Last week I wrote about why language death is such a big deal. This week I wanted to expand on this idea a bit further and talk about some of the ongoing difficulties with language revitalization that linguists have to deal with.
Why Language Revitalization can be Difficult
Linguists who work in language revitalization have their work cut out for them. Each language is different, and comes with its own challenges that linguists must contend with:
- Language ideologies
- Loss of land and culture
- Lack of information
- Lack of support
Each and all of these problems could arise with any given language, and it’s important for linguists to know how to deal with each one.
Before you go trying any of this yourself: Linguists who spend their time on language revitalization usually specialize in it. They have experience, education, a knowledge of the culture, knowledge of the language, and often a certain rapport with the people they are helping. Vigilante revitalization work might do more harm than good.
Language Ideologies and Revitalization
I spoke briefly last week about why language ideology can contribute to language death (see the article linked above). It can also make revitalization a lot harder, for similar reasons:
Preservation
Language revitalization work often requires recording information about a language to teach it to others. Some groups, though, don’t want their language recorded. This could be due to a spiritual or cultural belief, or something more personal.
For example, some groups might see their language’s preservation/ recording as a means of controlling the language (intentional or not). It could also be seen as something that will force their language to stagnate and become incapable of changing (a value that could be important for certain cultures). Different dialectal groups might disagree on whose version of the language should be recorded.
Modernization
Another important aspect of language revitalization is modernizing the language. As I talked about in my last post, economic opportunities often play a role in language death.
One way to help combat this is to bring in words for modern ideas. For example, the word “television” or “computer” might not exist in the language. There can be disagreement between outsiders and native speakers (or internally) about whether this should be done.
Even if it’s agreed upon that the language should be modernized, the question of “how” might cause disagreement. Sometimes, linguists or native speakers might want to simply make up new words (similar to making a conlang). Other times, they may just borrow the word that another language uses. (Shoshoni, for example, at least in the Northern Shoshoni dialect, borrowed the word television.)
Of course, natural development is often best, but if there are too few speakers, then the language simply won’t be able to keep up.
Protection
Some cultures have very particular beliefs about who should be able to engage with a language. Some believe it should be shared with anyone they meet, while other groups might learn outsiders’ languages to guard their own and keep it for themselves.
Other cultures might be less extreme, but have concerns about how outsiders will use a language. They wouldn’t want it to be used to ridicule their culture or otherwise defame it.
Even if the person learning their language and engaging with revitalization has the best of intentions, they could mistakenly do something wrong. Information about the language could also get into the hands of someone with less benevolent intentions.
The Importance of Reputation
Everything I just talked about should make it clear why there are entire fields of study dedicated to revitalization and why it’s important for linguists to establish a good reputation with the people they’re helping. If native speakers know that suggestions come from a place of genuine concern and good faith, they’re much more likely to listen.
When some random person tries to learn their language and start teaching it in schools, native speakers might question their authority on the topic, their knowledge, or their reasons for helping. If they know the person well, though, then it’s much less of an issue.
Loss of Land and Culture
You might not realize it, but land, language, and culture are deeply connected.
At its most basic level, a culture develops out of nearby geography. Local plants, animals, natural resources, and landmarks all play a significant part in any culture.
Separating people from their land separates them from valuable cultural symbols. This, in turn, removes the cultural background surrounding the language. It’s harder to make cultural associations and understand the viewpoints and ideas behind a language without the proper context. In order to bring back land, language, or culture, you often need to bring back all three at once, if possible.
Displaced language groups have a much harder time bringing back their language without these foundations underneath. Linguists in these areas have to fight an uphill battle to bring back the language.
Lack of Information
If a language, especially one with few speakers, doesn’t have much recorded data, it’s a lot harder to revitalize.
This data could be about the language or about the factors causing its death. Either way, it forces linguists to spend precious time finding data about such factors, or learning about the language itself. Often, this second part isn’t as much of an issue. If they’ve built up a reputation then they likely know something about the language already.
A lack of language data can also make it more difficult to study how the language should be taught to new speakers, how it should be modernized, etc. Compiling language data becomes more complicated when speakers disagree on preservation, like I said above.
Lack of Support
I mentioned in my last post that the ideologies of outsiders can create similar problems in revitalization.
Lack of support from a government or community will make linguists’ jobs much harder. Implementing a language course into the education system can’t be done without government support. If part of a community supports revitalization efforts while another doesn’t care or actively interferes, a linguist will have a much harder time getting work done.
In Ireland, for example, there is a lot of government support for revitalizing Irish Gaelic. The sign in the image at the top of the post was one of the first things I saw upon arriving to the airport in Ireland last month. It has directions in both English and Irish Gaelic. All over Ireland, in fact, there are signs with Irish Gaelic beside English. This is a big deal for revitalization efforts, as it exposes locals to the language consistently and gets them engaging with it. It also gives people more incentives to learn.
In addition, there are TV channels and radio stations that only use Irish Gaelic. Entertainment, news, and signage all over the country is pushing to bring back this language.
On the other hand, I have heard from Irish Gaelic speakers that there are a lot of problems with the education system surrounding the language. I don’t know the specifics, but without proper change, the revitalization efforts there might stagnate.
Imagine, though, a language with less government support. They won’t have the infrastructure or ability to increase the presence of their language. Without help, the language can’t come back. One of the many jobs of linguists and researchers trying to revitalize the language is finding ways to increase this support.
How Linguists Handle Language Revitalization
As you could probably guess, language revitalization is a lot of work.
It is the subject of constant study among many linguists, who work to find new methods and means of revitalizing and recording languages. Not only do they find new methods, but they often share their efforts with other researchers. It’s a constant process of research, observation, and feedback to find what works in a community, and each one is different.
Sometimes, these efforts seem like an insurmountable wall, but linguists climb it all the same. It’s always possible to make great strides in revitalization efforts, assuming that the linguists involved in the project know what they’re doing. Community support goes a long way, too. Establishing radio stations and podcasts or increasing access to language resources makes it easier for members of that community to engage with their native language.
Conclusion
I said before that I would talk about how you could help with language revitalization in this post. I ended up going into a lot more detail about language revitalization itself than I thought I would, so I think I’ll make this a three-part series. Next week, for sure, I’ll talk about how you can help!
If you missed my post last week, I talked about why language death is such a big deal. You can read it here. For more about language in general, see this page. If you’re looking for a grammar guide for a specific language, look here! There’s not a lot there yet, but I’ll make more soon, I promise!
Questions, comments, concerns? Need something clarified? Feel free to contact me or comment below!