Endangered languages, sociolinguistics, and linguistic sentimentalism

Abstract

It is a recurrent theme in sociolinguistics that besides fully documenting endangered languages, it is important to ensure somehow that they will continue to be used. The basic trope is that of ‘language death’, analogous to the extinction of species. But the analogy fails: languages do not die, although their users may abandon them, usually in favour of a more widely spoken language. Nor does linguistic diversity increase cultural diversity — or the equal treatment of language groups mitigate inequality between and within groups. In addition, promoting minority, local and immigrant languages, which are all too often ill-equipped for modern life, actually strengthens the position of the dominant language as the only common language of communication: the more languages are spoken, the sooner English will take over. This process can be seen at work both in post-Apartheid South Africa and in the European Union as it undergoes enlargement.

At Home at the Neighborhood Square

“…Migrants with a longer history in the Netherlands use it as a means for distinguishing themselves in relation to recently arrived migrant groups. Here, language intertwines with ethnicity-a phenomenon called "ethnolinguistic identity" (Gudykunst and Schmidt 1987;De Swaan 2004;Blommaert 2008).…”

Domesticating the Foreign: Globalization's Effects on the Place/s of Languages

“…He argues that De Swaan's method imagines that the world language order is culturally neutral, and that Q‐value is calculated with abstract and impersonal operations, as if the language order of the world were removed from interests and power. De Swaan () repudiates what he decries as “linguistic sentimentalism” (p. 573), defending his classification as a simply realist acceptance that marketplaces of exchange govern language preferences, and declares rights based arguments irrelevant to the language behavior of individuals.…”

From Babel to Brussels: European Integration and the Importance of Transnational Linguistic Capital

“…The self understanding of these authors is that their articles are scientific and analytical in nature, whereas I would classify them as political and normative texts (cf. the critical commentary on the literature by Kibbee 2003 and de Swaan 2004). The academic background which the authors bring with them attracts a specific audience.…”