Language and Politics

10 Key excerpts on "Language and Politics"

• 

  eBook - ePub

  Collected Works of Braj B. Kachru

  Volume 1

  • Braj Kachru, Jonathan J. Webster, Jonathan J. Webster(Authors)
  • 2015(Publication Date)
  • Bloomsbury Academic

    (Publisher)

  In this study, however, I have a modest aim: to provide a blueprint for the discussion of selected issues related to the power and politics of the spread of English in a global context. While addressing the specific issues concerning English, an aside on the frameworks for the theoretical conceptualization of the relationship between language and power—and its politics—will be helpful. This aside will, I hope, contribute to our understanding of the complexity of describing the relationship between language and power.

  I will briefly explore several other interrelated issues connected with language and power. These include the concept of “power” and its application for language; the motivation for acquiring linguistic power; presuppositions for a power base; strategies used for power and politics; linguistic power and lingocide; and the politics of language in the Inner Circle of English, comprising the users of English in the United States, Britain, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand2 ; and, finally, will revisit the issue of a framework for the study of power.

  However, let me start with a warning: questions about language and power need not necessarily involve linguistic issues. The issues go beyond linguistics into the realms of history, sociology, attitude studies, politics, and into very mundane economic considerations. Thus this topic has many faces, and the power of English has yet to be studied from all of these perspectives. This chapter, then, reveals only a minute tip of the iceberg.

  The two crucial terms in this chapter, the “power” and “politics” of English, are linked in more than one way: the first implies an attainment of various types of “control,” and the second signifies the processes and strategies used for this control (see, e.g., Kramarae et al. 1984:9–22).

  Once a language attains power, it does not mean that political strategies are necessarily abandoned—far from it. Rather it is a vicious circle: in order for power and control to be maintained, political maneuvering must continue, which, then, develops into various situations of conflict (for discussions of case studies of language conflict, see Bourhis 1984; Brass 1974; Das Gupta 1970).

  How do power and politics relate to language? The power of language is intimately connected with societal power of various types. The dimensions of power and resultant politics include: (a) the spread of a language to numerically expand the speech community3

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  State Apparatus

  Structures and Language of Legitimacy

  • Gordon L. Clark, Michael Dear(Authors)
  • 2021(Publication Date)
  • Routledge

    (Publisher)

  There is an enormous variety of language, and, as might be expected, a corresponding range of alternative paradigms for linguistic analysis. One of the major schóols is structural linguistics, which is usually identified as originating with Ferdinand de Saussure (1916). Structural linguistics has been developed by several influential thinkers, including Lévi-Strauss and Foucault, and has spawned a number of imitative studies phrased as statements about language and invoking the authority of structural linguistics. Equally influential is the school of formal linguistic analysis associated with Chomsky. Its emphasis is on the acquisition and knowledge of language and linguistic communication (see Smith & Wilson 1979). A natural extension of these concerns is the study of signs and semiotics which has been drawn even further into fundamental questions of philosophy and theory in the social sciences (see, for example, Hookway & Pettit 1978, Putnam 1981, and Ricoeur 1981). Our present interests derive largely from the field of sociolinguistics which places emphasis on the social context of language (see Giglioli 1972, Robinson 1972). The fundamental sources in the study of political language are by Edelman (1964, 1977).

  The importance of language is attested by Wittgenstein’s famous dictum: “the limits of my language mean the limits of my world” (Wittgenstein 1961, paragraph 5.6). This implies that language is a barrier which may be used to confine or to expand our consciousness. Language is never innocent; in either its most formal scientific format or in common everyday speech, language imprisons meaning, and there seems to be no way out of that prison. As Olsson (1980, p. 18e) puts it, after hitting his head against the ceiling of language, “… language is a closed door without hinges.” The indeterminate relativity of language and its interpretation poses many technical and philosophical problems. As we have indicated, we prefer to set these aside and to concentrate in this analysis on a more functionalist view of language. How does a specific type of language, that is, political language, come about? And how is it used by groups in society to structure the collective view of reality?

