Advances in language planning 9783111583600, 9783111210391

Citation preview

Contributions to the Sociology of Language

Edited by

Joshua A. Fishman

5

Advances in Language Planning Edited by

JOSHUA A. FISHMAN Yeshiva University, New York

1974 — M O U T O N — T H E H A G U E · P A R I S

© Copyright 1974 in The Netherlands. Mouton & Co. Ν.V., Publishers, The Hague. No part of this book may be translated or reproduced in any form, by print, photoprint, microfilm, or any other means, without written permission from the publishers.

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS CATALOG CARD NUMBER: 73-85456

Printed in The Netherlands by Mouton, The Hague.

For Einar Haugen who stimulated a new generation to continue and expand the study of language planning

Preface

This volume represents another way-station in my efforts, begun in 1963, to provide the sociology of language with the basic teachinglearning tools needed in order to facilitate its academic growth and consolidation. Since that date when I first began to put together my Readings in the Sociology of Language (1968), I have regularly set aside some of the time that might otherwise have gone into research for the preparation of texts and readers that would be of greatest use to me, to my students, and hopefully also to a larger circle of colleagues and their students. The favorable reception that these have generally received has encouraged me to continue along these lines and, most recently, to assemble the present volume. Frankly, I would feel less sanguine about the entire enterprise of preparing teaching-learning materials were I not primarily engaged in research at the very same time. As it is, I have the definite impression that my immersion in the most current theoretical and empirical literature for the purposes of my own research enables me more appropriately to select those items that might also be of greatest interest and value for others. More specifically, this volume is itself the third step in a series of steps that began in 1966. At that time the Committee on Sociolinguistics asked Charles A. Ferguson and me to organize a conference on language problems of developing nations. The proceedings of that conference, somewhat augmented, were subsequently published (Fishman, Ferguson and Das Gupta 1968) and represented the first step in my plan to help prepare a type of specialist that was then practically nonexistent (particularly in American academic life), namely a specialist in language problems at the national level. The second step along this

8

Joshua A. Fishman

route was taken when the Ford Foundation's International Division enabled me, Das Gupta, Rubin and Jernudd to spend a year (19681969) at the East-West Center in preparing for the International Research Project on Language Planning Processes which has consumed the lion's share of our efforts from that day to this. The outcome of that year's deliberations, those that transpired among ourselves as well as those between us and a small group of consultants, has now been published and represents, to the best of my knowledge, the first American collection of papers on language planning (Rubin and Jernudd). The current volume, about which a little more will be said below, represents the second such collective volume, and is the third step in the program that I set for myself in 1966. The fourth step will be the report of the International Research Project itself (Das Gupta et al., ms.). It is my hope that it can see the light of day within a year or so after the appearance of this volume (in which I have scrupulously avoided stealing any of its thunder). All in all then, I have been privileged to attract to the language problems of developing nations (and to language planning as a means of solving such problems in nations of whatever stage of development) somewhat greater empirical and methodological expertise, conceptual integration and academic attention than they previously enjoyed. I am particularly pleased with the progress made in the field of language planning research per se, since here a few dedicated workers have been able to demonstrate in the course of a few years that not only was such planning possible, but that it had been done and was being done repeatedly and often quite successfully. The present volume itself leans heavily on the brilliant series of volumes Current Trends in Linguistics, which Thomas A. Sebeok has initiated, inspired and edited. I have selected from the twelve volumes in that series, with his permission, most of the chapters dealing with language policy. To them I have added roughly an equal number of papers from other sources. My hope thereby has been to accomplish two things: to give the student and specialist in language planning the benefit of the monumental effort and talent invested in Current Trends in Linguistics, while, at the same time, also to go beyond the studies there represented to newer and quite different ones. I am grateful to all those who have cooperated with me in this undertaking, but particularly to those authors of Current Trends in Linguistics' chapters who revised and updated their earlier versions, as well as to several authors of the 'other papers' who assisted me in obtaining republication permissions from the publishers and prospective publishers to which their papers had originally been entrusted. I believe that as a result of our joint efforts 'language planning' will become an ever more

Preface

9

stable component in the training of sociologists of language. Jerusalem, June 1972

Joshua A. Fishman

REFERENCES Das Gupta, Jyotirindra, Björn Jernudd, Charles A. Ferguson, Joshua A. Fishman, Joan Rubin, et al. Language Planning Processes (ms.). Fishman, Joshua A. (ed.) 1968 Readings in the Sociology of Language (The Hague: Mouton). Fishman, J. Α., C. A. Ferguson and J. Das Gupta (eds.) 1968 Language Problems of Developing Nations (New York: Wiley). Rubin, Joan and B. Jernudd (eds.) 1971 Can Language be Planned? (Honolulu: East West Center and University Press of Hawaii).

Contents

Preface

7

Joshua A. Fishman Language Planning and Language Planning Research: the State of the Art

15

SECTION I: THEORETICAL STUDIES

J. V. Neustupny Basic Types of Treatment of Language Problems

.

.

.

37

Valter The Tauli Theory of Language Planning

49

Paul L. Garvin Some Comments on Language Planning

69

Joshua A. Fishman Language Modernization and Planning in Comparison with other Types of National Modernization and Planning . .

79

Francis X. Karam Toward a Definition of Language Planning

103

12

Contents

SECTION II: LANGUAGE POLICY STUDIES

Georg Hazai Linguistics and Language Issues in Turkey

127

John W. Spencer Colonial Language Policies and their Legacies in Sub-Saharan Africa

163

Wilfred H. Whiteley Language Policies of Independent African States

177

William E. Weimers Christian Missions and Language Policies in Africa .

191

Stephen A. Wurm Language Policy, Language Engineering and Literacy in New Guinea and Australia

205

Bonifacio Sibayan Language Policy, Language Engineering and Literacy in the Philippines

221

Henri Lavondes Language Policy, Language Engineering and Literacy in French Polynesia

255

SECTION III: CODIFICATION, CULTIVATION AND ELABORATION STUDIES

Salih J. Altoma Language Education in Arab Countries and the Role of the Academies

279

Guillermo L. Guitarte and Rafael Torres Quintero Linguistic Correctness and the Role of the Academies in Latin America

315

Gilbert Ansre Language Standardisation in Sub-Saharan Africa

369

.

.

Contents

13

S. Takdir Alisjahbana Language Policy, Language Engineering and Literacy in Indonesia and Malaysia

391

Prague School General Principles for the Cultivation of Good Language (translated from Czech by Paul L. Garvin)

417

Jack Fellman The Role of Eliezer Ben Yehuda in the Revival of the Hebrew Language: An Assessment

427

Dayle Barnes Language Planning in Mainland China: Standardization .

.

457

.

481

Yafa Alloni-Fainberg Official Hebrew Terms for Parts of the Car: A Study of Knowledge, Usage and Attitudes

493

Comhairle Na Gaeilge Towards a Language Policy Implementing a Language Policy

519 527

Chaim Rabin and I. M, Schlesinger The Influence of Different Systems of Hebrew Orthography on Reading Efficiency

555

Index of Names

573

Index of Subjects

585

SECTION IV: IMPLEMENTATION, EVALUATION AND FEEDBACK STUDIES

Jonathan Pool Mass Opinion on Language Policy: the Case of Canada .

JOSHUA A. FISHMAN

LANGUAGE PLANNING AND LANGUAGE PLANNING RESEARCH: THE STATE OF THE ART

If we apply to language planning Kurt Lewin's adage that "nothing is as practical as a good theory" then, indeed, the time may not be far off when language planning practice will begin to benefit from theoretically oriented language planning research. Thus far, however, the two fields of endeavor, the practical and the theoretical, have been but loosely joined and unidirectionally at that. Language planning research has, increasingly, been studying language planning practice, i.e. decision making in connection with language problems. However, the practitioners of language planning (legislators, implementors of policy, government agency and language academy personnel, language specialists in private industry, etc.) have not yet turned to or utilized language planning research to any major degree as a guide to their own procedures. There are signs, nevertheless, that the two are destined to meet and that the relevance of the one group for the other will not only be great but mutually recognized. However, until that happy day comes to pass a review of this type will be forced to concentrate on language planning research per se, rather than on the lessons learned or goals attained from utilizing such. THEORETICAL DIMENSIONS

The major dimensions of language planning, as currently defined, are Published for the first time in this volume. * On leave, 1970-1972, as Co-Director, International Research Project on Language Planning Processes, Coordinator of the Israeli Section thereof, and (19701973) Visiting Professor, Hebrew University, Jerusalem.

16

Joshua A. Fishman

still most commonly those posited by Haugen (1966, 1969) and subsequently slightly revised and refined by Neustupny (1970). Thus, whereas Haugen discusses policy formulation, codification, elaboration and implementation, Neustupny adds to this quartet a fifth consideration, namely cultivation. Neustupny views cultivation as being a sequentially later and more advanced stage of language planning, dealing primarily with stylistic varieties of the national standard focused upon during previous stages of language planning. Neustupny's examples, largely drawn from Czech and Japanese, illustrate his contention that he is concerned with later and perhaps more subtle stages of language planning than those following immediately from the initial designation of a code not heretofore much utilized for modern written, technical purposes. For such a code more basic planning actions are initially necessary, viz. to functionally allocate it authoritatively for such purposes (policy decision), to establish its basic langue patterns relative to these purposes (codification), to achieve intertranslatability with one or more preferred and previously modernized languages of world wide currency (in accord with the stipulated langue patterns) and, finally, to enforce or encourage acceptance of all of the above by specified target or user population (implementation). Cultivation, then, involves the iteration of each of the above processes first spelled out by Haugen, but for more specific or additional functions (e.g., popular non-fiction, belles-lettres, bible translation, informal-polite conversation, etc.). The above basic quartet or quintet has been illuminated in the past few years by exposure to several additional considerations. Ferguson (1968) has stressed the intertranslatability goal as basic to language modernization and "development". In this connection both codification and elaboration are guided so as to attain the ease and precision assumed already to exist in one or another Language of Wider Communication. At the same time, however, anti-modelling must also be recognized, particularly in ausbau codes relative to each other or in anti-Western or anti-imperialist/colonialist junctures. A particular difficulty is faced, of course, by those languages whose model and antimodel are one and the same language (German vis-a-vis Yiddish, Russian vis-a-vis White Russian, etc.). Since both modernization and indigenization are part and parcel of most nationalist ideologies underlying language planning the dialectic between these two opposing forces is often felt in language planning per se and in the reactions to it by various groups in the speech-and-writing community. Another dimension of considerable importance is that of evaluation stressed by Rubin (1971). Here we are reminded that various criteria of language planning success are possible (knowledge, attitude, use, etc.) and that these need to be specified and attended to as part of the

Language Planning and Language Planning Research

17

planning process itself rather than as an afterthought of outsiders. If Rubin may be considered as appropriately expanding the definition of language planning, by implying that evaluation should always be a part of it, then Jernudd and Das Gupta (1971) may be considered as appropriately restricting the definition by insisting that we attend only to governmentally authorized activity with respect to language problems. Finally, Tauli has further refined and expanded his distinctive approach (1973) stressing, without visible agreement from others, that language planning theory must not merely be descriptive and predictive but prescriptive or directional as well. All in all, the theoretical dimensions recognized at this time are not crucially different from what they were a decade ago. Indeed, Garvin convincingly demonstrates that the Prague school made many of the distinctions indicated above as long ago as the thirties (1973a, 1973b). While the Czech stress on cultivation, which both Neustupny and Garvin have urgently called to our attention, did not receive its due in American writings of the sixties, it is very likely to receive more such attention in the future. Certainly, language planning research can only gain by also attending more advanced language settings as well as by attending to other kinds of planning (Fishman 1973). In each of these comparisons there will undoubtedly be more attention to cultivation than has hitherto been the case. Certainly, cultivation-oriented research would merely stress the distinction, long recognized in orthographic studies, that preparing a writing system de novo where none has previously existed, revising a preexisting writing system and replacing a previously existing writing system are quite different undertakings in societal perspective (Sjoberg 1966). Similarly, language planning where no long established langue model exists, language planning that seeks to expand previous codification/elaboration, and language planning that seeks to replace previous codification/elaboration are all quite different kinds of enterprises and engender quite different societal responses. Future language planning research will need to be more comparative (across times as well as across polities) in order to adequately study such differences empirically.

POLICY DECISIONS

Turning to each of the above dimensions seriatim, it is obvious that most attention during the past half-decade or so has been devoted to the policy deliberation and policy decision stage or dimension of language planning. Three major volumes have been devoted largely to this topic (Haugen 1966b, Noss 1967, Das Gupta 1970), and significant

18

Joshua A. Fishman

papers have been contributed by Abdulaziz (1971), Armstrong (1968), Barnes (1973), Das Gupta (1968, 1969,1971), Fellman (1973), Fisherman and Fishman (1973), Fishman (1971a), Gallagher (1968, 1971), Macnamara (1971), Mazrui (1967), Paden (1968), Polome (1968), Pool (1969, 1973), Sibayan (1971a, 1971b), Spencer 1971), Van den Berghe (1968), and Whiteley (1968, 1969, 1971a, 1971b). Other papers substantially touching upon policy decisions, though stressing other aspects of language planning, are those by Bowers (1968), Burns (1968), De Francis (1967), Fishman (1968,1971b), Hazai (1970), Jernudd (1968), Lavondes (1971), Le Page (1968), Rabin (1971), Rubin (1968), Rustow (1968), and Weimers (1971). The full series of the Survey of Language Use and Language Teaching in East Africa (of which only Ladefoged et al. 1971 has thus far appeared) will also contribute several papers to this area of discourse. The above list could easily be further extended but its characterization would remain unchanged. Although covering a welcome variety of social, economic and political factors related to language policy formation and its consequences all too little attention is devoted to the process of policy decision making. Only Das Gupta and Haugen tell us much about how policies get to be formulated, how compromises are reached between opposing views and interests, in short about the formal and informal pressures and processes of arriving at policy decision. However, even in these last two instances we have no theory to match the data, no generalizable point of view nor conceptual approach. Perhaps if authorities arriving at language policies were viewed as constituent parts of organizations (and pressure groups were also so viewed) a more generalizable (or at least testable) approach might be forthcoming from organization theory. At any rate this most frequently observed aspect of language planning is much in need of systematization and conceptual integration if it is to escape from anecdotalism, historicism or local dimensionalism pure and simple. There are beginnings along such more systematic lines in the work of Garvin (1954), Das Gupta (1971), Sibayan (1971) and Pool (1972). More such work will doubtlessly be stimulated by the International Research Project on Language Planning Processses (Das Gupta et al., ms.).

CODIFICATION AND ELABORATION

Once the policy making stage has come and gone, at least for the time being or at least insofar as a particular target population or group of potential users is concerned, the technical linguistic aspects of language planning (which might well be referred to as "corpus planning", follow-

Language Planning and Language Planning Research

19

ing Kloss's felicitous distinction between corpus planning and status planning within language planning as a whole) tend to come to the fore. However, such technical expertise alone never seems to be sufficient since there are always habits and attitudes and values and loyalties and preferences, not only in the target populations, but among the planners themselves. Thus, the truly sociolinguistic study of codification and elaboration must be no more socially innocent than is the study of language policy decision making. Obviously neither of these may be linguistically innocent lest the nuances of language per se be lost to analysis. How do members of language academies (or other authorized codifiers and elaborators) actually work? What do they recognize as their goals? How do they choose between alternatives? How do they know if they have made the right choice? Only recently have such questions been raised and preliminary answers to them proposed. Previously, major students of codification and elaboration were wont to analyze the products of such efforts (the actual nomenclatures, dictionaries, stylistic guides, etc. produced) rather than the processes by which they were produced. Heyd's classic study is of this type (1954), as is Hamzaoui's (1965) and to a large extent Haugen's (1966b). So are the studies by Al-Toma (1973), Guitarte and Quintero (1968), Hazai (1970) and Ansre (1971). If we compare all of the foregoing with Garvin (1954), Fellman (1973a, 1973b), Alisjahbana (1960), Fellman and Fishman (1973) and a very few others we must be struck by a difference akin to that between content alone vs. structure-plus-content. We are beginning to get a picture of who the technical planners are, what they know, how they organize their work, what channels of communication (upward and laterally) they activate, their aspirations and aggravations, etc. This work, too, is still theoretically anemic but, in view of its infancy, we first must give thanks that it has come into being at all. Once it has sufficiently increased in frequency of appearance we can then begin to press it more firmly toward conceptual integration.

IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION

Given the variety of studies that exist comparing different methods of implementation in other areas of planned behavioral change (e.g. family planning campaigns, literacy campaigns, political participation campaigns, not to mention agricultural and industrial planning), it is surprising that studies of alternative implementational approaches to language planning are well nigh completely absent. There are hypotheses concerning the circumstances under which language planning efforts

20

Joshua A. Fishman

tend to succeed or fail (Fishman 1971b), but even as hypotheses their validity is suspect. All in all, little of a definite sort is known about how to implement language planning, particularly about how to implement it differentially in relation to a variety of target populations and given a variety of social settings. Certainly, centralized Soviet or Chinese language planning has available to it implementational alternatives not available in Indonesia, India, Israel or East Africa. Nevertheless it is not clear to what extent extremes of totalitarian control, in the context of total cultural planning, are either necessary or effective in relation to the types of sanctions and influence processes available in less totalitarian settings. Certainly even totalitarian language planning has been less than fully successful with all target population, and, equally certainly, there is no lack of at least partial success under non-totalitarian conditions. While all agree that the co-occurrence of other mobilizing and mobility-providing opportunities are important (viz. Heyd's picture of planning effectiveness in Ataturkian times vs. Garvin's picture of ineffectiveness in more peaceful and consensual Ponape), it does not seem to be at all clear whether such opportunities are really crucial or merely facilitating and whether they are equally so for all segments of societies at different levels of development. Before any of the above questions will be answerable (let alone answered) a great deal of more micro-level evaluation must take place. However, even such studies are few and far between. Their absence represents the primary stumbling block to the advancement of language planning at either the theoretical or the practical levels. Of course, optimal evaluation must take into consideration more than implementation alone. As Rubin correctly points out (1971), implementation itself must be viewed in the context of the type of decision making that preceded it and the type of codification/elaboration that was engaged in. Nevertheless, even more piecemeal evaluation would be welcome at this time, if only because it would tackle the problem of appropriate criteria of success. The International Research Project on Language Planning Processes (Das Gupta et al., ms.) was a pioneering venture not so much because of its comparative aspects (concentrating as it did upon India, Indonesia, Israel and Sweden) but because it differentiated between attitudinal/informational and language usage criteria as well as between sub-areas of each. Furthermore, very much like Fainberg's more focused investigation (1973), the IRPLPP was able to compare different populations with respect to their relative standing on these criteria and, thereafter, to ask what other characteristics of respondents (demographic, language repertoire and attitudinal/informational) were useful predictors of differential criterion performance. The size of the final cumulative multiple correlations obtained by the

Language Planning and Language Planning Research

21

IRPLPP in conjunction with the six criteria of 'language planning success' that it recognized (in the 80's and 90's) indicates that such largescale studies are not without considerable groundbreaking value. However, only Fainberg's more pinpointed approach (1973) could study the acceptance of particular words (selected in accord with word length, homonymity, prior existence of non-standard lexical equivalents, etc.) as well as the relative importance of various implementational means in the different populations sampled. The Irish Marketing Survey study of the effectiveness of a radio series in stimulating Irish language learning and interest is another focused evaluation effort (1969), although one that is less concerned with the particular Irish usage being employed and its detailed acceptability or unacceptability to the listening public. The language attitude research currently being conducted in Ireland under Ministry of Finance auspices (Comhaier Na Gaelige 1971) is policy oriented evaluation, but, to the extent that it seeks to determine what factors are responsible for use and non-use of Irish in a population in which study and admiration of Irish is ever so much more widespread than its use, it is evaluation research nonetheless and of a far too infrequent sort. Obviously, the harvest of implementation and/or evaluation research is still slim. However, the IRPLPP has pointed the way both to the need and to the possibility of such research, and of even more focused investigations yet to come. Certainly, the prescriptive school, whether of Taulian or more local normativist inclinations, must be concerned with evaluation; otherwise its precise 'dos' and 'don'ts' remain detached from reality and appear to be ad hoc rationalizations rather than the hard headed instrumentalisms corresponding to its self-view. However, in the final analysis, implementational/evaluational research on language planning is necessary for its own self-respect, for the self-respect of the authorities and speech communities that support language planning, for the self-respect of those personally engaged in language planning. Without concern for criteria of success, without examination of alternatives, without cost-benefit concerns (Thorburn 1971, Jernudd 1971), without self-correction in methods on the basis of demonstrated experience, language planning is trivial, self-indulgent and self-righteous, but it is also needlessly ignorant and trivial. Although the time is still far off when language planning can be as informed and as effective as, say, agricultural planning (if, indeed, any cultural planning, value immersed as it is, can ever be as effective as more technologically based planning), the time of language planning in an implementational/evaluational vacuum is drawing to a close. The next decade should witness substantial gains in this connection, and, as a result, in the sophistication of the field as a whole.

22

Joshua A. Fishman

RESEARCH ON CREATION AND REVISION OF WRITING-SYSTEMS

If policy determination is the most commonly studied stage of language planning then the creation and revision of writing systems is the most commonly noted aspect of technical language planning activity per se. The reasons for this are not hard to find. The creation and revision of writing systems is not only of interest to language planners but also to educationists (literacy specialists), missionaries (bible translators), anthropologists, political scientists, historians, etc. Such is the intensity of work in this area that it deserves and will be given separate treatment (Fishman, in press). Here, indeed, there is American, Soviet and Chinese experience of note. Here also there are a number of evaluational efforts, although, once again, these are far fewer in number and in impact than one would hope might be the case. Some reflection of recent work in this area is contained in papers by Weimers (1971), Ansre (1971) and Kun Chang (1967). The most recent extensive overview of the field is that of Fishman (1971b), although it is clear that he approaches this topic as a means of examining applied language planning research as a whole rather than the creation and revision of writing systems per se. Obviously, this is a field in which linguistic scholars, social science scholars, and practitioners from a variety of applied fields have all been at work - but, thus far, without much interaction or cross-fertilization. The beginning of just such interaction may be seen in Rabin and Schlesingers inquiry into the classroom-learning consequences of variant orthographies (1973). RESEARCH ON CODIFICATION

The specification and systematization of preferred phonological grammatical and/or lexical models is referred to in many language planning studies. Certainly Haugen does this for the major written varieties of modern Norwegian (1966b), Alisjahbana for Indonesian (1960), Omar for Malay (1971), Morag (1959), Blanc (1968), and Fellman (1973) for Modern Hebrew, Chi Li for Chinese (1962), Hall for Italian (1942), Heyd for Turkish (1954), etc. Of this company, Haugen, Alisjahbana, Fellman and, in part, Heyd are outstanding in that they provide us not only with a sketch of the structures finally arrived at but also with a tour through the social trouble and travail that accompanied the process of codification. All in all, these accounts, although they usually lack generalizable concepts, hypotheses or conclusions, are impressive indeed as indications of what language planning can attain. Can language planning successfully foster a phonology not native to or even utilized by the majority of speakers? Yes (Morag, Fellman). Can it develop

Language Planning and Language Planning Research

23

grammatical features only residually or marginally present and repress others of wider currency? Yes (Heyd, Haugen, Alisjahbana). Can it change something as patterned and as tightly interlocked as the number or terms of address system? Yes (Haugen 1966, Wittermans 1967). Is language planning then without limits? Are the purely instrumental considerations of Tauli (and, before him, of Ray 1963) also attainable? Personally, I would be skeptical of the latter, for reasons closely akin to those advanced by Haugen (1971). Every one of the system-building or revising triumphs of language planning has been carefully cloaked in sentiment, has appealed to authenticity rationales, has claimed indigenousness. Obviously, a modern speech community wants its language to be more than neat and trim and handy. It also wants it to be theirs, i.e. like them in some way, reflective of their individuality in some way, protective of their history in some way. Of course, as the 'Great Sun Theory' in Turkey revealed, these rationales are amazingly pliable. They very easily become mere masks, to be put over whatever it is that elites have decided. The new and strange are often justified as being old and authentic. Nevertheless there are limits here too, particularly given the continued existence of proto counter-elites. Thus, in sum, all we can conclude at this juncture is that the limits of language planning are more distant and expansive than had at first been thought. When (and with whom) they are wider and when (and with whom) narrower - this still remains very much a matter of impression and personal conviction rather than an issue that lends itself to empirical examinations. Clearly, however, the limits depend more on the social than on the linguistic facts of any case. RESEARCH ON LEXICAL ELABORATION

Certainly the lion's share of popular awareness of language planning is in conjunction with lexical elaboration as conducted by language academies or other official and semi-official agencies. It is equally clear that whereas the creation and revision of writing systems, on the one hand, and the codification of langue models, on the other hand, are normally either one-time or some-time pursuits of language planning bodies, the work of lexical elaboration goes on forever (or so it seems). This latter fact is reflected by the size of the literature dealing with the principles of elaboration for modernization or with examples of such elaboration (or its absence) in various technological and cultural fields. The past half-decade or so has yielded interesting work in this connection, not only by several of the major figures referred to so frequently above, but also by Chandola (1963), Demoz (1963), Fellman (1973), Gallagher (1971), Glunk (1966), Issawi (1967), Jazayery (1966), Kirk-

24

Joshua A. Fishman

Greene (1964), Minn-Latt (1966), Von Pelenz (1967), Weston (1965), etc. Nevertheless, as is true of so many other aspects of language planning research, process oriented research and theoretically guided research, particularly as related to the differential success of planned neologisms among various target populations, is almost entirely lacking. With the exception of Fainberg's (1973) inquiry into knowing and not knowing, using and not using, liking and disliking selected modern Hebrew terms for automobile parts (among civilian drivers, vocational high school students and army drivers) and the various ILPLPP inquiries into attitudes toward indigenousness of vocabulary (Das Gupta et al., ms.) very little is known with respect to who accepts and who rejects 'academese' (see, however, Seckbach 1973, for such data as well as data on dictionaries, grammars, model writers, etc.). Nor do we have studies of what words are regarded as neologisms by various target populations and the sources from which they suppose these words to have come. Studies of foreign markedness, that is what words strike various target populations as foreign (or as indigenous) and why, are also lacking. Above all, we lack usage studies which are sensitive to the basic sociolinguistic reality of contextual variation. Some members of some target populations doubtlessly adopt academy-produced and academy-sponsored neologisms and use them exclusively thereafter for particular referents; others reject all such creations with particular glee and steadfastness. However, the behavior in question is not only of an all-or-none sort. For many, perhaps for most, it is a 'sometimething', the same neologism being activated or suppressed in accord with person, place and purpose co-occurrences. TThis, indeed, is an area of much needed empirical and theoretical attention because it is basic to any efforts to expand the appropriateness definitions that, consciously or not, underly the usage readiness or opposition of speech-network members vis-a-vis 'academese' at the lexical level.

RESEARCH ON INTERTRANSLATABILITY

Modernization is commonly characterized by a desire to attain technical and cultural features, believed to be already present in referencecommunities considered to be already modern. In the language field, as Ferguson has stressed (1968), this takes the form of striving to render as adequately and as effortlessly in one's own language that which is already accurately and easily expressible in one or another crucial language of wider communication. However, intertranslatability goes beyond lexical and grammatical features alone to conversational and

Language Planning and Language Planning Research

25

written styles as a whole, as well as to entire literary genres. Bible translation itself involves the differentiation and cultivation of a variety of prose and poetry styles (Asad 1964; Nida 1964, 1968; Wonderly 1968). However, even as seemingly common a variety as that needed for newspaper reporting may be lacking (Passin 1968), not to mention those needed for governmental reports or legal briefs, textbooks, advertisements, informal or light fictional prose, etc. In order to foster the development of such styles, registers or varieties, some academies or language planning/language advocating agencies sponsor entire translation series from various kinds of world literature, encourage local writers to create in particular genres via prizes and publication subventions, and become major publishers of reading material for old and young. Intertranslatability thus tends to represent a compositing of codification and elaboration activity in accord with specific literary and oral models borrowed from more modern love-hate referents. What these referents are, why they are considered to be necessary models, what characteristics are taken to denote the genres that are targeted, these are all complex topics that have not yet been fully or frequently recognized outside of the bible translation field. To a considerable extent, this topic coincides with Neustupny's concern with cultivation. Obviously, a great deal of prior, more atomistic research may be needed before the large number of co-occurrences that constitute a particular register can be pieced together and traced through with respect to differential acceptance or rejection. Nevertheless, this is the level of integration at which language planning research must, ultimately, arrive, precisely because language planning behavior is the more meaningful the more it can be viewed in terms of behavior toward complete varieties (rather than in terms of separate phonological, grammatical or lexical dimensions).

CAN LANGUAGE BE PLANNED ?

By the time the above question came to be incorporated in the title of a book (Rubin and Jernudd 1971) it was already a rhetorical question. The major contribution of a question such as the above at this time is to officially recognize that many members of the language-sciences community have passed beyond wondering whether language should be planned. Obviously, language has been planned, in one way or another, for a good long time, and in the Das Gupta and Jernudd sense of central governmental planning at that. Obviously, too, it has at times been planned with considerable success. Finally, it will clearly continue to be planned in the future, both in connection with the further cultiva-

26

Joshua A. Fishman

tion of previously modernized languages, as well as in connection with the modernization of languages thus far utilized for traditional pursuits alone. Thus, the problem to be faced in the future is not whether language should or can be planned (since it obviously will be planned by those inclined to do so because of larger societal developments with which such planning is always interrelated), but, rather, how to do so most effectively in connection with pre-specified criteria of success. The criteria of 'successful' language-planning are multiple and perhaps they should be even more so. The anti-mechanistic fear that language planning leads to the death of poetry, of intuition, of spontaneity, of originality, when translated into sociolinguistic terms merely leads to protecting the desirability of a contextualized repertoire. There are language contexts, and they are more frequently spoken than written, that may well be desirably less governed by language planning than others. Just as the acquisition of communicative competence is not complete until one knows what language (or variety) to speak (or write) to whom and when, so it is not complete until one knows where and when 'academese' is and is not appropriate. That there are forces in most modernizing speech communities attempting to change or influence the commonly accepted or enacted view of appropriateness vis-avis 'academese' is true enough. But even without centrally sponsored and conducted language planning such forces operate and are, on occasion, opposed by counter-forces. The mass-media, the writer, the popular hero, the itinerant, the occupant, the clergy, the elite - these have always influenced usage and often consciously so. Language planning is merely an attempt to influence usage more rapidly, more systematically, and more massively. As such it is no more threatening than the other types of planned socio-cultural change and just as amenable to delimitation. It is far from being so monolithic and so compelling as to be justifiably feared as a levelling and dehumanizing force. Like educational planning, agricultural planning, industrial planning and population planning, it is engaged in by means fully consonant with the other means of planned behavioral change acceptable to populations and their leaders. Like other types of planning it is valueladen and value-directed. Like other types of planning it often runs into unexpected system linkages related to traditional usages whose modernization is vehemently rejected by particular networks within the larger society. Like other types of planning it requires evaluation and feedback in order to proceed more successfully (according to locally pre-specified criteria) in the future than it has in the past. The recently concluded Survey of Language Usage and Language Teaching in East Africa (see, e.g. Ladefoged et al. 1971) and International Research Project on Language Planning Processes (Das Gupta et al., ms), and the

Language Planning and Language Planning

Research

27

large number of provocative studies mentioned in this review as well as those by Desherijev (1973) and Lencek (1971), all indicate that we are beginning to accumulate the data, the theories and the methods necessary in order to slowly but surely make language planning more nearly like the rational and responsible pursuit that its adherents and practitioners have claimed it to be and that some other types of social planning have actually begun to be (Hyman 1970). Jerusalem, June, 1972 REFERENCES (emphasizing studies since the mid-sixties) Abdulaziz, Μ. H. 1971 "Tanzania's national language policy and the rise of Swahili political culture", in: Language Use and Social Change, W. H. Whiteley (ed.) (London: Oxford Univ. Press), 160-178. Alisjahbana, S. Takdir 1960 Indonesian Language and Literature: Two Essays (New Haven: Yale University Southeast Asia Studies). Altoma, Salih J. 1973 "Language education in Arab countries and the role of the Academies", in this volume. Ansre, Gilbert 1971 "Language standardization in sub-Saharan Africa", in: Current Trends in Linguistics 7, 680-698. Armstrong, Robert G. 1968 "Language policies and language practices in West Africa", in: Language Problems of Developing Nations, J. A. Fishman, C. A. Ferguson and J. Das Gupta (eds.) (New York: Wiley), 227-236. Asad, Muhammad 1964 Can the Quran be Translated? (Geneva, Islamic Center). Barnes, Dayle 1973 "Language planning in mainland China: standardization", Language Planning: Current Issues and Research, Joan Rubin and R. Shuy (eds.) (Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press), 33-54. Reprinted in this volume. Blanc, Haim 1968 "The Israeli koine as an emergent national standard", in: Language Problems of Developing Nations, J. A. Fishman, C. A. Ferguson and J. Das Gupta (eds.) (New York: Wiley), 237-252. Bowers, John 1968 "Language problems and literacy", in: Language Problems of Developing Nations, J. A. Fishman, C. A. Ferguson and J. Das Gupta (eds.) (New York: Wiley), 381-402. Burns, Donald H. 1968 "Bilingual education in the Andes of Peru", in: Language Problems of Developing Nations, J. A. Fishman, C. A. Ferguson and J. Das Gupta

