<i>Discourses of Endangerment: Ideology and Interest in the Defence of Languages</i> (Advances in Sociolinguistics) by <scp>Alexandre Duchêne and Monica Heller</scp>

Alexandre Duchêne and Monica Heller . Discourses of Endangerment: Ideology and Interest in the Defence of Languages (Advances in Sociolinguistics) . London : Continuum . 2007 . 304 pp . Hb (9780826487452) £75.00/$160.00/Pb (9781847063229) £24.99/$39.95 . Reviewed by Julia Sallabank Interest in the field of language endangerment continues to grow, over sixteen years since the publication of Fishman's (1991)Reversing Language Shift, and Hale, Krauss and colleagues' ‘wake-up call’ to the linguistic profession in a special issue of Language (Hale 1992). The number of foundations continues to grow which provide grants for language documentation, with the aim of ‘preserving’ threatened languages.1 Public awareness and institutional support (e.g. from UNESCO) have burgeoned since the turn of the millennium. Publications such as Crystal (2000), Nettle and Romaine (2000) and Dalby (2002) were widely reviewed and reported in the media, and focused public attention on to the imminent demise of between 50 percent and 90 percent of the world's languages (the proportion cited depends on the source). Much of the coverage of the issues has been uncritical, characterised by enthusiasm rather than reflection or critical debate. The field is thus ripe for evaluation and constructive criticism. Duchêne and Heller lay out the main themes of the book in their Introduction: ‘Our purpose here is to take some critical distance from this explosion of discursive material, and ask: why this? why now?’ (p. 2). ‘Rather than assuming that we must save languages, perhaps we should be asking instead who benefits and who loses from understanding languages the way we do, what is at stake for whom, and how and why language serves as a terrain for competition’ (p. 11). Unfortunately this book does not really answer these questions. I was somewhat disappointed to find that little of it is actually about endangered languages; it is more concerned with the misuse of discourses of endangerment, especially in order to protect the hegemony of major world languages such as English, French and Spanish. The book does not address the circumstances surrounding the decline of the majority of very small and undescribed languages, which are typically found outside Western contexts, although it is these that documentation programmes tend to focus on. None of the contributors to this volume actually examines the processes and outcomes of a language documentation project, or interviews linguists or mentions having discussed the critiques with them. The major charge made in this book against endangered language discourse is that of ‘essentialism’. It is indeed true that a strong streak of linguistic determinism runs through much writing on language endangerment, with both implicit and explicit acceptance of the Whorfian view that language, culture and identity are inseparable, without apparently noticing the irony that language shift would not happen if speakers' attachment to their ancestral language were really the overriding factor in their identity and motivation for their behaviour. Rhetorics of language rights are also criticised on the grounds that they are based on the ideology of the nation-state and accept its hegemony. However, in reality linguistic minorities live in nation-states and so have to either work within that framework or align themselves with rebel groups (who also have their own agendas, as is seen in Crowley's chapter). The book does not suggest practical solutions to such dilemmas. Shaylih Muehlmann kicks off the discussion by exploring ‘how the concept of linguistic diversity has been taken up by endangered language movements, NGOs and certain academic programmes as a rhetorical strategy in campaign materials’ (p. 17). Muehlmann points out that ‘essentializing disourses, rather than highlighting the interrelationships between biodiversity and linguistic diversity, have concealed the complex ways that social marginalization intersects with linguistic and environmental processes’(p. 15). Muehlmann highlights important implications of linguistic science following the approaches of biologists towards diversity, such as the tension between language documentation and revitalisation, exoticitisation of ‘indigenous’ people, the ownership of ‘linguistic treasures’ (as well as natural resources), and the avoidance of social justice issues through the focus on ‘diversity’. This is one of the strongest chapters in the book, although one of the websites criticised had already been revised before publication.2 Donna Patrick examines the problems caused by equating endangered languages with traditional lifestyles and territories, especially with regard to indigenous people who have moved to urban environments: ‘this makes the question of what Aboriginal language is being saved for whom a pressing one’ (p. 39); ‘one needs to find arguments in addition to those that invoke links between language and culture’ (p. 43). Patrick's chapter is the only one which discusses indigenous endangered languages outside Europe, although it focuses on Canada, where even indigenous groups have access to technology and resources. Alexandra Jaffe surveys examples of ‘essentializing’ discourses in the publications of organisations which promote endangered language research. She then discusses the example of Corsica, where campaigners first employed a strategy common to endangered language activists of raising the status of their language variety in order to bestow legitimacy on it in the eyes of both speakers and politicians. However, ‘the making over of Corsican in the authoritative image of French … led to minority language purism and homogeneism’ (p. 63) and the exclusion of people who did not speak Corsican. Since the 1990s a ‘polynomic’ model of language has been promoted, which ‘makes variation and variability the centrepiece of practices