  One important theme in linguistic theory is the relationship between language and social context. As Kress and Hodge noted (1979, p. 13)

  Without immediate and direct relations to the social context, the forms and functions of language are not fully explicable.

  However, the exact nature of the link between language and context is the subject of much debate. A fundamental distinction has been made between langue and parole

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  Language, Society, and the State

  From Colonization to Globalization in Taiwan

  • Gareth Price(Author)
  • 2019(Publication Date)
  • De Gruyter Mouton

    (Publisher)

  2 Towards a political sociology of language

  2.1 Introduction

  The central concerns of political sociology are the relations between society and the state. These include critical questions about ethical and normative parameters of liberal democracy; who rules and who is ruled; how rule is conducted and how it is accepted or resisted; how symbolic and material resources are allocated; and what constitutes rights and how they can be distributed, claimed, and defended. These questions have sociolinguistic dimensions: which languages of the state are used to conduct the business of rule; the vitality and status of languages in civil society; how language is used to access rights; how democratic participation is structured based on language; how linguistic capital is valued within overlapping markets; and so on. As such, the present chapter develops a theoretical framework of a political sociology of language. It should be stressed that this is a political sociology of language, and not a political sociology of language; that is, it is not simply an explicitly politicized version of a conventional sociology of language approach. Instead, it is to bring the concerns of political sociology to bear on language and, conversely, it is a sociolinguistic understanding of the relations between society and the state. The aim of this chapter, in other words, is to frame relations between society and the state as a sociolinguistic concern, and language as a concern for political sociology.

  At a general level, a political sociology of language is concerned with some of the problems posed by the fact that “we will never share a single language, nor be in complete agreement on what we view as the good life and/or the good state of society” (Peled, Ives, and Ricento 2014 : 296). Multilingual, multi-ethnic, and multicultural complexity characterizes social and political relations both between and within states, though this comes at the risk of “razor edges of division” and “zones of silence” (Steiner 1998 : 56–8) if common ground, tolerance, and understanding cannot be achieved. An academic approach to these issues is to locate – historically, geopolitically, and contextually – the politics of language in a given society, and thus a political sociology of language addresses Pennycook’s (1998

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  The Routledge Handbook of Language and Politics

  • Ruth Wodak, Bernhard Forchtner, Ruth Wodak, Bernhard Forchtner(Authors)
  • 2017(Publication Date)
  • Routledge

    (Publisher)

  Introducing the language–politics nexus

  Ruth Wodak and Bernhard Forchtner

     

  Sketching out a long history

  Given the significance of actual language use, and meaning-making more generally, in politics since at least the rise of rhetoric in Ancient Greece, and the ever more discursive nature of late modern politics in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, The Routledge Handbook of Language and Politics contributes a single-volume reference work to this field. More specifically, this handbook adds to existing scholarship by providing a comprehensive overview of influential theoretical approaches, as well as common methodologies, classic genres and contributions on salient, socio-cultural challenges.1

  In this introduction, we situate the 45 contributions to this volume both historically, that is, in a wider context of how language use has been viewed in relation to politics, and theoretically, that is, pointing to perspectives when approaching the language–politics nexus. We close with an overview of the various contributions to this volume.

  Research in the field of Language and Politics has expanded enormously in recent years (for example, Cap & Okulska 2013; Fairclough & Fairclough 2012; Wodak 2011; Wodak & de Cillia 2006; Chilton 2004). From a Western point of view, the significance of skilful, persuasive language use is, of course, connected to rhetoric in Ancient Greece. Starting with councils as advisory bodies and, ultimately, the emergence of democracy in Athens, the art of persuasion (rhetoric) became an increasingly necessary prerequisite for successful participation in public life (Murphy et al. 2013; Fuhrmann 2011). This significance of actual language use for politics is visible, for example, in Aristotle’s Politics

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  Language, Ethnic Identity and the State

  • William Safran, J.A. Laponce(Authors)
  • 2014(Publication Date)
  • Routledge

    (Publisher)