28

Joshua A. Fishman

(eds.) (New York: Wiley), 403-414. Chandola, Anoop Chandra 1963 "Some linguistic influences of English on Hindi", Anthropological Linguistics 2, 9-13. Chi Li 1962 New Features in Chinese Grammatical Usage (Berkeley: Center for Chinese Studies, Institute for International Studies, University of California). Comhairle Na Gaeilge 1971 Towards a Language Policy (Dublin: The Stationery Office). Das Gupta, Jyotirindra 1968 "Language diversity and national development", in: Language Problems of Developing Nations, J. A. Fishman, C. A. Ferguson and J. Das Gupta (eds.) (New York: Wiley), 17-26. 1969 "Official language problems and policies in South Asia", in: Current Trends in Linguistics 5, 578-596. 1970 Language Conflict and National Development (Los Angeles and Berkeley: Univ. of Calif. Press). 1971 "Religion, language and political mobilization", in: Can Language be Planned?, Joan Rubin and B. Jernudd (eds.) (Honolulu: East-West Center and Univ. Press of Hawaii), 53-62. Das Gupta, J., C. A. Ferguson, J. A. Fishman, Β. H. Jernudd, Joan Rubin et al. Language Planning Processes, ms. DeFrancis, John 1967 "Chinese language and script reform", in: Current Trends in Linguistics 2, 130-150, Reprinted in: Advances in the Sociology of Language II, J. A. Fishman (ed.) (The Hague: Mouton, 1972), 450-475. Demoz, Abraham 1963 "European loanwords in an Amharic daily newspaper", in: Language in Africa, J. Spencer (ed.) (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press), 116-123. Desherijev, Yunus 1971 "Soviet methodology. Theory and practice of language development planning and prognosis", in: "Toward a Sociology of Language", Rolf Kjolseth and Fritz Sack (eds.), Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, Sonderhefte 15, 192-205. Fainberg, Yafa Alloni 1973 "Who knows, likes and uses the Academy's Hebrew terms for automobile parts?", in: Language Planning in Israel, Chaim Rabin, J. A. Fishman and J. Fellman (eds.), in press; also, in this volume. Fellman, Jack 1973a "The role of Eliezer Ben Yehudah in the revival of the Hebrew Language: An assessment", in this volume. 1973b "What do the members of the Hebrew Language Academy know and think about its operation?", in: Language Planning in Israel, Chaim Rabin, J. A. Fishman and J. Fellman (eds.), in press. Fellman, Jack and Joshua A. Fishman 1973 "How do terminological committees of the Hebrew Language Academy actually work?", in: Language Planning in Israel, Chaim Rabin, J. A. Fishman and J. Fellman (eds.), in press. Ferguson, Charles A. 1968 "Language development", in: Language Problems of Developing Nations, J. A. Fishman, C. A. Ferguson and J. Das Gupta (eds.) (New York: Wiley), 27-36.

Language Planning and Language Planning Research

29

Fisherman, Haya and Joshua A. Fishman 1973 "The language laws of Israel and police familiarity with them", in: Multilingual Political Systems: Problems and Solutions, J. G. Savard (ed.) (Quebec City: International Center for Research on Bilingualism). Fishman, Joshua A. 1968 "Some contrasts between linguistically homogeneous and linguistically heterogeneous polities", in: Language Problems of Developing Nations, J. A. Fishman, C. A. Ferguson and J. Das Gupta (eds.) (New York: Wiley), 53-68. 1971a "The impact of nationalism on language planning; some comparisons between early twentieth century Europe and more recent years in South and Southwest Asia", in: Can Language be Planned?, Joan Rubin and B. Jernudd (eds.) (Honolulu: East-West Center and Univ. Press of Hawaii), 3-20. 1971b "The uses of sociolinguistics", in: Applications of Linguistics: Selected Papers of the Second International Congress of Applied Linguistics, Cambridge 1969, G. E. Perren and J. L. M. Trim (eds.) (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press), 19-40. 1973 "Language modernization and planning in comparison with other types of national modernization and planning", Language in Society 2, no. 1. Reprinted in this volume. Fishman, Joshua A. (ed.) in press Advances in the Creation and Revision of Writing Systems (The Hague: Mouton). Gallagher, Charles F. 1968 "North African problems and prospects: language and identity", in: Language Problems of Developing Nations, J. A. Fishman, C. A. Ferguson and J. Das Gupta (eds.) (New York: Wiley), 129-150. 1971 "Language reform and social modernization in Turkey", in: Can Language be Planned?, Joan Rubin and B. Jernudd (eds.) (Honolulu: EastWest Center and Univ. Press of Hawaii), 159-178. Garvin, Paul L. 1954 "Literacy as a problem in language and culture", Georgetown University Monograph Series in Language and Linguistics 7, 117-139. 1973a "Some comments on language planning" in: Language Planning: Current Issues and Research, Joan Rubin and R. Shuy (eds.) (Washington, D.C., Georgetown University Press), 24-33. Reprinted in this volume. 1973b "General principles for the cultivation of good language", translated from the Czech original of the Prague School (1932) in: Language Planning: Current Issues and Research, Joan Rubin and R. Shuy (eds.) (Washington, D.C., Georgetown University Press), 102-111. Reprinted in this volume. Glunk, Rolf 1966 "Erfolg und Misserfolg der nationalsozialistischen Sprachlenkung", Z. für deutsche Sprache 22, 146-153. Guitarte, G. L. and R. T. Quintero 1968 "Linguistic correctness and the role of the academies (in Latin America)", in: Current Trends in Linguistics 4, 562-606. Reprinted in this volume. Hall, Robert Α., Jr. 1942 The Italian Questione della Lingua (Chapel Hill: Univ. of North Carolina Press). Hamzaoui, Rachad

30

Joshua A. Fishman

1965 L'Academie Arabe de Damas et le problime de la modernisation de la langue arabe (Leiden: Brill). Haugen, Einar 1966a "Linguistics and language planning", in: Sociolinguistics, W. Bright (ed.) (The Hague: Mouton), 50-71. 1966b Language Conflict and Language Planning: The Case of Modern Norwegian (Cambridge, Harvard University Press). 1969 "Language planning, theory and practice", in: Actes du Xe Congris International des Linguistes, Bucarest, 1967, A. Graur (ed.) (Bucarest: Editions de L'Academie de la R6publique Socialiste de Roumanie), 701-711. 1971 "Instrumentalism in language planning", in: Can Language be Planned?, Joan Rubin and B. Jernudd (eds.) (Honolulu: East-West Center and Univ. Press of Hawaii), 281-289. Hazai, Georg 1970 "Linguistics and language issues in Turkey", in: Current Trends in Linguistics 6, 746-758. Reprinted in this volume. Heyd, Uriel 1954 Language Reform in Modern Turkey (Jerusalem: Israel Oriental Society). Hyman, Herbert H. and N. Gene Levine 1970 "Inducing social change in developing countries", Development Digest 8, 107-119. Excerpted from Inducing Social Change in Developing Countries; an International Survey of Expert Advice (Geneva: United Nations Research Institute for Social Development, 1967). Irish Marketing Surveys Ltd. 1969 Report on a Survey Conducted to Assess Public Reaction to "Buntus Cainte" (Dublin: IMS Ltd). Issawi, Charles 1967 "European loan-words in contemporary Arabic writing: a case study in modernization", Middle Eastern Studies 3, 110-133. Jazayery, Mohammad Ali 1966 "Western influences in contemporary Persian: a general view", Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 29, 79-96. Jernudd, Björn H. 1968 "Linguistic integration and national development; a case study of the Jebel Marra Area, Sudan", in: Language Problems of Developing Nations, J. A. Fishman, C. A. Ferguson and J. Das Gupta (eds.) (New York: Wiley), 167-182. 1971 "Notes on economic analysis for solving language problems", in: Can Language be Planned?, Joan Rubin and B. Jernudd (eds.) (Honolulu: East-West Center and Univ. Press of Hawaii), 263-276. Jernudd, Β. H. and J. Das Gupta 1971 "Towards a theory of language planning", in: Can Language be Planned? Joan Rubin and B. Jernudd (eds.) (Honolulu: East-West Center and Univ. Press of Hawaii), 195-216. Kellman, Herbert C. 1971 "Language as an aid and barrier to involvement in the national system", in: Can Language be Planned?, Joan Rubin and B. Jernudd (eds.) (Honolulu: East-West Center and Univ. Press of Hawaii), 21-52. Reprinted in Advances in The Sociology of Language II (J. A. Fishman, ed.) (The Hague: Mouton, 1972), 185-212. Kirk-Greene, Anthony Η. M. 1964 "The Hausa Language Board", Afrika und Übersee 47, 187-203.

Language Planning and Language Planning Research

31

Kun Chang 1967 "National languages [in China]", in: Current Trends in Linguistics 2, 151-176. Ladefoged, Peter et al. 1971 Language in Uganda (Nairobi: Oxford University Press). Lavondes, Henri 1971 "Language policy, language engineering and literacy in French Polynesia", in: Current Trends in Linguistics 8, 1110-1128. Reprinted in this volume. Lencek, Rado L. 1971 "Problems in Sociolinguistics in the Soviet Union", Georgetown University Monograph Series on Languages and Linguistics 24, 269-301. Le Page, Robert B. 1968 "Problems to be faced in the use of English as the medium of education in four West Indian territories", in: Language Problems of Developing Nations, J. A. Fishman, C. A. Ferguson and J. Das Gupta (eds.) (New York: Wiley), 431-441. Macnamara, John 1971 "Successes and failures in the movement for the restoration of Irish", in: Can Language be Planned?, Joan Rubin and B. Jernudd (eds.) (Honolulu: East-West Center and Univ. Press of Hawaii), 65-94. Mazrui, Ali A. 1967 "The national language question in East Africa", East African Journal 4 (3), 12-19. Minn-Latt, Yekhaun 1966 Modernization of Burmese (Prague: Oriental Institute, Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences). Morag, Shlomo 1959 "Planned and unplanned development in modern Hebrew", Lingua 8, 247-263. Neustupny, J. V. 1970 "Basic types of treatment of language problems", Linguistic Communications 1, 77-98. Reprinted in this volume. Nida, Eugene A. 1964 Toward a Science of Translation (Leiden: E. J. Brill). 1968 Religion Across Cultures: A Study in the Communication of Christian Faith (New York: Harper and Row). Noss, Richard 1967 Language and Higher Education: Higher Education and Development in South East Asia (Paris: UNESCO), vol. 3, part 2. Omar, Asmah Haji 1971 "Standard language and the standardization of Malay", Anthropological Linguistics 13, 75-89. Paden, John N. 1968 "Language problems of national integration in Nigeria; the special position of Hausa", in: Language Problems of Developing Nations, J. A. Fishman, C. A. Ferguson and J. Das Gupta (eds.) (New York: Wiley), 199-214. Polome, Edgar 1968 "The choice of official languages in the Democratic Republic of the Congo", in: Language Problems of Developing Nations, J. A. Fishman, C. A. Ferguson and J. Das Gupta (eds.) (New York: Wiley), 295-312.

32

Joshua A. Fishman

Pool, Jonathan 1969 "National development and language", La Monda Lingvo-Problemo 1, 140-156. Reprinted in: Advances in the Sociology of Language II, J. A. Fishman (ed.) (The Hague: Mouton, 1972), 213-230. 1973 "Mass opinion on language policy; the case of Canada" in: Language Planning: Current Issues and Research, Joan Rubin and R. Shuy (eds.) (Washington, D.C., Georgetown University Press), 55-66. Reprinted in this volume. Rabin, Chaim 1971 "Spelling reform-Israel 1968", in: Can Language be Planned?, Joan Rubin and B. Jernudd (eds.) (Honolulu: East-West Center and Univ. Press of Hawaii), 95-122. Rabin, Chaim and I. M. Schlesinger 1973 "The influence of different systems of Hebrew orthography on reading efficiency". In this volume. Ray Punya Sloka 1963 Language Standardization: Studies in Prescriptive Linguistics (The Hague: Mouton). Rubin, Joan 1968 "Language and education in Paraguay", in: Language Problems of Developing Nations, J. A. Fishman, C. A. Ferguson and J. Das Gupta (eds.) (New York: Wiley), 477-488. 1971 "Evaluation and language planning", in: Can Language be Planned?, Joan Rubin and B. Jernudd (eds.) (Honolulu: East-West Center and Univ. Press of Hawaii), 217-252. Reprinted in: Advances in the Sociology of Language II, J. A. Fishman (ed.) (The Hague: Mouton, 1972). Rubin, Joan and Bjorn Jernudd (eds.) 1971 Can Language be Planned? (Honolulu: East-West Center and Univ. Press of Hawaii). Rustow, DanKwart 1968 "Language, modernization and nationhood: an attempt at typology", in: Language Problems of Developing Nations, J. A. Fishman, C. A. Ferguson and J. Das Gupta (eds.) (New York: Wiley), 87-106. Seckbach, Fern 1973 "Attitudes and opinions of Israeli teachers and students about aspects of modern Hebrew", in: Language Planning in Israel, Chaim Rabin, J. A. Fishman and J. Fellman (eds.), in press. Sibayan, Bonifacio P. 1971a "Language planning processes and the language-policy survey in the Philippines", in: Can Language be Planned?, Joan Rubin and B. Jernudd (eds.) (Honolulu: East-West Center and Univ. Press of Hawaii), 123-140. 1971b "Language, policy, language engineering and literacy in the Philippines", in: Current Trends in Linguistics 8, 1038-1062. Reprinted in this volume. Sjoberg, Andree F. 1966 "Sociocultural and linguistic factors in the development of writing systems for preliterate peoples", in: Sociolinguistics, W. Bright (ed.) (The Hague: Mouton), 260-276. Spencer, John 1971 "Colonial language policies and their legacies", in: Current Trends in 1973 "The theory of language planning". In this volume. Tauli, V. 1973 "The theory of language planning". In this volume.

Language Planning and Language Planning Research

33

Thorburn, Thomas 1971 "Cost-benefit analysis in language planning", in: Can Language be Planned?, Joan Rubin and B. Jernudd (eds.) (Honolulu: East-West Center and University of Hawaii Press), 253-262. Reprinted in: Advances in the Sociology of Language II, J. A. Fishman (ed.) (The Hague: Mouton, 1972), 511-517. Van den Berghe, Pierre L. 1968 "Language and 'nationalism' in South Africa", in: Language Problems of Developing Nations, J. A. Fishman, C. A. Ferguson and J. Das Gupta (eds.) (New York: Wiley), 215-224. Von Pelenz, Peter 1967 "Sprachpurismus und Nationalsozialismus: Die Fremdwort-Frage Gestern und Heute", in: Nationalismus in Germanistik und Dichtung, Benno von Wiese and Rudolf Renss (eds.) (Berlin: Erich Schmidt). Weimers, William E. 1971 "Christian missions and language policies", in: Current Trends in Linguistics 7, 559-569. Reprinted in this volume. Weston, Α. Β. 1965 "Law in Swahili: problems in developing the national language", Swahili 35 (2). 2-13. Whiteley, Wilfred H. 1968 "Ideal and reality in national language policy: a case study from Tanzania", in: Language Problems of Developing Nations, J. A. Fishman, C. A. Ferguson and J. Das Gupta (eds.) (New York: Wiley), 327-344. 1969 Swahili, The Rise of a National Language (London: Methuen). 1971a "Language policies of independent African States", in: Current Trends in Linguistics 7, 548-558. Reprinted in this volume. 1971b "Some factors influencing language policies in Eastern Africa", in: Can Language be Planned?, Joan Rubin and B. Jernudd (eds.) (Honolulu: East-West Center and Univ. Press of Hawaii), 141-158. Wittermans, Elizabeth P. 1967 "Indonesian terms of address in situations of rapid social change", Social Forces 46, 48-51. Wonderly, William L. 1968 Bible Translations for Popular Use (New York: United Bible Societies). Wurm, Stephen A. 1968 "Papua - New Guinea nationhood: the problems of a national language", in: Language Problems of Developing Nations, J. A. Fishman, C. A. Ferguson and J. Das Gupta (eds.) (New York: Wiley), 345-364. 1971 "Language policy, language engineering and literacy in New Guinea and Australia", in: Current Trends in Linguistics 8, 1025-1038. Reprinted in this volume.

