Language, Imperialism, and the Modern Nation-State System

Abstract

This chapter explores the role of language, and the related status of language varieties, in the modern nation-state system, which emphasizes linguistic homogeneity, especially in the public realm. The emphasis on linguistic homogeneity within modern nation-states, which specifically disadvantages minority language speakers, is compared to the more open, multilingual approach adopted by a range of empires historically. A more linguistically accommodative approach in international law has also emerged, albeit unevenly, over the last sixty to seventy years. The latter emphasizes the public accommodation of minority languages, particularly for national minorities, which equates to what Kloss (1977) has termed "promotion-oriented" language rights. The chapter concludes that the expansion of promotion-oriented language rights accords with a more pluralistic and inclusive approach to linguistic diversity in an increasingly globalized world. Such developments are thus also compatible with the "multilingual turn," recognizing and valuing multilingual repertoires as a basis for sociolinguistic analysis.

Introduction: Linguistic justice, migration and the nation‐state

“…1 1 Rare exemptions include May (2017), who claims that especially large immigrant groups should have linguistic rights, and Pogge (2003) and Laitin and Reich (2003), who explicitly reject the idea of immigrant language rights.…”

New Zealand is “racist as f**k”: Linguistic racism and te reo Māori

“…As the colonial history of Aotearoa New Zealand attests, the marginalization and denigration of te reo Māori is part of a wider process of linguistic hierarchization, which has evolved from the confluence of colonialism and nation-state formation over the last few centuries (Anderson, 1991; Bauman and Briggs, 2003; Gellner, 1983; May, 2012, 2016). In conjunction, this has led to the primacy of establishing a common “national” (settler) language – in this case, English – at the specific expense of its Indigenous language.…”

Majority nation‐building through language requirements: Minority perspectives from EU27

“…There is no reason to expect that this should apply only to national minorities—the identity interests of migrants are not negatable just because they are not (yet) seen as part of what counts as national. May (2017, p. 14) claims that, particularly in relation to languages with a large number of speakers in a state, it would ‘be unreasonable not to provide some level of state services and activity in that language’. Present policies for the linguistic accommodation of migrants have nevertheless, according to Bauböck (2015, p. 218), the purpose of facilitating communication and language shift rather than paying equal respect to migrant identities.…”