  INTRODUCTION: THE POLITICAL ASPECTS OF LANGUAGE

  WILLIAM SAFRAN

  University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado      

  Language is a marker of ethnic identity; a vehicle for expressing a distinct culture; a source of national cohesion; and an instrument for building political community. Yet the relationship between language and ethnonational identity is a contested matter. There is no question that language is one of the elements defining collective consciousness, the others being religion, history, common descent, and territory. In the 19th century, language was considered the major defining factor of a nation, at least in Europe; and it was almost taken for granted that each linguistic community deserved to have its own state. The German language was a crucial element in politically mobilizing a number of kingdoms, duchies, and city-states in central Europe toward a national state, the fight against Napoleon being the proximate mobilizing event. However, pan-Germanic unity—the unification of Germany and Austria—was blocked by dynastic and religious rivalries, and its achievement under Hitler was short-lived. Language was the most important force for Italian political unity; but the imposition of standard Italian has not prevented the survival of regional idioms, nor has it been sufficient for overcoming the economic, social, and cultural divisions between northern Italy and the Mezzogiorno. Conversely, the collapse of unity in post-Tito Yugoslavia must not be attributed entirely, and perhaps even primarily, to linguistic divisions, for the conflicts among the components of that state also had religious, historical, and other translinguistic causes.

  In the opinion of T.R. Gurr, “language issues alone are not a common source of deadly rivalries, because language differences, unlike racial and religious ones, are subject to individual and collective compromises. Individuals in heterogeneous societies can and ordinarily do speak several languages, but they cannot be both black and white or both Hindu and Muslim.”1

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  Language Ethics

  • Yael Peled, Daniel M. Weinstock, Yael Peled, Daniel M. Weinstock(Authors)
  • 2020(Publication Date)
  • McGill-Queen's University Press

    (Publisher)

  My purpose in this chapter is to interrogate a construct – English as a “global” language – that is of interest to scholars in both the political philosophy and the language policy and planning literatures. In these literatures, a variety of approaches and analytic frameworks have been adopted, and a wide range of descriptions and explanations proffered, as to the nature and effects of “global” English in the contemporary world. Scholars in these literatures often borrow ideas and theories from a broad range of disciplines in the social sciences and humanities, including cultural studies, political economy, postmodernism, critical theory, history, sociology, linguistics, and education, among others that could be mentioned. To be sure, this admixture of theories and ideas from various disciplines is inevitable; when political philosophers invoke “language” in their normative theorizing on language rights and democracy, they are dependent on expertise, implicitly or explicitly, from the various language sciences literatures. Western political theorists, generally non-experts in the language sciences, whose principal aim is often to advance normative theories on desirable states of affairs within liberal democratic states, tend to deal with language as a stable nominal category, as something that one “has” or “doesn’t have,” that can be labelled as one thing (e.g. English) or another thing (e.g. French), that may be learned for defined purposes, that has instrumental and symbolic value, that is used principally as a modality for interpersonal communication, with “speakers,” possibly with associated geographic territories, and with cultural affiliations and traditions “attached” to named languages and varieties. The fact that situated language practices and behaviours are far more complex than this and not generally explainable by using the tools of rational choice methodology common in political theorizing, that cultural affiliations and identities cannot be predicted strictly on linguistic grounds (or vice versa), and that the desire to acquire, use, maintain, or identify with a particular language/variety may have little to do with its purported instrumental value or utility are often not taken into account by political philosophers engaged in normative theory construction that involves language(s).

