Emerging target varieties of irish as a result of irish language planning

La revitalització de l’irlandès a la llar familiar no sols és un principi del manteniment de la llengua i de la seua expansió a d’altres dominis, sinó que també és part d’iniciatives més àmplies de les quals no és fàcilment aïllable, perquè és la interacció entre aquestes iniciatives el que defineix la planificació de l’irlandès. La planificació lingüística per a promocionar-lo com una llengua parlada implica el seu manteniment en àmbits on encara es parla com a llengua comunitària, la seua extensió a través de l’educació en irlandès en zones on no és parlada com una llengua comunitària, i la facilitació com a mínim d’un coneixement passiu de la llengua a la població sencera a través de l’ensenyament com a assignatura fonamental durant l’ensenyament obligatori. Aquest article considera la revitalització de l’irlandès a la llar familiar en el context més ampli de la planificació lingüística dirigida per l’estat i inclou dades basades en qüestionaris procedents del treball de camp fet amb adolescents irlandòfons a les àrees de la Gaeltacht de Munster, en les quals els participants reporten llur ús de l’irlandès a casa. S’hi sosté que la planificació lingüística que pretén cultivar la vitalitat de la llengua i unificar els irlandòfons pot donar lloc, de fet, al sorgiment de noves varietats d’irlandès que adopten el paper de varietat estàndard, fins ara restringida al reialme de les varietats vernacles tradicionals de la Gaeltacht

Emerging target varieties of irish as a result of irish language planning

La revitalització de l’irlandès a la llar familiar no sols és un principi del manteniment de la llengua i de la seua expansió a d’altres dominis, sinó que també és part d’iniciatives més àmplies de les quals no és fàcilment aïllable, perquè és la interacció entre aquestes iniciatives el que defineix la planificació de l’irlandès. La planificació lingüística per a promocionar-lo com una llengua parlada implica el seu manteniment en àmbits on encara es parla com a llengua comunitària, la seua extensió a través de l’educació en irlandès en zones on no és parlada com una llengua comunitària, i la facilitació com a mínim d’un coneixement passiu de la llengua a la població sencera a través de l’ensenyament com a assignatura fonamental durant l’ensenyament obligatori. Aquest article considera la revitalització de l’irlandès a la llar familiar en el context més ampli de la planificació lingüística dirigida per l’estat i inclou dades basades en qüestionaris procedents del treball de camp fet amb adolescents irlandòfons a les àrees de la Gaeltacht de Munster, en les quals els participants reporten llur ús de l’irlandès a casa. S’hi sosté que la planificació lingüística que pretén cultivar la vitalitat de la llengua i unificar els irlandòfons pot donar lloc, de fet, al sorgiment de noves varietats d’irlandès que adopten el paper de varietat estàndard, fins ara restringida al reialme de les varietats vernacles tradicionals de la Gaeltacht

Teachers as new speakers of a minority language: identity, speakerness, and ideologies on variation in Irish

Aims and objectives: This article reports the ideologies on linguistic variation among a cohort of new speaker teachers (NSTs) of Irish. It investigates responses to the three main traditional dialects of Irish and a post-traditional variety common among new speakers. Design and methodology: An experimental design was employed. Participants responded to 15-second samples of four speakers, first on adjective items referring to speakers’ characteristics (speaker phase) and second on statements referring specifically to the type of Irish in the samples (speech phase). Background information was also gathered, for example, school type, place of origin, and type of Irish spoken. Data and analysis: We present the responses of a subset of 88 NSTs of Irish, focusing specifically on participants’ responses in the speech phase where they evaluated the type of Irish in the samples. Data were analysed to determine whether there were significant differences in the ratings of samples within different respondent subgroups. Findings and conclusions: Some significant differences were found among subgroups. Teachers working in Irish-medium schools align more closely with established native speaker language ideologies than those in English-medium institutions. Participants did not distinguish significantly between their local Gaeltacht variety and other Gaeltacht areas, but did rate all three Gaeltacht samples more positively than the new speaker variety. Finally, participants who self-identify as speakers of ‘standard’ Irish and those who describe themselves as practising a Gaeltacht variety rated the Gaeltacht samples more positively. Originality: While experimental investigations of linguistic ideologies are central to sociolinguistics, this article is original in its focus on the ideologies of NSTs of Irish. Significance and implications: This research illustrates the robustness of established ideologies in the responses of some participants but shows that others challenge these ideologies. Results speak to the complexities and contradictions of identity and speakerness among NSTs of a minority language

Converging and diverging stances on target varieties in collateral languages: The ideologies of linguistic variation in Irish and Manx Gaelic

This article will argue that language revival movements, particularly those founded in the ethno-nationalist era of the late 19thand early 20thcenturies, retain founding overt beliefs rooted in an ideological commitment to a specific language because of its role as the authentic and legitimate cultural vehicle of a distinct people. Revival is thus the reinstatement of cultural distinctiveness based on traditional language. Revivalists have in the past afforded the language varieties of the remaining traditional native speech communities a high prestige status based on their perceived ethnolinguistic authenticity. However, after more than a century of language maintenance and revivalism, significant linguistic institutionalisation, a strong presence in schooling and new socialisation mechanisms outwith the traditional speech communities,some minoritised languages have regained a degree of their sociolinguistic vitality by the advent of ?new speakers? who have no organic relationship with the traditional language community. The ways that these ?new speakers\u27 and ?learners\u27 of previously displaced languages negotiate linguistic authenticity and ethno-cultural legitimacy in our contemporary late modern period provide challenges to established value-laden perceptions about language revitalisation and regeneration of traditional speech communities and the long-held belief in the prestige of ?native? speech as the target variety. This discussion will draw on data from recent fieldwork among contemporary speakers of Irish and Manx Gaelic in order to analyse both their overt and more hidden beliefs about the utility and legitimacy of traditional and revival speech. It will further argue that ?traditional? and ?new? speakers do not live parallel sociolinguistic realities in which they are sociolinguistically isolated from one another, but rather that contemporary speakers contest the prestige of both traditional and innovative revival varieties in their language practices and ideologies in a multi-faceted fashion

Review of Normative Language Policy

This book is a welcome addition to the literature on language policy. The authors are mainly concerned with providing an axiological account of normativity in language, using the province of Qu?bec as a case study to explore the extent to which normativity can be morally justified in certain contexts. This focus represents a significant departure from the mainly descriptive and ontological accounts of implicit and explicit policy that are current in many strands of language-policy research. In fact, the focus of the book emerges from the authors? view that contemporary language-policy scholarship maintains a strongly descriptive and empirical character, with the ?ought? of language in society (i.e. normativity) often not a central concern. Indeed, they argue that normativity in language is often associated with illegitimate power and coercion, and is thus regarded negatively, with authors criticising it but not offering insights into how things might be improved. An interdisciplinary approach is adopted here, drawing mainly on literature from sociolinguistics and normative political philosophy, in order to argue for a more nuanced view of prescriptivism. The authors contend that normativity is not inherently wrong in and of itself. Ultimately, they argue for a research agenda that includes an examination of the ethics and morality of normative language policy