of identification’ (p. 57). But as Jaffe points out, such a model is difficult to implement in practice, especially in schools which are ‘not set up to recognize multiple norms and mixed codes’ (p. 73). She recommends awareness of the social and political dimensions of discourses of endangerment, as ‘an essential relationship between language, culture and identity … can never just “restore” a language; it will always inevitably create new linguistic, social and political realities’ (p. 74). Raphaël Maître and Marinette Matthey report on an ethnographic study of a Francoprovençal vernacular in Switzerland. The authors examine how their own ideological stance interacts with that of the research participants, recognising that ‘a totally “neutral” or “depersonalized” interview is not relevant for the production of an interactive corpus of this kind’ (p. 92). These observations are relevant to many other research contexts. However, Maître and Matthey ignore the ideological basis of their conclusion that speakers are voluntarily abandoning their vernacular. Surely this is an almost textbook example of internalised ideologies of inferiority? Annette Boudreau and Lise Dubois examine how linguistic debates in Francophone Canada have become ‘ideologized and politicized’ (p. 99), again using an ethnographic approach. As in other Francophone contexts, the hegemonic ideologies associated with standard French strongly influence arguments about linguistic legitimacy and purity; as in so many places, ‘language and values attributed to language varieties serve as the bases for social stratification and processes of identity’ (p. 119). Joan Pujolar relates language endangerment to nationalist discourses in Catalonia, arguing that ‘the debate [about survival of Catalan] was not politically neutral, but constituted a site of struggle for power and resources’ (p. 121). As in the contexts described in other chapters, the debate is thus not really about language: language, and rhetoric about the defence of diversity, act as a screen for vested interests in local power struggles. Like Patrick, Pujolar raises the issue of who owns an indigenous language, this time in a context of increased immigration. Tony Crowley notes that there is a long history of Irish nationalists ‘using the threat to Irish to mobilize social and political forces for a variety of ends’ (p.150); is it therefore legitimate for the loyalist community to do the same? As in Catalonia, linguistic boundaries often stand for ethnic boundaries; in Northern Ireland religious boundaries are also aligned with linguistic ones. Following the peace agreement in 1998, identification of Irish with countering colonial rule was replaced by a rhetoric of language rights, supported by European Union promotion of linguistic diversity (with funding). This led to the elaboration of a rival ‘new language’ by the Ulster Scots community, which perceived its political influence to be diminishing. Crowley claims that the use of language endangerment discourse to help wage a war can ‘generate’ a ‘fearful, aggressive and non-reflexive stance’ (p. 166) and ‘a refusal to view history in other than binary terms’ (p. 167). The next few chapters relate to the application of discourses of endangerment to languages which are flourishing by most standards. Readers whose main interest is in small, poorly described languages with few resources might be tempted to skip these chapters. The editors' claim that the situations are analogous simply because rhetorics are misappropriated is not itself problematised. Tommaso Milani discusses a debate surrounding the role of Swedish, which cannot be said to be endangered, but which may suffer functional shrinkage compared to the dominance of English in international scientific and political arenas. The debate was prompted by Sweden's entry into the European Union, coupled with the increasingly multilingual and multicultural nature of society; it is therefore clear that once again, the debate is not only about language but about the changing relationship of a small nation to the wider world. Most of the book's readers have not been party to this debate, so our only window on the issues and contributions is that which is provided here. Ronald Schmidt extends the scope of ‘discourses of endangerment’ to the ‘official English’ debate in the United States. English is in an unassailable position of dominance in the U.S.A.; why, then, do some speakers feel threatened by multilingualism? Schmidt explains this as a sense of ‘loss and displacement experienced by monolingual Anglophone Americans at the sight and sound of non-English languages in “their” spaces’ (p. 213). Although this chapter is interesting and echoes the ideologies revealed in Chapters 7 and 9, it cannot really be said to be about language endangerment. Claudine Moïse's chapter concerns France, a polity with one of the most centralised and monolingual language policies in the world. As with Sweden and the U.S.A., French speakers are having to come to terms with an increasingly diverse society, as well as with the international dominance of English. In France the integrity and purity of the national language are intimately entwined with the integrity and unity of the nation. Alarm is expressed when expressions of minority identity become part of public rather than private life, e.g. through language or religious dress; this conflicts with the growing desire of minorities to assert their cultural identity. Moïse suggests that ‘[w]hen the old protection reflexes remain fruitless, listening to and considering the social demands of the minority would help to avoid any hardening and would help assert a plural nation’ (p. 236). This sounds very much like a plea for tolerance, diversity and language rights, discourses criticised by Jaffe earlier in this volume. José del Valle describes a situation which might be seen as analogous to the French one: perceived threats to the unity and quality of Spanish (which are not really engaged with in the