  At the same time, while scholarly research in the language policy and planning literature may make reference to, or incorporate theories from, political philosophy and economics, the focus generally is on aspects related to how language(s) are deployed, taught/acquired, valued, threatened, and used/perceived within various contexts, such as schools, families and communities, public and private institutions, or national or supranational contexts. Constructs such as language ideologies, communities of practice, linguistic imperialism, discourses of power, and many related concepts are often invoked in explaining the roles and status that languages/varieties play in defined contexts, synchronically or diachronically. The broader picture often provided by political philosophers, who take care to ground their theorizing in carefully stipulated theories of normative justice and the role of the state in liberal democracies, is often left out of discussions in the LPP

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  Critical Applied Linguistics

  A Critical Re-Introduction

  • Alastair Pennycook(Author)
  • 2021(Publication Date)
  • Routledge

    (Publisher)

  I have attempted in this chapter, in rather compressed and simplified form, to sketch out various configurations of how Language and Politics may be related. The key question is not whether applied linguistics is political but about how it should be critical. In Chapters 3 to 6, I will discuss the implications of different ways of doing critical applied linguistics. The next chapter will give more substance to the claims already made in this chapter that language is political from top to bottom, that language use, language rights, language reclamation, and so on are all deeply political endeavors, and need to be grounded in clear political and theoretical positions as well as grounded forms of research and action. Note 1. In the first edition, I labeled this position ‘anarcho-autonomy’. The liberal position outlined later I called ‘liberal-ostrichism.’ I no longer consider these labels very useful (though the ostrich metaphor did some nice work) and I’ve attempted here to move away from the over-labelling of positions.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  The Idea of English in Japan

  Ideology and the Evolution of a Global Language

  • Philip Seargeant(Author)
  • 2009(Publication Date)
  • Multilingual Matters

    (Publisher)

  Chapter 2 of the comments by the Education Minister), in how its ornamental trace is displayed and how its cultural connotations are mobilized (as in the McPal example).

  An understanding of this is important because this symbolism often prefigures usage in terms of speech. That is to say, it prefigures the indexical complexes that constitute the metapragmatics of a particular contextually specific language practice in that it positions that language practice within society, organizing the conceptual routes by which people approach the language. This is particularly the case for bi- or multilingual societies, where there exist hierarchies of languages that are regulated both institutionally and as part of the everyday environment. It is an analysis of these regulative practices, both as they are articulated in ‘official’ discourse (in applied linguistics doctrine or policy statements, for example) and also inscribed within the lived environment, that will form the substance of this book, and that can, it is hoped, then be used to provide a more complete view of the concept of a global language.

  The Historical Ontology of Language

  To reiterate, therefore, my specific focus is the way in which the English language is conceptualized, both in Japan as well as in the wider context of applied linguistics research and theory (and how a detailed look at the one can enhance our understanding of the other). The key focus, then, is to be on the relationship between the English language and social, cultural and political concerns. Underpinning both these perspectives, however, is the more fundamental issue of how language is conceptualized as a feature of the human experience, and what existential form it is understood to take within the world. This ontological question is of key importance as it sets the parameters for any subsequent discussion of the language, and can play an influential role in determining the direction of research and debate (to paraphrase Heidegger – science presupposes ontology (1962 [1927]: 30)). The debates referred to above, as well as the various conceptualizations of the language that I wish to explore within the context of Japan, all begin with specific assumptions about the nature of language itself. As such, it will be helpful to formulate a methodology that will allow us to critique the ontological assumptions from which we work and to scrutinize both the evidence upon which they are based and the implications to which they give rise. For while an investigation of the specific cultural associations that comprise the conceptualization of English within Japan takes as its primary object of study the inter-relation between language and social practice, the nature and function of the linguistic system itself (the scientific study of which is the focus of the third category in Woolard's taxonomy of language ideological research interests) are determining factors in this interrelationship.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  The Routledge Handbook of Educational Linguistics

  • Martha Bigelow, Johanna Ennser-Kananen, Martha Bigelow, Johanna Ennser-Kananen(Authors)
  • 2014(Publication Date)
  • Routledge

    (Publisher)

