|
|