SECTION O N E

Theoretical Studies

J. V. N E U S T U P N *

BASIC TYPES OF TREATMENT OF LANGUAGE PROBLEMS

1. TREATMENT OF LANGUAGE PROBLEMS

The linguist's concern with language problems represents only an extreme case of a more general phenomenon which may be called treatment of language problems. Language problems, at least some of them, receive attention and are discussed in any community by linguists as well as by non-linguists. Patterns of thinking and talking about language problems are easily established and frequently strict constraints are imposed in this manner on the identification and understanding of the relevant issues. Treatment patterns display various degrees of systematicity. Problems may be exposed either in an ad hoc way as they historically emerge, or as an ordered system of items. Independently from this, some treatment patterns are more theoretical in the sense of being meaningfully based on sociological and/or linguistic models, while others reveal no similar background. Treatment patterns may furtner either relate to problems as they are reflected in folk taxonomies and naive attitudes toward language, or try to treat the linguistic situation responsible for these taxonomies and attitudes. This important difference in depth of treatment has so far received little attention (cf. however a similar notion in Danes 1968: 122-123). In order to account for, for instance, the Japanese situation a 'surface' treatment will accept the From Linguistic Communications 1 (1970), 77-98. Reprinted with permission. I wish to thank Björn Jernudd for useful comments on many problems discussed in this paper.

38

7. V. Neustupny

belief that all language problems in Japan are problems of script; on a 'deeper' level problems ranging from stylistic and lexical (e.g., limits on pre-modern vocabulary) to phonological issues (e.g., borrowed phonological elements) may emerge from behind the 'surface' slogan of script reform. Danes (1968) has suggested another dimension which he calls rationality. Rational treatments are characterized by affective neutrality, specificity of goals and solutions, universalism, emphasis on effectiveness, and by long-term objectives. On the other hand, lack of rationality is marked by affectiveness, diffuseness, particularism, emphasis on quality instead of effectiveness, and preoccupation with shortterm goals. Systematicity, theoretical elaborateness, depth, and rationality (perhaps with additional features such as various kinds and degrees of adequacy) may be thought as contributing to the rigour of a theory or a treatment system (the term has been suggested to me by B. Jernudd).1 With regard to rigour the historically observable patterns in each community may be expected to fall within a range the extremes of which are (1) a considerably rigorous treatment (Tr), and (2) a treatment with no legitimate claim on rigorousness (Ti): Tr t i

higher level treatments lower level treatments

Ti An attempt to divorce completely the higher level treatment patterns (linguistic, etc.) from the lower ones is of necessity futile. Linguists, if involved at all, have continually claimed a high degree of systematicity and theoreticity for their approaches to language problems. Their intention has been to attain T r but mostly with little success. Manifold reasons for this may be quoted: the lack of a socio-linguistic theory, personal political involvement (because of which often also social scientists have been kept distant from Tr), and to a significant degree the limited extent of the problems treated.2 Lower level treatment pat1

'Rigorousness' differs of course from 'objectivity'. I fully agree with G. Myrdal's remark that recommendations cannot be made without commitment to value judgements (1968: 1941-1942). Principles applied in language treatment are accepted differently by different social groups (Neustupn^ 1968: 292) and as long as social stratification exists no 'objectivity' in language treatment is possible. Treatment patterns show various degrees of 'rigour' independently from the question of 'objectivity'. 2 Too often the word language in the phrase 'language problems' is accepted to mean only the linguistic code (grammar-code variety). What is obviously needed

Basic Types of Treatment of Language Problems

39

terns still play a role far exceeding what linguists working outside and inside language policy and planning agencies would readily accept.

2. BASIC TYPES OF LINGUISTIC TREATMENT OF LANGUAGE PROBLEMS

2.1 Policy and Cultivation

In present day linguistics two basically different and extreme approaches to language problems seem to coexist. I shall call the first policy approach.3 This approach covers problems like selection of the national language, standardization, literacy, orthographies, problems of stratification of language (repertoire of code varieties) etc. The emphasis is on linguistic varieties and their distribution. This approach is combined with notions of language policy and planning. It might also be called a sociological or macroscopic approach. Ferguson (1962), Rice (1962), Bright (1966), Fishman-Ferguson-Das Gupta (1968), Fishman (1970), and perhaps the majority of other studies connected with modern sociolinguistics supply representative examples of this approach. The second set of treatment patterns may be described as the cultivation approach. It is characterized by interest in questions of correctness, efficiency, linguistic levels fulfilling specialized functions, problems of style, constraints on communicative capacity etc. The term cultivation of language (coined by Garvin to cover the continental Sprachkultur, jazykovä kultura, kul'tura reci etc.) is the most appropriate to describe

this approach. Langue, language code, remains the central focus, but parole, speaking, is also considered: inclusion of phenomena like 'intellectualization' or 'styles' (Havränek) is not accidental. This second approach might perhaps also be labelled anthropological or microscopic. Havränek's "Studie ο spisovnem jazyce" and the Prague School theory of Literary Language in general are typical examples of this attitude. While the policy approach appeals to administration, the cultivation approach addresses the public in general, and intellectuals in particular. Acceptance of one of the approaches frequently excludes the other is coverage of the whole complex of communication patterns, including for instance network rules, rules governing the use of channels, thematic rules etc. (cf. Neustupn^ 1968). The extent of the field is best indicated in Hymes (1962, 1964, 1967, in press) and Ervin-Tripp (1964, 1968). 3 Words like 'policy' or 'cultivation' have been employed here as mere labels, without intention to declare what 'policy', 'cultivation' or 'planning' etc. is or should be. A recent theoretical approach to some of the relevant problems may be found, e.g., in Jernudd-Das Gupta (1971) and Rubin (1971).

40

J. V. Neustupny

approach. It is noticeable, for instance, that although the distinct Bohemian diglossia (Literary vs. Common Czech) received descriptive attention already in the thirties (Havränek 1934), it was not raised as a language problem until recently (Sgall 1960, Havränek 1963a, DanesSgall 1964). Both the policy and cultivation approach occur in various mutations with regard to the T i - T r axis. The examples used above (sociolinguistics and the Prague School) represent considerably rigorous attempts. A journalist's attitude toward the language problem of India, or a puristic attitude toward Czech, frequent before the emergence of the Cercle linguistique de Prague, approximate the other extreme. Reasonably developed attempts at linguistic treatment of language problems have so far been presented independently in four areas: the Prague School, Japanese linguistics, Russian linguistics, and Sociolinguistics. A careful examination of these aproaches may, in the future, lead to a better understanding of the complicated structure of language treatment patterns. 2.2

The Prague School Theory of Cultivation of Language

Future research in this area will undoubtedly reveal predominance of the policy approach over the cultivation approach for the Czech situation in the 19th and early 20th century. The basic idea of the Prague School linguists since the late twenties was, however, to provide a more systematic and theoretical alternative to the language problem treatment of their predecessors and contemporaries, and to incorporate this alternative into the novel framework of structural linguistics (cf. Vachek 1966: 96-99, also Jedlicka 1964). The initial formulation is found in Theses of the Circle in TCLP 1 (1929): 27-29 (also available in Vachek 1964). Further elaboration is due to V. Mathesius and B. Havränek (cf. the bibliography). One of the primitive terms in the discipline is a norm, conceived as being different from its codification in textbooks, dictionaries etc. (Havränek 1938: 414). Norm has never been satisfactorily defined but its close relatedness to evaluation of language is obvious. Norm is basically identical with the phenomenon discussed by Bloomfield (1927) under the heading of "literate speech". Any type of language (any variety) has a norm. 'Cultivation of language' is, however, mainly concerned with the norm of Literary Language.4 The two main problems * I translate spisovnf jazyk intentionally as Literary, not Standard, Language, because it seems that the usage of the former term is closely connected with the cultivation approach, while Standard Language represents a concept typically discussed in the policy approach.

Basic Types of Treatment of Language Problems

41

concerning the norm of the Literary Language are: its flexible stability attained by fixation of the norm and destroyed by arbitrary interventions (Mathesius 1932), and functional differentiation (Havränek 1932; in 1947-1948: 134 Havränek calls the problem "adequacy to the given purpose"). Functional differentiation does not imply only a different inventory of elements, but also their different use (Havränek 1932: 37). This is the point where the theory leaves the sphere of langue and embarks in the area of parole. There are two fundamental types of this special use: intellectualization (or rationalization) on the one hand, and automatization/foregrounding on the other (cf. Garvin 1964: 9). Individual functional dialects and styles are characterized by a different share of these problems. 2.3

Two Japanese Approaches

While a single aproach has been characteristic for the Czech scene, two distinct currents may be distinguished in Japan. The first discipline is called kokugo mondai (Problems of the National Language, cf. Katö 1961) and contains chapters like "National Language policy", "Unification of spoken and written language", "Limitations on the number of characters", "Standard Language and dialects" etc. (cf. Kömoku ichiranhyö in Kokugogaku iten 1955: 18-19). It is not difficult to recognize in these topics a typical policy approach. Since the Meiji Restoration language policy has always been given enormous attention in Japan, and Japan may easily be designated as one of the countries with most vigorous treatment of language problems. The post-war series of language reforms was not so much a measure imposed by the American Occupation authorities - as often believed - as it was a logical conclusion of the long autochthonous process of treatment of language problems. Kokugo mondai is still an important term of reference in Japan. There is however no doubt that the post-war language reforms were the last for many years. After the war a new discipline referred to as gengo seikatsu (mostly translated as 'linguistic life') appears as a strong representative of the cultivation approach to language problems (cf. Miyaji 1961, Nishio 1961, Tokieda 1964, T. Iwabuchi 1964, Takahashi 1964). In the 'Encyclopaedia of the Japanese National Language' (Kokugogaku iten 1955: 15-18) the entries relevant for gengo seikatsu are classified as follows: 1. General... 1.1 Language acts in general... 1.2 Types of language acts . . . 2. Linquistic life and spoken language . . .

J. V. Neustupnf

42 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 3. 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8

Speaking in general... About monologue... About dialogue . . . Listening life . . . Language product and language play . . . Linguistic life and instruments . . . Film, theatre, stage entertainment... Society and language . . . Language, customs and beliefs . . . Linguistic life and written language . . . Writing in general... Means and methods of writing . . . Types of written works . . . Calligraphy... Reading in g e n e r a l . . . Philology... Books . . . Printing, publishing . . .

This system of topics, comparable to the "ethnography of speaking" (Hymes 1962) is treated not only as an object of description but also as a catalogue of language problems. The journal Gengo seikatsu published since 1951 under the sponsorship of the National Language Research Institute is especially notable in this respect. Paralleled by attempts in a different tradition (Iwabuchi 1961, Kindaichi 1964) and also by a recent interest in McLuhan (e.g. Hanashikotoba... 1968), the growth of the 'linguistic life' studies gives a clear testimony in favour of a transition from the policy toward the cultivation approach.5 E. Iwabuchi, Director of the National Language Research Institute, formulates perspectives for future development in the following way: The object of discussion of the so called Problems of National Language is at present most often represented by material which concerns its graphical representation. The Problems of National Language should not however stop in an area as narrow as that. Can, in the contemporary Japanese language, functions like cognition, communication, thinking and creation be satisfactorily performed? In which direction is it necessary to develop Japanese to further enhance the functions of human language? In my opinion this constitutes the real Problems of the National Language. (1965 : 2-3). Fundamental to the Japanese situation is the problem of a theory. Standards of the journal Gengo seikatsu, laid down basically by T. 5

Useful surveys of language situation and a bibliography appear annually in Kokugo nenkan (Yearbook of the National Language), ed. by the National Language Research Institute (Tokyo: Shüei Shuppan).

Basic Types of Treatment of Language Problems

43

Shibata, are high, more than half way between journalistic and purely academic treatment. The reports of the National Language Research Institute on 'linguistic life' (An Introduction . . . 1966: 6-9, Grootaers 1952; cf. also Sh. Hayashi 1966) still continue to bring extremely useful and sometimes unique material. Even if these studies are sometimes considerably systematic, an outside observer may, however, not fail to notice that neither kokugo mondai nor gengo seikatsu have so far produced a generally acceptable attempt at establishing a modern theoretical framework. This situation has already been criticised in Japan (Takahashi 1964) but no improvement is immediately foreseeable. 2.4 Why Two Different Approaches? The variables responsible for the difference between the policy and cultivation patterns are not difficult to identify. Treatment of language problems, even on its deepest and most theoretical levels, has so far been strongly influenced by levels adjoining Ti, and these, in their turn have received strong influence from features of the speech communities in question: language situation

Tr

It is the less developed modern (or modernizing) societies in which the policy approach prevails. These societies are characterized by a high degree of arbitrary (Neustupny 1965: footnote 6, p. 89) social and linguistic heterogeneity. Under changed or changing social conditions the diversity within the repertoire of varieties is easily recognizable and leads to a clear policy approach on both the lower and higher levels of treatment. This explains the predominance of the policy approach in sociolinguistics which has largely developed as a study of developing languages.® The kokugo mondai approach in Japan slowly disappears (or significantly changes) with the country's transfer into the category of developed nations. From what I know of the Soviet treatment of language problems, a marked division seems to exist: the policy approach is employed for the less developed languages, while the cultivation approach applies to Russian (cf. already Polivanov 1927). The cultivation approach coexists with a situation of functional (Neustupny 1965: footnote 6, p. 89) stratification of language which 9

The other source of inspiration for treatment of language problems in sociolinguistics seems to derive from studies of bilingualism in developed societies like America (Haugen 1953, 1956; Fishman 1965).

44

J. V. Neustupnf

appears in the foreground in more developed communities. The intervariety relationships become less conspicuous, variation is "fine" (Labov 1966), and it is now issues like stability and functional differentiation that matter. Problems of (non-literary) style and expression come under discussion.7 Variations in this basic model can hardly destroy its general validity. It may further be expected that the contemporary transition of most developed speech communities from communication largely relying on written language (Japan, partly Europe) to patterns with less marked weight on written messages (American English) may constitute a third approach to treatment of language problems. M. McLuhan (Hymes 1964) seems to represent a lower level treatment of the third type.

3. CONCLUSIONS

The main points of the above discussion may be summarized as follows: (1) Linguistic approaches to language problems are only one section of a broader category of treatment of language problems. (2) Two extreme and opposite patterns of linguistic treatment of language problems may be distinguished: a policy approach and a cultivation approach. (3) The policy approach is connected with the study of less developed speech communities while the cultivation approach is found in modern industrialized societies. Before any modern prescriptive attempt at language treatment is produced, at least the following three considerations seem necessary: (1) Can any advantage be derived from application of the policy approach in communities characterized by a high degree of social development? The already mentioned persistent neglect of the Bohemian diglossia seems to attest to the correctness of a positive answer to this question. Some linguists' surprise whenever a policy type problem (e.g., the language problems in Belgium or Canada) emerges in the developed world points to the same conclusion. (2) Is the cultivation approach applicable to less developed societies? Undoubtedly the centre of language problems in these societies 7

Fishman (1970: 69 et seq.) correctly argues in favour of both "uniformation" and "differentiation" in industrialized societies. Undoubtedly new dialectal features do emerge (Shibata 1965) even if mostly they are isolated and do not constitute clear new varieties. Of much greater importance for industrialized societies than these examples of newly created arbitrary heterogeneity is, however, the fact of the fast growth of functional heterogeneity, establishment of a complicated set of so far nonexistent levels of linguistic means designated to fulfil new tasks (Neustupn^ 1965: 89).