  The definitions of bilingualism have moved from a set of characteristics of the individual to an embedded social process where individuals and groups engage interactionally within their sociocultural circumstances. Moving away from a strict emphasis on decontextualized cognitive strategies and processes, language and culture have been increasingly conceptualized as social constructs (Cole 1996; Lantoff 2000; Moll 1990; Rogoff 2003)—that is, as shared meanings emerging from and living into norms through language and other social practices. The issues of power and language status and the role of ideology have been explicitly considered (Herriman and Burnaby 1996; Galindo and Vigil 2000; King 2000; Ricento 2000; Wiley 2000; Pavlenko and Blackledge 2004, among others) within a language-reflects-society perspective (Gafaranga 2005). The most innovative studies were those that focused on macro-meso-micro situations. In these studies, the focus has been not only on how language policies and planning occur within the political and ideological context, but also on how such policies have been reflected in school policy and in communities and homes, and, most importantly, in an individual’s everyday personal experiences and in how the individual has perceived languages opening/constraining possibilities and choices they have made (Hornberger 2007; Martínez-Roldán and Malavé 2004).

  The sociocultural approach has generated research on the relationship of identity and language, and provided a new lens on language and literacy development and its implications for education. As the realities of the multilingual lives of children and their teachers have received greater attention, the emerging narratives have brought a proliferation of topics to the field, including how teachers have brought their linguistic and cultural experiences to bear on teaching and how the experience of children in classrooms and communities has moved beyond bilingualism to multilingualism. This has also brought attention to the formal acquisition of heritage languages and to three or more languages in schools (Cenoz 2003; Hoffman 2001; Clyne 1997).

  Conceptualizing Diversity

  Examining language and culture in schools has gone from a deficit construct (i.e., “the culture and the language (which is limited) of the children does not help them in school”) to a more positive, holistic perspective in which language is a cultural resource children bring into the classroom (Mercado 2005). Continuing to build on the notion of languages and cultures as a resource, Gonzalez, Moll and Amanti (2005), Mercado and Moll (1997), Olmedo (2002, 2005), and Mercado (2005) have noted that privileging the resources of the home, the family, and the community in schools creates spaces within educational institutions that can trigger a change in the relationship of children from linguistically and culturally different communities to school learning. Concomitantly, the theory of social capital (Portes 1998) has built on the funds of knowledge to describe the network of resources that families possess within a broader relational system and to identify how schools can augment and enrich the network minoritized linguistic children may need to achieve academic success. Beyond the understanding of ways of knowing associated with particular communities and bringing them into the school, Zentella (2005) has proposed them as strengths schools can build on.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  Critical Discourse Analysis

  A Practical Introduction to Power in Language

  • Simon Statham(Author)
  • 2022(Publication Date)
  • Routledge

    (Publisher)

  In examining the language of this pandemic, which emerged in China in late 2019, was declared a pandemic in 2020 and is still ongoing at the time of writing, we are also demonstrating how CDA remains consistently relevant in its analytical focus on society. The political process and the major events which it addresses are always ongoing, so data is constantly emerging on how powerful groups use language to react to them. It is also important to establish that politics is not the exclusive purview of political professionals. Ordinary people, for want of a better phrase, engage in politics as voters in elections and might attend protests or demonstrations or take part in industrial or other forms of collective actions like boycotts. These are all clear examples of people who are not professional politicians taking part in politics. There are a good many other examples which you might not immediately consider to be inherently ‘political’ but which can very easily be considered ‘political statements’ either by those performing them or by others who judge and evaluate them. For many, vegetarianism or veganism could be considered political – part of the process of ‘lifestyle politics’ – whilst choosing to walk or to take public transport instead of driving one’s own vehicle might play a part in ‘environmental politics’. We play ‘office politics’ at work and ‘sexual politics’ in life, although of course the boundaries here are somewhat fuzzy. It is very unlikely that anyone partaking in conventional society will not be involved in at least one of these types of sub-politics. Even in that unlikely event, s/he could still not be viewed as existing outside of politics. Even someone considered wholly disengaged from politics is a recipient of politics; s/he is a consumer or a taxpayer or an employee or employer, someone who contributes to or receives a pension, who uses subsidised or, perhaps more likely, unsubsidised public transport, healthcare or education

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book