A typology of small-scale multilingualism

Abstract

Aims: The paper aims at providing an exhaustive overview of studies of small-scale multilingualism, a type of language ecology typical of—but not exclusive to—indigenous communities with small numbers of speakers. We identify the similarities and differences among situations of such multilingualism, which lay the foundations for a future typology of this kind of language ecology. Approach and data: We outline the importance of language ideologies for multilingualism in small-scale societies, highlight the sources of this type of language ecology, with a special focus on the impact of marriage patterns, discuss to what extent situations of small-scale multilingualism are truly egalitarian and symmetric, and survey the different methods used in the study of this domain. In order to do so, we survey studies devoted to multilingualism in indigenous communities of all continents: the New World (especially South America), Australia, Melanesia, Africa, Europe and Asia. Conclusions: The multilingual ecologies of the pre- and postcolonial world are extremely diverse, with many factors playing a role in their constitution. They are also highly endangered, and thus their study is of the utmost urgency. Originality: The domain of small-scale multilingualism is still novel for sociolinguistics and linguistic anthropology. Although the researchers working with indigenous groups have been describing the peculiarities of multilingual repertoires, language acquisition and language attitudes in various parts of the world, the domain lacks the kind of comparison and generalizations that we provide here. Significance: The increased interest in small-scale multilingualism has been boosted by the realization of its significance for reconstructing the social conditions that favoured linguistic diversity in the precolonial world. Furthermore, insights into this type of multilingualism—which differs considerably from the better-studied situations of bi- and multilingualism in urban contexts and large nation states—are of prime importance for a better understanding of the human language faculty.

Rejecting “nativeness” to produce a more accurate and just Linguistics

“…Abstracting away from the term "native speaker" itself, a crucial idea to track is the association between "nativeness" and essentialist ideas about language and identity. It is well known that there is considerable diversity in how language and identity are co-constructed across contexts (see examples cited in Thomason & Kaufmann (1988), Heine & Kuteva (2005), Aikhenvald & Dixon (2007), and Pakendorf et al (2021) for how this diversity is discussed in the language contact literature). The way that "nativeness" is commonly employed in modern linguistics, as being (among other things) the earliest learned language or the language "learned at the mother's knee" (Bloomfield 1927:435), reflects neither the diversity of human language experience, nor the diversity of how humans conceive of language experience.…”

Language ideology in an endogamous society: The case of Daghestan

“…The endogamy, patrilineality and strong propensity to have one dominant language in the village and family are combined with valuing multilingualism, which is another ideology typical for small‐scale multilingualism (Pakendorf et al., 2021). Indeed, Daghestanians love boasting about the number of languages they can speak, or that their ancestors could speak.…”

“…Language choices in the mixed families of Daghestan are influenced by local language ideology—ideas, or sets of beliefs, shared by the members of a community concerning language, its uses, and its role in their social world (Kroskrity, 2000; Rumsey, 1990; Silverstein, 1979). Among others, two groups of beliefs found in Indigenous communities all over the world are widely discussed (Pakendorf et al., 2021). The first group concerns the identification of the individual: with which language do the individuals identify themselves?…”

Interpreting mismatches between linguistic and genetic patterns among speakers of Tanimuka (Eastern Tukanoan) and Yukuna (Arawakan)

“…Ross [ 27 ] has suggested that phonological transfer, constructional calquing, transfer of specialized vocabulary and simplification are expected. By contrast, convergence due to extensive contact is expected to induce lexical and grammatical calquing, as well as syntactic restructuring and complexification [ 27 , 28 ] (see §3.2 and particularly Fig. 6 for more information).…”