Basic Types of Treatment of Language

Problems

45

will remain in the sphere of the policy approach. Issues of stability, functional differentiation, intellectualization etc. do however apply in any situation. A model like Haugen's (1966) which attempts to incorporate elements from both of the extreme approaches deserves careful attention (cf. also Jernudd-Das Gupta, 1971, Section 3). (3) In order to develop the higher levels of treatment of language problems it will further be necessary to set linguistics free from its preoccupation with the problems of language code (grammar-code variety) and explore the vast area of parole far beyond what 'code' linguists would imagine. The langue-and-only-langue approach in linguistics is close to going out of fashion also in the sphere of treatment of language problems (Neustupn$r 1968). Monash University REFERENCES» 1966 An Introduction to the National Language Research. A Sketch of its Achievements (Tokyo: Kokuritsu kokugo kenkyüjo, 1966). Bloomfield, L. 1927 "Literate and Illiterate Speech", American Speech 2. Reprinted in Hymes (1964), 391-396. Bright, Wm. (ed.) 1966 Sociolinguistics (The Hague-Paris: Mouton). Daneg, F. 1968 "Dialektick6 tendence ve v^voji spisovn^ch jazyku" [Pfisp6vek sociolingvistick^], in: Ceskosloven sk6 pfedndlky pro VI. mezinärodni sjezd slavistü (Praha: Academia), 119-128. An abbreviated version of this paper appeared under the title "Einige soziolinguistische Aspekte der Schriftsprachen", in: Die Welt der Slawen 13 (1968), 17-27. DaneS, F. and P. Sgall 1964 "Jazyk a souSasnä spoleönost" [Language and the contemporary society], in: P. Sgall (ed.), Cesty moderni jazykovedy (Prague: Orbis), 7-30. Ervin-Tripp, S. M. 1964 "An Analysis of the Interaction between Language, Topic, and Speaker", in: J. J. Gumperz and D. Hymes (1964), 86-102. Also in: Fishman (1968), 192-211. 1968 "Sociolinguistics", in: L. Berkowitz (ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 4, 91-165. Ferguson, Ch. A. 1962 "The Language Factor in National Development", Anthropological Linguistics 4. Reprinted in Rice (1962), 8-14. Fishman, J. A. 1965 Language Loyalty in the United States (The Hague: Mouton). 1968 Readings in the Sociology of Language (The Hague: Mouton). 1970 Sociolinguistics. A Brief Introduction (Rowley: Newbury House Publishers).

46

J. V.

Neustupnf

Fishman, J. Α., Ch. A. Ferguson and J. Das Gupta (eds.) 1968 Language Problems of Developing Nations (New York: Willey & Sons). Garvin, P. L. (ed.) 1964 A Prague School Reader on Aesthetics, Literary Structure and Style (Washington: Georgetown University Press). Grootaers, W. A. 1952 "Language Behaviour of an Individual during One Day", Orbis 1, 126129. Gumperz, J. J. and D. Hymes (eds.) 1964 The Ethnography of Communication, American Anthropologist Special Publication, American Anthropologist 66 (6/2) (Menasha). 1968 Hanashikotoba no shisö [The Ideology of Spoken Language], a collection of articles in the journal Shisö no kagaku 9 (7) (1968). Haugen, E. 1953 The Norwegian Language in America, 2 vols (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press). 1956 Bilingualism in the Americas: A Bibliography and Research Guide (Alabama: University of Alabama Press). 1966 "Linguistics and Language Planning", in: Bright (1966), 50-67. Havränek, Β. 1929 "Influence de la fonction de la langue litteraire sur la structure phonologique et grammaticale due tcheque litteraire", Travaux du Cercle linguistique de Prague 1. Reprinted in Vachek (1964), 252-269. 1931 "Zur adaptation der phonologischen Systeme in den Schriftsprachen", Travaux du Cercle linguistique de Prague 4. Reprinted in Vachek (1964), 270-283. 1932 "Ükoly spisovneho jazyka a jeho kultura" [The functions of literary language and its cultivation], in: Spisovnd ceStina a jazykovä kultura (Prague). Reprinted in Havränek (1963), 30-59. Section 2 of this paper is available in English in Garvin (1964). 1934 "Naieöi Ceska" [Bohemian Dialects], in: Ceskoslovenskd vlastivMa III (Praha). 1938 "Zum Problem der Norm in der heutigen Sprachwissenschaft und Sprachkultur", in: Actes du Quatrieme congres international de linguistes (Copenhagen). Reprinted in Vachek (1964), 413-420. 1942 "K funkSnimu rozvrstveni spisovndho jazyka" [On functional differentiation of the Literary language], Casopis pro moderni filologii 28. Reprinted in Havränek (1963), 60-68. 1947 "Demokratizace spisovneho jazyka" [Democratization of Literary Language], in: Cestina ν zivote a ve Skole (Prague). Reprinted in Havränek (1963), 145-148. 1947-48 "Zäsady Prazskeho linguistickeho krouzku a novä kodifikace spisovne CeStiny" [Principles of the Prague linguistic circle and the new codification of Literary Czech], Slovo a slovesnost 10. Reprinted in Havränek (1963), 133-144. 1963a "Studie ο spisovnem jazyce" [Studies on Literary language] (Prague: Academia). 1963b "Na zäv£r dvoalete diskuse of obecne a hovorov6 2e§tin£" [Closing the two year discussion on Common and Colloquial Czech], Slovo a slovesnost 24, 254-261. 1964 "On Comparative Structural Studies of Slavic Standard Languages", Travaux linguistiques de Prague 1, 59-66.

Basic Types of Treatment of Language Problems

47

Hayashi, Ο., N. Nakada and U. Saeki (eds.) 1961 "Kokugogaku" [The Study of National Language] (Kokugogaku kokubungaku kenkyüshi taisei 15) (Tokyo: Sanseidö). Hayashi, Sh. 1966 "Gengo ködö no taipu" [Types of verbal activity], in: Nihon buntairon kyökai hen, Buntairon Nyümon (Tokyo: Sanseidö), 252-276. Hymes, D. H. 1962 "The Ethnography of Speaking", in: T. Gladwin and W. C. Sturtevant (eds.), Anthropology and Human Behaviour, 13-53. Also in Fishman (1968), 99-138. 1964 "Introduction: Toward Ethnographies of Communication", in: J. J. Gumperz and D. Hymes (1964), 1-34. 1967 "Models of the Interaction of Language and Social Setting", The Journal of Social Issues 23 (2), 8-28. in press On Communicative Competence (Philadelphia: University of Philadelphia Press). Iwabuchi, E. (ed.) 1961 Shinpan akubun [Wrong style, a new edition] (Tokyo: Nihon Hyöronsha). 1965 Gendai no kotoba [Modern Language] (Tokyo: Ködansha). Iwabuchi, T. 1964 "Gengo seikatsuron no seichö" [Growth of the theory of 'linguistic life'], Gengo seikatsu 150, 44-48. Jedli£ka, A. 1964 "Zur Prager Theorie der Schriftsprache", Travaux linguistiques de Prague 1, 47-58. Jernudd, B. H. and J. Das Gupta 1971 'Toward a Theory of Language Planning", in: J. Rubin and B. Jernudd (eds.), Can Language be Planned? (Honolulu: East-West Center Press). Also in Working Papers of Linguistics, Department of Linguistics, University of Hawaii, 9 (1969). Katö, A. 1961 "Kokugo kokuji mondai no rekishi" [A history of the problems of national language and national script], in: Hayashi-Nakada-Saeki (1961), 561-616. Kindaichi, H. 1964 "Hanashikotoba no keigoteki hyögen" [Honorifice-like expressions in spoken language], Gengo seikatsu 149, 16-23. 1955 Kokugogaku iten [Encyclopedia of the Study of the National Language] (Tokyo: Tökyödö, 1955). Labov, W. 1966 The Social Stratification of English in New York City (Washington: Centre for Applied Linguistics). Mathesius, V. 1932 "O poiadavku stability ve spisovnem jazyce" [On the requirement of stability in Literary language], in: Spisovnd Seitina a jazykovd kultura (Prague). Reprinted in Mathesius (1947), 415-435. 1947 Cestina a obecny jazykozpyt [The Czech Language and General Linguistics] (Prague: Melantrich). Miyaji, Y. 1961 "Gendaigo, gengo seikatsu kenkyü no rekishi" [A history of research in present day language and linguistic life], in: Hayashi-Nakada-Saeki (1961), 374-399.

48

J. V.

Neustupny

Myrdal, G. 1968 Asian Drama (3 vols.) (New York: Pantheon). Neustupny, J. V. 1965 "First steps towards the conception of Oriental languages'. A contribution to the sociology of language", Archiv Orientdlni 33, 83-92. 1968 "Some General Aspects of Language Problems and Language Policy in Developing Societies", in: Fishman-Ferguson-Das Gupta (1968), 285-294. Nishio, M. 1961 Gengo seikatsu no tankyü [Investigations in "linguistic life"] (Tokyo: Iwanami shoten). Polivanov, E. D. 1927 "Revoljitsija i literaturnye jazyki Sojuza SSR" [Revolution and Literary Languages of the U.S.S.R.], in: Revoljutsionnyj Vostok 1, 36-57. Also in: E. D. Polivanov, Stafi po obscemu jazykoznaniju (Moscow: Nauka, 1968), 187-205. Rice, F. A. (ed.) 1962 Study of the Role of Second Languages in Asia, Africa and Latin America (Washington: Center for Applied Linguistics). Rubin, J. 1971 "Evaluation and Language Planning", in: J. Rubin and B. Jernudd (eds.), Can Language be Planned? (Honolulu: East-West Center Press). Sgall, P. 1960 "Obixodno razgovornyj CeSskij jazyk" [Colloquial Czech], Voprosy Jazykoznanija 9 (2), 11-20. Shibata, T. 1965 Ikite iru högen [Living Dialects] (Tokyo: Chikuma Shobö). Takahashi, T. 1964 "Gengo seikatsugaku wa sairitsu suru ka" [Can a theory of 'linguistic life' be constituted?], Gengo Seikatsu 150, 25-33. Tokieda, M. 1964 "Watakushi no gengo seikatsuron, gengo seikatsu shiron no kösö" [My conception of the theory of linguistic life and the theory of the history of linguistic life], Gengo seikatsu 150, 18-24. Vachek, J. 1966 The Linguistic School of Prague (Bloomington: Indiana University Press). Vachek, J. (ed.) 1964 A Prague School Reader in Linguistics (Bloomington: Indiana University Press).

VALTER TAULI

THE THEORY OF LANGUAGE PLANNING

Language is a means of communication. By this statement two main and essential characters of the language are given. Firstly language is a means. Already Wilhelm von Humboldt maintained: "Die Sprache ist immer nur Mittel."1 Secondly language is a social code, as well as a social institution. If we want to treat language realistically, and not as a mystery, we must always have in mind these two aspects of language. Much has been written on the importance of language. It is impossible to exaggerate the role of language in a society and culture, and its importance is still increasing steadily day by day. Joyce O. Hertzler in his book A sociology of language2 discusses the following major general functions of language: language as the means of identification, categorization, perception, thinking, creative activity, technology, memory, transmitting knowledge across space and time and grasping the abstract and supernatural. Besides this language is the basic instrument of social behavior. That language has a great social function is proved by man's great concern in linguistic matters. This is valid for the man in the street as well as for persons holding the highest posts in a state. One is anxious that oneself as well as other persons use correct and good language. This is manifest in the extensive demand for and success of manuals of linguistic correctness in various countries and in numerous From Las Concepciones y Problemas Actuates de la Sociolingiiiistica, Oscar Uribe Villegas (ed.) (Mexico: Universidad Nacional Autönoma de Mexico). Reprinted with permission. 1 Gesammelte Schriften VI (2) (Berlin, 1907), 396. 4 New York, 1965, 38 ff.

50

Valter Tauli

inquiries and complaints received daily by offices dealing with linguistic service in many countries.8 The concern of political authorities for language is manifest in royal and governmental academies, official language boards and in legislation regulating the use of language (cf. governmental intervention in language reform in Turkey or Norway, Ley de defensa del idioma in Columbia etc.). The concern of intellectuals for linguistic correctness and efficiency is manifest in numerous private and semi-official organizations in various countries (cf. Office du Bon Langage in Belgium), which besides service often deal with linguistic propaganda on a vast scale in the press, radio, television and special drives (cf. Quinzaine du bort langage in Belgium, 'Language Day' in Latin-America). Often, but not always, the linguistic philosophy behind such propaganda is puristic. A popular slogan is 'the defense of the language' (cf. Association Defense de la langue frangaise). A common catchword of intellectuals is the 'decay' or 'ruin' of the language; one speaks of illness, corruption, crisis, etc. of language ("they tend to feel that the English language is going to hell if 'we' don't do something to stop it").4 Regardless of the real efficiency of the propagated norms and the naivete of people in linguistic matters this activity proves the great social role of language. The striving for correct and good language are based on the two basic characters of language, as a social phenomenon and as a means. Language is a social code. The codes of society are in general normative. The linguistic norm is inherent in the nature of language. In a normal dialect in general, except in mixed border areas, no phonemic or morphemic variants occur. The linguistic norm is the precondition on which an efficient and economic function of linguistic communication is based. This is instinctively felt also by the speakers of standard language (SL). It is the most natural and positive thing in principle. It is on this normal instinctive feeling that the demand for linguistic correctness is based. If a user of SL becomes aware of more than one expression for something, he naturally asks which of them is the correct one. The natural assumption is that one of them must be wrong. But man is not satisfied with language which is correct. He wants to use good language and he is anxious to improve his language, like other tools and even social institutions. This, too, is the most natural and s

The language office of the Finnish Academy receives yearly 10,000 inquiries (Seulaset, 1968), 52. The Austrian radio has a broadcasting series, the so-called 'Sprachpolizei', whose main task is to make the listeners language policemen. During fifteen years the Austrian radio had received 110,000 communications from listeners. Most of them were reports of linguistic errors which the listeners had noticed (Maria Hornung in: Sprachnorm, Sprachpflege, Sprachkritik [Düsseldorf, 1968], 216). 4 Cf. Α. Α. Hill, Language 46 (1970), 246.

The Theory of Language Planning

51

rational attitude towards language. Ulis attitude is based on language as a means. The spreading of a tool depends partly on the usefulness and efficiency of the tool, partly on various historical, social and psychological conditions, as propaganda, power, social and individual mentality. An inefficient tool can spread because it has become fashionable or because it has been forced upon. All this is also valid for a language and its components, as words, morphemes, constructions, even sounds, as the history of languages proves. From the fact that language is a means follows that a language and its components can be evaluated, altered, corrected, regulated, improved, and replaced by others and new languages and components of a language can be created at will. Thus all languages or the components of a language, as constructions, words or morphemes, are not equal in efficiency in every respect. The efficiency of a language or a component of a language as a means of communication can be evaluated from the point of view of economy, clarity, redundancy, etc. with objective scientific often quantitative methods. For example a conspicuous difference exists in languages in respect of the degree of morphophonemic complexity, i.e. invariability vs. variability of morpheme, regularity vs. irregularity. On this difference also the degree of difficulty in learning a language or linguistic pattern depends. There is, of course, a great difference in memory burden if a grammatical category, e.g. the genitive singular, is expressed by one or a few automatically conditioned allomorphs, as in English, or by about 70 unpredictable allomorphs, as in Estonian. A well-known type of error in child language is formation according to a regular pattern instead of an irregular one. Susan M. Ervin and Wick R. Miller maintain that in English even a six-year old often uses regular and irregular past tense forms interchangeably, which proves that the adult norm has not yet developed a firmly established habit. Other, less frequent patterns are yet to be learned.8 It is obvious that where such irregular forms are lacking it is impossible for children to commit such errors, and the time needed to learn the expressions of the corresponding grammatical categories must be shorter. No language can express everything adequately: the whole physical and psychical reality, all the shades of human thought and feeling, not to speak of abstract theories. But there are also many imperfections in languages which need not occur. The ethnic languages were not constructed methodically according to plan. They originated and developed by infinite momentary groping attempts of individual members of thousands of generations to communicate with each other. These individuals had no consciousness of the whole system of language but 5

83.