chapter). The reaction of language policy agencies has been ‘not the elimination but the enthusiastic embrace of intralingual diversity’ (p. 243) in order to protect the influence of Spain in its former colonies. Once again, the detail is fascinating, but its relevance to those concerned with documenting and reclaiming highly endangered languages is at best tangential; opportunities for them to repeat the policy mistakes of major world languages are somewhat distant. Cameron's final chapter is the most challenging, although it repeats arguments previously raised by Malik (2000) in a review of Nettle and Romaine (2000). Cameron relates alarmist and emotive rhetoric in public discussion of language endangerment to ‘folk linguistic’ equating of language and culture with linguistic and biological diversity. She then draws historical parallels with Nazi race science in the 1930s, tracing the descent of all these ideas from 19th-century European nationalism. Cameron is at pains not to accuse any living linguists of fascism (and most would be alarmed at being seen in such company), but highlights the ethical and logical dangers of relying on arguments based on identity and ethnicity, and of ‘making “languages” (and other abstractions such as “cultures” and “traditions”) more salient in discourse than human beings’ (p. 281). As Cameron points out, ‘many struggles around language are intimately linked to other political struggles for, say, land rights, compensation for past injustices’ (p. 282); but these issues are less attractive to the media than ‘ecologizing’ discourses. The ideology of the book itself is that ‘discourse = good, essentialism = bad’, but nowhere is this itself analysed or critiqued. What is meant by ‘discourses of endangerment’ varies between the authors; and the term ‘essentialism’ is not explained. (Maybe such definitions would themselves seem too essentialist?) Some other writers who work within a linguistic ideologies framework seem to wish to rehabilitate Whorfianism: e.g. Silverstein (2000) stresses the impact of cultural preconceptions on language (or the idea of ‘language’). For many members of endangered language communities, links between language, culture and identity are subjectively real. More detached writers who have not experienced heritage-language loss, or worked closely with a community going through language shift (with all its contradictions), may not appreciate that, as suggested by Moya (2000: 8), ‘cultural identities can be enabling, enlightening, and enriching structures of attachment and feeling … significant modes by which people experience, understand, and know the world’; what is more, they can feel emancipated after centuries of denigration. Elsewhere, Jaffe (1999: 83) points out that ‘the discourse of scientific rationality’ can lead to linguistic value being represented as having an objective, ‘scientific’ rather than a social basis and being used as ‘a screen for the symbolic violence wrought by linguistic domination’. It cannot be denied that many writers on language endangerment appeal to emotional responses and moral justice. After all, a good deal of wrong has been done to linguistic minorities. As Fishman (1991: 19) notes, those who wish to reverse language shift ‘should not be embarrassed about the fact that theirs is basically a value position (a position relative to the ethnocultural saliency, content and regulation of their lives), because the position of their opponents is also no more than a value position’. This book raises important questions, and I was pleased to see that a paperback has appeared, at a more affordable price than the hardback edition, as the book deserves to be more widely available (especially to students and early-career researchers). People involved in language revitalisation, both researchers and activists, can find numerous useful nuggets in this volume, the chief of which is that as language issues and vested interests cannot be separated, language policy-makers need to take them into account. The book reminds us of the need to be aware of (or to find out) both our own and communities' conscious and subconscious ideologies and agendas: what Fishman (1991) called ‘prior ideological clarification’, which is lacking from much language planning. Unfortunately however, the book's immediate usefulness to those involved in endangered-language documentation is less apparent; and it is uncertain whether its message will reach those it is intended to critique. The quality and cohesion of the papers is uneven, and there are numerous errors in referencing as well as some rather unidiomatic translations from French, which detract from the overall impression. The book gets off to a strong start with chapters 2–4, but then seems to get rather ‘bogged down’ in what many endangered-language linguists and activists might regard as side issues, before Cameron's hard-hitting closing chapter. The style is often turgid, and many of the writers use a jargon or code which is not necessarily accessible to campaigners or to students of language endangerment or documentation, to whom the book should surely speak if it is to be effective in getting its message across. The authors provide very little in the way of constructive suggestions. One might then ask, who is this book for and what is its purpose? An opportunity has been missed for a systematic assessment of the ‘industry’ of language documentation, not least by entering into dialogue with those involved in it. The field of documentary linguistics is starting to question issues that it has itself identified, such as its usefulness and answerability to speaker communities, and the messages that it sends to its Western funding public (e.g. Bradley and Bradley 2002; Hill 2002; Errington 2003; Dobrin, Austin and Nathan 2007). It is also taking on Cameron's (1992) ideas on empowerment and collaborative approaches to research (Grinevald 2003; Yamada 2007); but it still awaits a full evaluation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.