Readings in the sociology of language, J. A. Fishman (ed.) (The Hague, 1968),

52

Valter Tauli

only the needs of the moment. In the development of language chance plays an essential part: the various linguistic changes depend on several extralinguistic conditions, psychological, geographical, social and historical factors, which have no logical connexion with each other. It would be absurd to assume that languages form logical, harmonious or perfect systems, or that every element in every language and dialect is the most efficient one. It is evident that all languages are fatally imperfect and unsystematic, with lacunae and unnecessary elements. It is a well-known fact that language lags behind thought: on one hand it contains signs which have no longer any meaning in the speaker's mind, on the other hand there are meanings which have not yet been given an adequate expression. It is particularly in the periods of cultural revolution that language lags behind needs, when the lack of adequate expressions for new meanings is felt. To a certain extent the need for new words is a constant phenomenon of every developing culture. Several linguists have pointed to structural imperfections in the main European languages, also in one's own mother tongue (e.g. Charles Bally« and J. Marouzeau7 in French). In comparison with progress in technology and social life modern ethnic languages seem rather primitive and archaic. But what is is not necessarily what should be. We are not bound to the language as it is (as Ferdinand de Saussure thought).8 Like other tools a language and its components can be changed and replaced. This is valid for phonemes, morphemes, words, syntactic constructions and rules. Although language is more resistant to changes than some other social phenomena, it is nevertheless subject to deliberate change and direction, even to radical change. The deliberate direction of language depends on the same factors as change of other social customs and codes: individual initiative, influence of leading persons, authority, prestige, imitative instinct, propaganda, and, last but not least, power. The deliberate change of linguistic elements is already proved by several customs in several preliterate societies. For example, some Australian tribes name their children after natural objects; when the person so named dies another word is invented for the object after which the person was called. According to a similar custom in the language of the Abipones of Paraguay, e.g., during seven years the word for jaguar was changed thrice. In the Galla kingdom of Ghera the name of the sovereign may not be pronounced and common words which resemble it in sound are changed for others.9 Literary and • Linguistique generale et linguistique frangaise (Bern, 1944s), 253 ff., 310, 334 ff., 368. 7 Aspects du frangais (Paris, 1950), 198 ff. 8 Cours de linguistique ginerale (Paris, 1922), 104. » J. G. Frazer, The Golden Bough II (London, 1911), 358 ff.

The Theory of Language Planning

53

standard languages are all to a greater or lesser extent deliberate arbitrary creations. This is valid for old literary languages, and to a still greater extent for various new national languages in Africa and Asia. New words are coined not only for new concepts but purists and language planners in several countries have succeeded in replacing everyday words with new ones. The most obvious proof of the possibility of extensive deliberate changes in linguistic usage is the experience of language reforms in such languages as Hungarian, Norwegian and Estonian. In Norway the so-called landsmal or nynorsk was originally constructed by one person, Ivar Aasen, on the basis of archaic dialects.10 In Estonian, by the initiative of the bold language reformer Johannes Aavik, wholly arbitrarily constructed new root-words roim, laip, relv have supplanted such old common compound words as kuritegu 'crime', surnukeha 'corpse', söjariist 'weapon' respectively not only in literary language (LL) but also in colloquial SL and have been transmitted to the new generation. Through the influence of Aavik, in the language of many users of Estonian SL in the 1920s the plural morpheme -te was deliberately replaced in many words by -i, which was formerly unknown in their language, e.g. körgetes kirikutes 'in high churches' was replaced by körgeis kirikuis; likewise the analytic superlative expression by the particle köige + comparative was in many words replaced by a synthetic superlative form with the suffix -im, hitherto unknown in Estonian.11 That linguistic tools which are deliberately and freely constructed can be efficiently used as means of communication in writing as well as in speech is proved also by the experience of the constructed languages. Theoretically there are no limits to deliberate language change if we do not take into account limitations due to biological factors. Neither have we any practical experience proving that there are certain kinds of deliberate changes that are impossible. Chances for realization of deliberate changes differ in different language communities and periods, depending on various psychological, social, cultural and other factors. In any case man is free deliberately to change and improve his language, as he does with his other tools and social codes. And that is feasible to an extent that was not realized in the past. It is regrettable that linguists have been slow to grasp the nature of language as a means of communication and to draw the logical conclusions from this fact. The 20th century inherited from the 19th century the negative attitude of linguists towards the problems of language 10

See further Einar Haugen, Language conflict and language planning (Cambridge, Mass., 1966). 11 See further Tauli, "Estonian poetry and language", in: Studies in honour of Ants Oras (Stockholm, 1965), 106 ff.

54

Valter Tauli

evaluation and language planning (LP). As late as the year 1921 Otto Jespersen could write: "Breadth of vision is not conspicuous in modern linguistics, and to my mind this lack is chiefly due to the fact that linguists have neglected all problems connected with a valuation of language."12 This passage has been later repeatedly quoted, and it is still valid for some linguists. It is remarkable that it is in the small countries as Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Scandinavia, Finland, Estonia etc. with young LLs where linguists have actively participated in LP and have been first to advocate the solution of LP problems by linguists. The Hungarian linguist Fiilöp Kaiblinger in his book Alkotö nyelvtudomäny (1912), maintained that linguistics must change from being purely historical and psychological into creative or constructive science. The task of linguistics should be to spread the existing better forms and to construct new better forms. The distinguished Danish linguist Otto Jespersen voiced (1914) the opinion that theoretical linguistics is the means and LP the end, adopting the slogan of Auguste Comte: "Savoir pour prevoir, et prevoir pour prevenir": one investigates reality with scientific methods in order to remodel reality.13 The greatest breadth of vision was shown by the Estonian language reformer Johannes Aavik. In his book Keeleuuenduse äärmised vöimalused [The extreme possibilities of language reform] (1924) he outlined a revolutionary theory of LP. Aavik drew the full logical conclusion of the plain fact that language is a means: as all natural languages are imperfect, the improvement of languages is indispensable. Aavik differs from other language planners in insisting that language improvement must be methodical and extensive, including "artificial", i.e. free, arbitrary creation. He argued that we can arbitrarily combine sounds to make new words and even new derivational and inflectional morphemes, and to create new syntactic constructions. That Aavik's theory did not remain on paper is proved by the success of his language reform.14 Aavik's theory and practice smashed all mystical prejudices about languages and opened unprecedented perspectives for improvement of ethnic languages. Several linguists have since then stressed the need of language improvement. In the bigger countries with older LLs the comprehension of the nature of language as a means of communication has been more slow. Regarding Germany Siegfried Jäger could write as late as 1971: "Die Sprache wurde lange Zeit personalisiert und mystifiziert. Eine Auffassung der Sprache als sozio-kulturelle Variable, als gesellschaftliches Mittel zum gesellschaftlichen Zweck, wie sie schon von Leibnitz ver18

Language, its nature, development and origin (London, 1922), 99. »» Linguistica (Copenhagen, 1933), 103. 14 Cf. Tauli, "Estonian poetry".

The Theory of Language Planning

55

treten worden war, setzt sich in Deutschland erst in der allerletzten Jahren wieder durch, bei V. Polenz, Betz und anderen."15 The new attitude of linguists is manifest in the statement that evaluation is an important task of linguistics (Hugo Moser).18 Das Institut für deutsche Sprache, founded 1964 in Mannheim by linguists from all Germanspeaking countries, has a committee "für wissenschaftlich begründete Sprachpflege". In France the new attitude is manifest in Aurelien Sauvageot's statement: "Le probleme de la regulation de la langue . . . est l'un des plus importants qui connaisse la linguistique".17 Progress in the attitude of linguists has been slowest in the USA. The slogan 'Leave your language alone'18 and the view that 'one word is as good as another', current among many linguists in the 1950s, has now mostly been abandoned and one has begun to grasp that languages and their components can also be evaluated from the structural point of view, for example morphophonemic complexity. A distinguished American linguist, Joshua Whatmough, maintained even that language must be adjusted to the present age, for which purpose it must be improved and redesigned.19 Nevertheless one can still find prejudices and, curiously enough, unscientific statements about language evaluation even by distinguished linguists. Such dogmatic fallacies are what Einar Haugen calls the hypothesis of linguistic equilibrium20 and I. A. Richards "non-scientific linguistic egalitarianism"21. According to the former view positive and negative balance each other in all languages and no language is more easy or difficult than another. Needless to say, such balance has never been proved for any language, and has no evidence whatsoever. This view ignores, besides other things, the difference in morphophonemic complexity and is practically contradicted by experiences in language learning. Likewise unfounded is the view that every language is equally well adapted to the uses to which the community puts it. Some American linguists still cannot imagine that linguistic expressions can be evaluated by the linguist "qua scientist"22 not only from the viewpoint of social prestige and from the esthetical point of view, but also from the structural aspect, i.e. from viewpoints 15

Muttersprache 81 (1971), 163. In: Sprachnorm, Sprachpflege, Sprachkritik, 186. « Bulletin de la Sociiti de Linguistique de Paris 64 (2) (1969), 18. 18 The title of a book by a known American linguist Robert A. Hall, Jr., 1950. The second revised edition has the title Linguistics and your language (Garden City, New York, 1960), but the same content. 19 Language (London, 1956), 238. 2 ° Language 45 (1969), 941. 21 So much nearer (New York, 1968), 74. 22 Cf. Ernst Pulgram, Linguistics 53 (1969), 89 ff. D. Crystal, What is linguistics? (London, 1968), 8 ff., 14 ff., 23 ff. 18

56

Valter Tauli

of efficiency, such as clarity and economy, that the different expressions for the same meaning are not only 'just different'.23 Understanding of the importance of LP has steadily gained ground among linguists in several countries, but the theoretical foundations in dealing with LP problems have been weak. In the 20th century, several scholars have voiced the opinion that LP should be based on a proper theory and methods and that for this purpose a new branch of science should be established. For this science several names have been used, e.g. practical linguistics (A. Peskovskij), applied linguistics (Bruno Migliorini, H. Spang-Hansen), prescriptive linguistics (Punya Sloka Ray), normative linguistics (Einar Haugen). The present writer uses the term theory of language planning (TLP).24 It should be mentioned that in the current usage the term 'applied linguistics' does not mean a science of LP, but it is a collective name for the most various practical problems connected with language, including computational and mathematical linguistics, machine translation, bilingualism, etc. In some countries it deals mainly with problems of foreign language teaching. Sometimes the programmes of applied linguistics include LP. In practice LP is ignored by the institutions, journals and congresses which contain the term 'applied linguistics'.25 TLP may be defined as follows: Theory of language planning is a science which methodically investigates the ends, principles, methods and tactics of language planning. LP may be defined as follows: Language planning is the methodical activity of regulating and improving existing languages or creating new common regional, national or international languages. Often the use of the term 'language planning' includes governmental 23

That there is something wrong with the evaluation criteria of some modern linguists is also proved by the attitude towards orthography. I do not mean those who defend the present English spelling with a metaphysical pathos against the "tyranny of reason" (cf. John Nist, Linguistics 23 [1966], 81 ff.), but those who mean that English orthography "comes remarkably close to being an optimal orthographic system for English" (Noam Chomsky and Morris Halle, The sound pattern of English [New York, 1968], 49; for criticism of this view see Geoffrey Sampson, Language 46 [1970], 621 ff.) and who do not grasp that "the current orthography should be anything in particular other than what it is" (Richard L. Yenezky, The structure of English orthography [The Hague, 1970], 122), and that despite the obvious complexity of the system (which now has been revealed even with the help of computer) and inconsistencies, and the experiences of learning and ability of spelling, not to speak of what popular belief and common sense says in this matter (cf. also the steadily increasing trend of spelling pronunciation in English, French and Swedish). 24 Cf. the author's book Introduction to a theory of language planning (Uppsala, 1968). 25 Regarding the various meanings and programmes of applied linguistics see Otto Back, Sprache 16 (1970), 21 ff.

The Theory of Language Planning

57

linguistic policy in the widest sense (cf. Belgium or India)2® or it is used only in this meaning. But it is more expedient to employ the traditional term language policy for the latter meaning. Why do we need competent LP based on a proper theory? The prerequisite for normal, easy and efficient communication in a society is the possession of one common language. In case of a nation it is called standard language. SL means deliberate choice and planning. In order to do it in the most efficient way it must be based on a scientific theory, proper principles and methods. An urgent task in many languages is to eliminate the harm done to language by the incompetent and antiquated grammarians in the past. In various countries many newer more efficient colloquial forms have been repudiated, whereas archaic, extinct and inefficient or unnecessary forms have been preserved in LL owing to the influence of grammarians. Often language development has been directed in a wrong direction or has been stopped altogether, in contradiction to the spontaneous and beneficial development. To eliminate these errors of the past is the task of a scientific methodical LP. It is not the task of LP to prescribe norms, but to try to point out and prove which expressions are preferable. The higher and more difficult task of LP is the methodical improvement of language, i.e. to eliminate inadequacies and inconveniences in the structure and vocabulary of a language, and to adapt the language for new needs and to make it more efficient. For this purpose TLP is indispensable. We must also consider the immense increase of the importance of language in modern society. An entirely new situation has arisen, which cannot be compared with the situation in the beginning of the century when the main manifestation forms for LL were belleslettres, modest press and scientific literature destined for specialists. Now, because of radio and television, the modern press and the dynamic social life, the importance of LL and SL in the life of man and society is far more extensive. Let us also remember that in all countries the teaching of the mother tongue in the schools demands extensive costs in time, energy and money, while the knowledge of the mother tongue of graduates is still unsatisfactory. Thus the efficiency of a language has great importance also from the viewpoint of national economy. The role of writers in language development has diminished and among the dominating factors which influence language development are now also technology, natural sciences, economy, advertising and every-day speech, which more and more is also used by writers.27 Adding here the problems of terminology we realize how important LP 29 Cf. Haugen in: Sociolinguistics, William Bright (ed.) (The Hague, 1966), 52; H. A. Koefoed, Sprog og sprogvidenskab (Oslo, 1968), 13. *7 Cf. Moser in: Satz und Wort im heutigen Deutsch (Düsseldorf, 1967), 16.

58

Valter Tauli

and a rational solution of its problems are. The importance and difficulty of the problems of terminology is proven by the enormous number of existing terms and the everlasting need for new ones. If already at the beginning of the century several scholars found that language is behind thought, how much farther does it lag behind now. The new situation and knowledge have placed in the foreground other LP principles. Still some decades ago (and in some circles even today) one argued with such romantic criteria as historical or puristic principles. Now economic principle is in the forefront. The need for LP is not the same in all languages. The situation is different in a language with a long literary tradition, relatively simple morphology and small dialectal differences and a language with a young literary tradition, complex morphology, great dialectal differences and a great many competing forms in SL, which did not become the vehicle of a complex culture until the 19th or 20th century and is in urgent need of a mass fabrication of new words. Still other problems face the countries where hitherto has existed no national or regional common language, no SL nor LL. An important task of LP is to establish linguistically sound principles for creating new common and literary languages where none yet exist. The creation of new national and regional common languages has become an acute problem all over the world, in Europe, Africa, America, Asia. It concerns a great number of languages and peoples. If a new common language to be created is to become as efficient as possible, it is necessary that it be founded on linguistic considerations, not extralinguistic, political factors or chance. The main problems are: (1) to choose the dialect or dialects SL is to be based on; (2) to establish norms for SL; (3) to plan the appropriate improvements, i.e. to adapt the language to the new cultural and social needs, making it an efficient instrument for the new society and culture; (4) to create an appropriate orthography. It is obvious that such a planning demands a proper theory. S. Takdir Alisjahbana, professor at the University of Malaya, has spoken of "The failure of modern linguistics in the face of linguistic problems of the twentieth century"28 and has declared that the new nations in Asia and Africa "are interested in the problem of how to change and mould the phonology, the morphology and the vocabulary of their languages, so that these languages not only become an integrating force in society but also adequate vehicle for communication and progress in the modern world. What they want is not descriptive but prescriptive linguistics"29 One can imagine how much harm may be done to the languages and peoples concerned if 28

Inaugural lecture delivered at the University of Malaya in 1964 (Kuala Lumpur, 1965). 29 Lingua 15 (1965), 517.

The Theory of Language Planning

59

these problems are handled by dilettantes or prejudiced scholars. It is to be feared that much harm has already been done to millions of people by incompetent manipulation of their languages. The enormous task of vocabulary planners is illustrated by some statistics. The Indian Board of Scientific Terminology, constituted 1950, was assigned the task of preparing 350,000 new terms in Hindi, of which, by 1963, 290,000 were already delivered. This regards only science, for other fields another committee has the task to coin new terms.30 In Indonesia in 1952-1965, 328,000 new terms were created.»1 TLP is an applied science, i.e. its results are applicable to practical ends. In this respect TLP is comparable to other applied sciences such as pedagogy, agronomy, medicine, technology, etc. TLP is also a normative science as opposed to descriptive or factual science. It deals with values. The proposition of a normative theory implies a following form: "an A which is Β has the quality of C".32 TLP as a normative science implies by definition that one has not to be satisfied with the factual state of things; the task of TLP is to evaluate the facts and to give norms for their improvement in conformity with an ideal.88 A property of normative science is the non-uniqueness of its theory. As the postulates of a normative theory partly depend on subjective attitudes there may be several rival normative theories. Consequently more than one TLP is possible.84 TLP problems are teleological, methodological and tactical corresponding to the ends (principles), means (methods) and tactics (strategy) of LP respectively. It is particularly necessary to stress the difference in principle between the teleology, based on the ideal of language as an efficient instrument, and the tactics of LP, which must take into account the existing language and the social and other conditions of the lan-

guage community. In practice, and often also in theory, it is difficult to separate these two points of view. Language ideal can be expressed by a formula which is valid for all human activities, for instance in economy as well as in art: Ideal language is that which by the minimum of means attains the maximum of results.

In general terms we can define the demands for an ideal language as follows: (1) An ideal language must do all the jobs necessary for its purpose, 30

J. Das Gupta in: Current trends in linguistics 5 (The Hague, 1969), 585 ff. I. Käbel, Zeitschrift für Phonetik, Sprachwissenschaft und Kommunikationsforschung 22 (1969), 603. 8 * Cf. Edmund Husserl, Logische Untersuchungen I (Halle, 19132), 48. 38 Cf. Husserl, Logische Untersuchungen, 26 ff., 40 ff.; F. S. C. Northrop, The logic of sciences and humanities (New York, 1948), 225 ff., 278 ff. 84 One of them is suggested in the present writer's book mentioned in note 24. 31

60

Valter Tauli

the means of communication, i.e. it must convey all necessary information and shades of meaning. (2) It must be economical, i.e. as easy for the speaker and the listener as possible. (3) It must have an aesthetic form. (4) It must be elastic, i.e. easily adaptable to new tasks, i.e. for expression of new meanings. The basic and most difficult problems of LP are: (1) How to reconcile the contradictory demands of clarity and economy, i.e. which is the most efficient relation of clarity, redundancy and economy? (2) Which is the most efficient and economic structure? (3) (In Tactics:) To what extent it is expedient deliberately to change a given language at a given moment, i.e. which is the most expedient relation between tradition and ideal? The evaluation and comparison of linguistic elements as to the principles of clarity, economy and beauty must be based on empirical facts and stated, if possible, in quantitative terms. If no appropriate empirical methods to evaluate certain structural features are available, or if one cannot solve a crucial dilemma between antagonistic principles by the deductive method, the diachronic facts and tendencies of linguistic change must help to solve the problems of linguistic evaluation. Here one must take into account the history, structures, tendencies and the factors behind them of all the existing language types and groups. In a methodical LP the following stages may be discerned. (1) One must try to evaluate the existing competing expression variants in SL, and to decide which of them are to be preferred and favoured. (2) The deficiencies of the language are to be discovered. (3) A plan must be worked out how to eliminate the deficiencies and how to improve the language. An appropriate LP presupposes that it is based on the existing structural type on the respective language and takes into account the potentialities of its spontaneous development, likewise the possibility of directing the language towards a more efficient structural type. LP comprises all spheres of the oral and written forms of the language: phonology, morphology, syntax, lexicology (vocabulary) and orthography. The most extensive field of LP is vocabulary planning and lexicology is the biggest section of TLP, constituting in itself an extensive branch of science. Elaboration of detailed and well-founded principles and methods of vocabulary planning is an urgent task. In addition to the traditional sources and ways of coining new words, new bold methods can be used on a great scale, as arbitrary construction of words by free combination of phonemes, alteration of foreign words (cf. gas v> w> x, y> z- The INL announced that the "historical decision has liberalized the spelling of Pilipino . . . word borrowing from the influencing languages, either native or foreign, will become more comfortable . . I n spite of this optimistic statement, the standardization of Pilipino spelling is far from solved.

Language Policy and Literacy in the Philippines

237

teaching English as a second language was brought to the attention of Filipino educators by Clifford H. Prator in 1950 in his excellent monograph Language Teaching in the Philippines. At the time of its publication, the first large-scale experiment on the use of the native language of the pupils (Hiligaynon) as the medium of instruction was going on in Iloilo (Ramos, Aguilar, and Sibayan 1967, 37-43). As stated earlier the Iloilo experiment became the basis for the policy on the use of the native language as medium of instruction in the first two grades; more importantly, it was to inspire two other large-scale experiments on second-language teaching (Davis 1967). The movement and the development of second-language teaching that followed the publication of Prator's monograph is considered by many as one of the brightest chapters in Philippine education. Largely through Prator's efforts in collaboration with Philippine education officials, a Philippine project on second-language teaching was established at the University of California at Los Angeles with financial support from the Rockefeller Foundation. This led to two important programs, (1) the training and education of Filipino teachers, supervisors, and administrators at UCLA and other American universities and in the Philippines, and (2) the establishment of the Philippine Center for Language Study (PCLS) in 1958. It is the movement on second language teaching which made much use of the findings of structural linguistics that focused attention of educators to the importance of knowing the various first languages of the Filipino child. As stated elsewhere in this paper, the scientific study of language and the application of the knowledge to teaching languages - Pilipino, English, and other Philippine vernaculars - led to be professionalization of language teaching. This has benefited the study and teaching of Pilipino. The PCLS and the Bureau of Public Schools (BPS) produced a series of teachers guides and manuals20 on teaching English as a second language in the elementary school and a series of monographs on linguistics, language teaching, experiments, and policy (Hemphill 1962; Dacanay and Bowen 1963; Sutaria et al. 1965; Davis 1967; and Ramos, Aguilar and Sibayan 1967). The BPS and PCLS also conducted two large-scale experiments, one 20

The British Journal English Language Teaching (1963, 17, 100-101) has high praise for the guides in a review of the first volume, Teachers Guide for English in Grade I. Excerpts of the review: "This book is an impressive example of what co-operation among teachers, administrators, linguists, and teacher-trainers can achieve . . . The work reflects sound linguistic and pedagogic principles; material is analyzed and graded; meticulous detail marks every stage, and every stage is reinforced by background information for the teacher." For a complete list of publications and projects undertaken by the PCLS and UCLA, see J. Donald Bowen, The UCLA-Philippine Project (forthcoming).

238

Bonifacio P. Sibayan

a four-year study in Iloilo (called Iloilo Experiment II) to determine the best time to introduce two second languages (English and Pilipino in non-Tagalog provinces) in the education of the child, and the other a six-year study in Rizal to (1) find out when it is best to introduce reading in a second language, and (2) determine the best grade for introducing English as a medium of instruction (Davis 1967b).21 In addition to the preparation of teachers guides and monographs and the conduct of investigations, the PCLS conducted a number of workshops for Filipino teachers and supervisors. It also assisted in the establishment of a graduate program leading to a masters degree in second-language teaching at the Philippine Normal College, the national college for the education of teachers, supervisors, and administrators. As a whole, the work on the teaching of English as a second language which saw a revolution in methodology and materials has led to many related activities and interests. The movement has produced (and is continuing to produce) a new breed of teachers and supervisors and administrators who are interested in linguistics and in research as instruments in language teaching. LITERACY

One of the important measures of determining the state of progress of a nation is the percentage of literacy. A literate person is defined in the Philippine census as a person who can both read and write a simple message in any language or dialect. This test is asked only of persons ten years old and above so in a way literacy data measure the extent to which one of the fundamental objectives of a country's educational program have been successfully carried out. The literacy rate in the Philippines for the last three decades is shown in Table 2.22 In 1960 21

The Iloilo Experiment II proved that two second languages are best introduced simultaneously right at the start of the child's education with the medium of instruction for the content subjects being his native language. This finding contradicts the average layman's belief that the introduction of two foreign languages simultaneously confuses the child. The Rizal experiment proved that 1) reading in English as a second language is best introduced in the first year of the child's education approximately after a semester's instruction in English, and 2) that of three schemes of introducing English as a medium of instruction 2a) four years of native language instruction and the 5th and 6th years in English, 2b) two years of native language instruction with the 3rd to the 6th years in English (the plan in effect since 1957), and 2c) English instruction from the very beginning without instruction in the native language - of these three schemes, the third or all-English curriculum was the best with pupils achieving the highest in language and content subjects including a test in the native language (Tagalog) which they did not study formally compared to those who were instructed in it. ** The data on population and language in Tables 2, 3, 4, and 5 are from the 1960 census.

239

Language Policy and Literacy in the Philippines

more than two-thirds of the total literate persons were in the age group 10 to 34 years for both sexes. The literacy rate was lowest for persons 65 years and over (31.2%) and highest for persons 15 to 19 years (83.3%). TABLE 2

Literacy rate in three decades Year 1939 1948 1960

Men 54.3% 62.8 % 73.6%

Women 43.2% 56.9% 70.6%

Total 48.8% 59.8% 72.0 %

The percentage of persons attending schools for the ages 6 to 19 years was highest immediately after the second world war. The highest percentage of persons who attended school fell on age 11 with 73.0%; the lowest on 30 years and over with 1.3%. A gradual but steady decrease followed after age eleven. The percentage of persons ages 6 to 19 years attending school for the last three decades are shown in Table 3. An index to determine the portion of population which has attained a level of formal education beyond mere literacy is the highest grade completed. In 1948 the median grade completed for both sexes was 4.2 and in 1960 it was 5.1. TABLE 3

Percentage of persons ages 6-19 years attending school Year 1939 1948 1960

% Attending Schools 32.3% 55.2% 42.7%

Male 11.7 12.6 11.9

Median Age Female 11.1 12.4 11.7

Both Sexes 11.4 12.5 11.8

SPEAKERS OF VARIOUS LANGUAGES

While it is true that there are more than eighty languages and dialects in the Philippines (some estimates go as high as 150), 86.2% of the population report one of the eight major languages23 as their mother 28

A Philippine major language is one spoken by at least half a million speakers (Commonwealth of the Philippines 1936; Bureau of the Census and Statistics 1960, xxi-xxiii). Cf. the working definition of a major language used in the Survey of Second-Language Teaching to investigate the nature and extent of the problem of second-language learning as a factor in national development in countries of Asia, Africa, and Latin America as "a language spoken by at least ten million people or one tenth of the population" (Ferguson 1962).

240

Bonifacio P. Sibayan

tongue, leaving only 13.8% speaking the minor languages. The alien population of 219,686, which is .8% of the population, is included in the 13.8% figure. Table 4 shows the number and percentage of speakers of the total population who speak the eight major languages. TABLE 4

Number and percentage of Filipinos whose mother tongue are the eight major languages (1960 Census) Mother Tongue Cebuano Tagalog Ilocano Panay-Hiligaynon Bikol Waray Pampango Pangasinan Total

No. of mother tongue speakers 6,529,882 5,694,072 3,158,560 2,817,314 2,108,837 1,488,668 875,531 666,003 23,338,867

Per cent of total population 24.1 21.0 11.7 10.4 7.8 5.5 3.2 2.5 86.2

The percentage of people who can speak (the test for ability to speak is the ability to carry on a simple conversation) Tagalog and English increased considerably from 1939 to 1960. While only 24.1% of the population report Tagalog as their mother tongue, 44.4% of the total population are able to speak it. It is probable that a great number of the non-Tagalog speakers of Tagalog acquired their speaking knowledge of the language in the schools, while many others may have acquired theirs with the aid of the movies, radio, and television and in contacts with Tagalog-speaking Filipinos in and around Manila. In 1939, the year before Tagalog was introduced as a subject in the schools (the language was first introduced as a subject in secondary and normal schools for a start in 1940), only 25.4% of the population could speak it. The percentage has1 almost doubled in two decades. The percentage of persons who could speak the three official languages in 1939, 1948, and 1960 are shown in Table 5. TABLE 5

Percentage of population who can speak the three official languages Year 1939 1948 1960

Pilipino a 23.4 37.1 44.4

English 26.6 37.2 39.5

a Pilipino became an official language only on July 4, 1946.

Spanish 2.6 1.8 2.1

Language Policy and Literacy in the Philippines

241

MASS COMMUNICATION MEDIA

Perhaps two of the most important means of directing or influencing language change and use, exceeded only by the schools and the newspapers, are radio and television. As of June 30, 1971 there were 315 radio stations operating in the country. Thirty-four more had approved construction permits but were not yet in operation. Of these 29 are in the Manila area and the rest scattered throughout the country. Most of these radio stations are commercial and privately owned but a number are operated and owned by the Philippine government, by colleges and universities, and by the United States government.24 Broadcasts are mostly in English and Tagalog, with provincial stations using the local or trade language. The most frequently used languages after English and Tagalog are Cebuano, Ilocano, Bikol, Hiligaynon, Pangasinan, and Pampango. The Philippine Broadcasting System, which is government-owned, uses only English and Pilipino. The Department of Education's Bureau of Public Schools uses commercial radio stations as outlets for its series of educational broadcasts in Pilipino and English as a second language. Perhaps even more important in influencing language use than radio is television, both commercial and educational television (ETV). The development of ETV had been aided financially by the Ford Foundation with a grant to the Ateneo de Manila University to develop ETV materials in science, physics, chemistry, Pilipino, and English. The lessons are beamed to a number of schools in the Manila area. On June 30,1971 there were twelve TV channels operating twenty-five TV stations. Seven of these stations are in the Manila area and the rest scattered all over the country. The languages of broadcast in the Manila area are English and Pilipino (Tagalog) while those in the provinces are English, the local language, and Pilipino. One of the most interesting phenomena in the language of broadcasting is the use of a mixture of English and Pilipino especially in advertisements. The mixture has been facetiously referred to as Engalog or Taglish.

NEWSPAPERS

The most important means of mass-communication media are newspapers and periodicals. In 1965 there were 1,120 periodicals published in 18 languages with a total circulation of 7,336,572. The greatest 14

Data from "List of TV and Standard Broadcast Radio Stations as of June 30, 1971" by the Radio Control Board, Department of Public Works and Communications, Republic of the Philippines, Quezon City.

242

Bonifacio P. Sibayan

number of publications were in English of which there were 611 wholly devoted to that language with a total circulation of 3,552,938. In addition there were those published bilingually or trilingually (six were in four languages) with English as one of the languages in 341 publications. There were 202 published bilingually in English and Tagalog with a total circulation of 824,480. There were 101 published exclusively in Tagalog, with a circulation of 2,117,346. Ten were published in Spanish with a circulation of 46,066, and 97 others which used some Spanish. The data includes school newspapers and periodicals which may account for the large number of publications published partly in Tagalog, and especially Spanish, The number and influence of the Chinese population of the Philippines may be gauged by the fact that ten newspapers were published in Chinese with a circulation of 81,298 and seven others in Chinese and English with a circulation of 44,500. The number of newspapers and periodicals entirely and partly devoted to 18 languages are summarized in Table 6.25 Of the eight major TABLE 6

Breakdown of newspapers and periodicals by language used Language English Pilipino (Tagalog) Spanish Cebuano Ilocano Visayan a Chinese Bikol Hiligaynon Pampango Uongo Pangasinan Panayan b Leytefio (Waray) Ibanag Igorot (Sagada) Itawis Latin

Number of publications entirely in partly in 611 341 101 293 10 97 8 20 14 13 2 16 10 7 1 3 1 3 2 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Note: It is very likely that because of the difficulty of reporting names of languages » is Cebuano b is Hiligaynon 25

Data on newspapers furnished by the General Services Division, Bureau of Census and Statistics, Manila.

Language Policy and Literacy in the Philippines

243

languages, the number of periodicals and circulation show that Pilipino is by far the most widely used. It is likely that its selection as the national language has had important effects on the number of newspapers and periodicals. Also of interest is the fact that sixty-six per cent (749 out of 1,120) of the newspapers and periodicals were printed in and around Manila. The rest were scattered all over the country. Of the 56 provinces there were eleven without any newspapers published within their territories. However, most of these are either adjacent to or contain the cities where periodicals are published. A good example of a province where no newspapers or periodicals are published is the island province of Cebu, whereas 21 periodicals are published in Cebu City.

A NOTE ON THE CHINESE

While the Chinese were in the Philippines ahead of the Spaniards and there are a large number of Chinese (the exact number has never been ascertained, but the consensus is that there are more than the 1960 census report of 122,906), there is no organized effort to teach the Chinese language to Filipinos. The Chinese, however, learn the language of the locality where they live. In fact a Chinese who cannot speak the local language is often suspect: people think he got into the country illegally. Many have married Filipino women (Filipino men marrying Chinese women are very rare) and have become Filipino citizens. Some of the most influential and most distinguished Filipinos are of Chinese ancestry including the national hero, Jose P. Rizal. The Chinese in the Philippines have managed to maintain their culture and their language (as they have in many parts of the world including the United States) by (1) sending their children to Chinese schools, (2) living in 'Chinatowns', and (3) supporting their own means of masscommunication media which includes newspapers and the radio. In connection with Chinese schools, the Bureau of Private Schools of the Department of Education, which is in charge of the supervision of all schools supported by private organizations or individuals, has had difficulty in supervising these schools because of the lack of supervisors who could speak and write Chinese.

ENROLLMENT IN SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES

This report on language policy, language planning and literacy would be incomplete without some data on the number of pupils and students

244

Bonifacio P. Sibayan

in the schools. The Constitution of the Philippines requires that 'the government shall establish and maintain a complete and adequate system of public education, and shall provide at least free public primary instruction, and citizenship training to adult citizens" (Republic of the Philippines 1967a:34). Because of this requirement on free public primary education, more than 90% of those enrolled in the public schools supported by the government are enrolled in the elementary schools. The national government spends more than a third of its entire annual budget for education, most going to public education. In the school year 1964-65, there were 5,701,029 students enrolled at all levels of public school education (kindergarten, elementary, secondary, college, and university) and 1,379,868 enrolled in private schools (all levels) for a total of 7,080,897. This is approximately more than 20% of the estimated total population of 32 million in 1965. In the same school year there were 178,702 teachers and supervisors in the public school system. Data available for 1965-1966 show that there were 49,529 teachers and supervisors in the private school system. The comparative enrollment in public and private schools, colleges, and universities during the 1964-1965 school year is shown on Table 7. It is interesting to note that higher education is practically in the hands of people in the private school system. Of the 60,292 enrolled in public colleges and universities, 60,747 were enrolled in state colleges and universities which are not under the Bureau of Public Schools. The University of the Philippines, the country's highest institution of learning, had an enrollment of 20,779, a third of the enrollment in state colleges and universities. TABLE 7

Enrollment in public and private schools, colleges, and universities, school year 1964-65 Level Kindergarten Elementary Secondary College and University Special Vocational Totals Grand Total

Public 466 5,327,704 303,567 60,292

Private 29,602 247,567 643,061 390,454 69,184 1,379,868

5,701,029

Proportion 1:64

22: 1 1: 2 1: 6 4: 1

7,080,897

LANGUAGE FUNCTIONS IN PHILIPPINE MULTILINGUALISM

Linguistic diversity is (and will continue to be) the rule in the Philip-

Language Policy and Literacy in the Philippines

245

pines, and Filipinos accept it as a way of life. Even with the program of building Pilipino as the national language, the country is committed to multilingualism. The Philippines is one of those countries where the policy is "the recognition and preservation of important languages within the national scene, supplemented by universal use of one or more languages to serve for official purposes and for communication across language boundaries" (Stewart 1962:15). Tagalog (Pilipino) is standard in the sense that it has a formalized grammar and lexicon. It is also marked as a group language because those who speak it as their native language identify themselves as Tagalogs. Spanish is also marked as a group language because there is a small but influential group, most of whom live in the Manila area, which identifies itself with the language. Tagalog and English are classified or marked literary because the development of literature in these languages is more or less officially encouraged. Spanish may also be considered as occupying a literary function because various literary pieces in Spanish are officially required for study in college. The literature in the major vernaculars is generally read and cited only by group members and therefore has limited importance. Arabic is taught under private auspices and is used in the Muslim areas of the Philippines mainly for reading the Koran. The arabic script is taught to children in religious schools. It is not, however, a part of the curriculum of the government supported public schools. Chinese is used in the Chinese schools maintained by Chinese nationals which are under the supervision of the Bureau of Private Schools. There are two languages of wider communication across local language boundaries for purposes of trade and commerce. These are Cebuano in the Visayan islands and in Mindanao and Ilocano in Northern Luzon. The various functions or domains of the languages in use in the Philippines are summarized in Table 8.

LANGUAGE AND THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION

Since 1967 when the original essay was written, a number of important studies2® have been undertaken and a national event affecting the 2e

The studies I refer to are the Survey on Language use and Attitudes Towards Language which is partly reported by Sibayan in Rubin and Jernudd (ed.) (1971, 123-140). The study is summarized in a report made at the conference on Sociolinguistically oriented language surveys held in Glen Cove, New York, in September 1971 under the auspices of the Center for Applied Linguistics (Sibayan

246

Bonifacio P. Sibayan TABLE 8

Functions or domains of various languages in the Philippines 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11.

Language Pilipino (Tagalog) English Spanish Cebuano, Ilocano Hiligaynon, Waray, Bikol, Pampango, Pangasinan Tausog, Magindanaw, Samal, Ibanag Other Philippine Languages Chinese Latin French, German Arabic

Function S - ο - η - e(i,s) - 1 - g S - ο - e(m,s) - 1 - 1 S - o -e(s)-1 - g V - w - e(i) - g V - e(i) - 1 - g V-e(i)-g V-g S -e -g C-r S - f -e(s) S -r

Legend: S - Standard; V - Vernacular; C - Classical ο - official language η - national language 1 -literary function e -educational (m) medium of instruction for content subjects (i) medium of instruction in the initial or first two grades of schooling (s) language studied as a subject r -mainly for religious purposes t -language used for technical and scientific purposes g -language used mainly by the group and native speakers identify themselves with the language f -foreign language requirement w-language used for wider communication (trade language)

problem of language is taking place at this writing (April 1972). The event I refer to is the Constitutional Convention (ConCon) an assembly 1971). (For detailed reports on the study see Otanes and Sibayan 1969 and Sibayan, Otanes, Baylon, and Castillo forthcoming.) The other study is that conducted by the Presidential Commission to Survey Philippine Education which made a number of recommendations on language. The study came out with the observation that the "persistent controversy on the language of instruction is well known", and then skirted the issue by stating that "a decision regarding the medium of instruction will be taken on political rather than on purely educational grounds." (Republic of the Philippines 1970,119). It is no secret that the Commission thought it the better part of discretion to have the Constitutional Convention decide the thorny matter. Many other groups, including the Board of National Education which is the policy-determining body of the Republic on educational matters, suspended decision on the use of Pilipino as a language of instruction in the schools because of the expectation that the Constitutional Convention was going to say something on language and that any definite action by the Board or the Department of Education should depend on the provision of the new Constitution.

Language Policy and Literacy in the Philippines

247

of 320 delegates from all over the Philippines elected by the people to rewrite the Constitution of the Republic which was written in 1934. The ConCon started working in June 1971 and is due to complete its work at the end of December 1972. No event in Philippine history has brought to a sharper focus the problems and difficulties, the emotional ties involved with language among Filipinos than the ConCon. When the ConCon started work in June 1971, it promptly got snagged on the subject of what language to use in its deliberations and what language the Constitution was to be written in. The difficulties of the Convention on the subject of language was sparked by the over-eager advocates of Pilipino (Tagalog) who proceeded to irritate the non-native speakers of Tagalog (who composed the majority) with their insisting on speaking in Pilipino and debating in Pilipino at the start of the convention. This did not set well with the majority who proceeded to vote that English be the language of debate and deliberations and to have the new constitution written officially in English with translations into Spanish, Arabic, and all Philippine languages spoken by more than 50,000 people. Accusations of colonial mentality and lack of patriotism and nationalism were thrown by Pilipino partisans and the advocates of English answered by saying it is not only Tagalogs or Tagalog advocates who are patriotic and nationalistic. The Committee on National Language of the ConCon conducted hearings on what the basis of the national language should be. The hearings took several weeks during which linguists, educators, private individuals interested in the language problem, advocates of Tagalog as the basis of the national language, persons who think the national language should be based on all Philippine languages testified. The draft of the provisions of the Constitution which was approved on third reading on March 23, 1972 did not recognize the existence of Pilipino as a national language. The Manila Times, the Philippines' largest newspaper, headlined "Constitutional Convention Abolishes Pilipino Language." While the final draft of the Constitution still has to be written and to be ratified in a plebiscite by the people sometime in 1973, the deliberations and actions of the members of the ConCon on language are significant and may be an index of the difficulties faced by the people on language. It shows that language is associated with much that is ethnic or regional in character. It also shows that it is difficult even for men who are educated and are supposed to be the leaders of the country to shed their regional attachments and language loyalties and get into the mainstream of Philippine life through a national language based on one of the Philippine languages. One inescapable conclusion is that Pilipino

248

Bonifacio P. Sibayan

is not yet a mark of identity with the majority of Filipinos. Many Filipinos think that the action of the majority (the vote was 165 to 101 on the resolution which did not recognize the existence of a national language), was more an expression of their resentment against the Tagalog partisans than anything else. I shall attempt to analyze and interpret these provisions below in terms of language planning processes. The provision that the consitution is to be promulgated in English seems to be a choice dictated by practical reasons rather than a love for English. I do not think it stems from colonial mentality either as some nationalist critics say. It is the language that most of the delegates have good command of for debate and writing because it is the language they were educated in. The provision for translations in various Philippine languages with speakers of over fifty thousand people which is presumably intended to make all the people understand the Constitution may also be interpreted as one more of those yieldings to the tug of ethnic upbringing brought about by the native language. The translation into Spanish is somewhat more difficult to explain but it shows that the influence of the Spanish language in the Philippines remains. It seems, however, that the influence of those who speak Spanish on the affairs of the nation such as those on the economic, social, legal, and other fields is very strong. The use of Arabic is very significant because this is the first 'official' recognition of the language. This is a recognition of the growing influence of the Muslims in the Philippines who use Arabic for religious purposes. Arabic is taught in religious schools in the Muslim areas which are mainly in the southern island of Mindanao and Sulu. The use of English, Spanish, and Arabic and the disregard for Pilipino has come under severe attack by many important segments in the community but most specially by the intense nationalists. One of the most significant provisions of the proposed article, however, is that portion which states "As soon as a common Filipino national language is adequately developed as herein provided, this Constitution shall also be promulgated in such language." This simply means that the majority of the delegates do not recognize the existence of Pilipino, the national language. This has very very serious implications. I shall attempt to indicate these below. It shows that the great majority of the Filipinos (three out of five is the proportion of those who voted) still have to be won over to the development of Pilipino. If the provision is carried through in the new constitution, the work during the last four decades will practically go to naught. But more staggering is the thought of starting a national language all over again, a task that is almost impossible.

Language Policy and Literacy in the Philippines

249

An interesting provision is Section 2 which provides that "A common national language to be known as Filipino shall be evolved, developed and adopted based on existing native languages and dialects without precluding the assimilation of words from foreign languages." I do not know how this is to be interpreted and carried out but it seems it is the idea of the members of the ConCon that a national language is to be developed by mixing, 'amalgamating', the various Philippine languages. The delegates of the convention even spell out how the language is to be developed by specifying the establishment of an Academy of National Language with the power and duty to implement the provisions of the constitution and of all laws relative to the development of the national language. It is quite clear that the intention of the ConCon in specifying this provision is to see to it that the 'language interests' of the people speaking the various languages are protected. The member representatives of the languages would see to it that in the formation of the new national language the languages represented will get into the new language. The qualifications of the members of the academy are specified in detail: at least thirty years old, of good moral character, and must have a thorough knowledge of the vernacular he represents (I am afraid that not too many would qualify on this point) and he must be able to speak at least one major dialect aside from his native tongue. This provision on being able to speak a major dialect is not difficult to satisfy inasmuch as practically all Filipinos are bilingual in many Philippine languages with the second language being one of the major languages, and most educated Filipinos would be speaking Tagalog. Preference shall be given to citizens who have distinguished themselves in the field of letters and linguistics. Of the nine members of the present Institute of National Language, only four of the members have training in letters and linguistics with one or two being distinguished nationally and one internationally. The other five are distinguished in fields other than letters and linguistics. These five would be disqualified from membership in the new Academy. The members are to serve for fifteen years and the chairman who is to be elected by the group shall serve for five years. The hand of politics seems to be ever present even in matters of language. The members of the Academy shall be appointed by the President of the Philippines and their appointments shall be confirmed by the Commission on Appointments, the body composed of congressmen and senators who pass on all presidential appointees. It is possible that some distinguished scholar in letters and linguistics who does not have the influence will not receive the backing of the body. The definition of official language is implied rather than specified. "Pending the adoption of the common national language, English and

250

Bonifacio P. Sibayan

Spanish shall be official languages." What is most striking is that the constitution would recognize all spoken languages as official "in the regions" where the languages are spoken. The proposed constitution would recognize a Manila lingua franca as official language in the Greater Manila area and Arabic in the Muslim areas. The reader familiar with the difficulty of determining the boundaries of languages can easily see how chaotic the situation would be. In a province like Tarlac in Central Luzon where four languages - Tagalog, Pampango, Ilocano, and Pangasinan - are spoken by the people, all the languages would be official. If one of the inherent 'rights' of an official language is its use in the schools, which of the four 'official languages' shall be used in the education of the child? The medium of instruction in the first two grades shall be the vernacular of the region which shall be decided by the Ministry or Commission on Education, together with English. What 'together with English' means is not clear. In the present system, English is taught as a subject in the first two grades of school. If it is to be used as a medium of instruction in addition to the vernacular, does the ConCon envision bilingual teaching? "To hasten the development of Filipino, it shall, as soon as practicable and upon recommendation of the Academy, be taught in all levels of education up to the second year college and be used as additional medium of instruction in the primary grades." How shall the future language be evaluated to determine when it is practicable to teach it? The proposed article practically summarizes the sentiments of the majority of the ConCon delegates on Pilipino. It shows that the ConCon does not recognize the existence of Pilipino. Even the spelling of the new national language to be developed begins with an / rather than p. The conflicting emotions that went into the writing of the provisions on language, with the majority of the ConCon delegates practically telling the Pilipino (Tagalog) partisans that Pilipino does not exist and that Tagalog is being imposed on the rest of the Filipinos is very evident. The recognition of a Manila lingua franca as official language in the Greater Manila area is an implied admission that there is a variety of Tagalog that is different from the various Tagalog dialects composing the Tagalog language. This variety may be called Pilipino. In assessing the thoughts and sentiments expressed by the ConCon delegates in terms of the world wide search for identity by peoples of so-called developing or emerging countries of which the Philippines is one, especially those who have in the past been under colonial rule, it is rather difficult to understand their rejection of Pilipino in favor of two (or three) foreign languages. It is clear that while they identify them-

Language Policy and. Literacy in the Philippines

251

selves with their ethnic languages, languages they have intimate ties with, they have not yet identified themselves with a language that is based on a 'rival' Philippine language. It is not unfair to say that it is this jealousy of the 'advantages' that they feel are given to Tagalog speakers that made them reject the language. The search for identity with symbols like language carries with it so many emotional involvements that even the educated human mind cannot seem to transcend ethnic or parochial attachments. Whereas the Filipino has accepted the flag and the national anthem as national symbols, he has not done so with Pilipino. An explanation for this is that the various Filipinos speaking various Philippine languages did not have their own flags nor their own anthems to sing, but they have their own languages that deeply penetrate their daily lives. Therein lies the difference. There is a prevailing opinion shared by many responsible persons in the community that had the Tagalog partisans been more discreet in proposing Pilipino or Tagalog as language for debate and for writing the constitution, had they been more 'humble', giving way to nonTagalog speakers to suggest that Pilipino be recognized, the climate under which the provisions on language especially the treatment that Pilipino based on Tagalog got should have been more favorable to Pilipino. If the provisions on language as written finally get ratified by the people, the task of developing a national language will become more difficult in the future. Philippine Normal College, Manila and University of California, Los Angeles.

REFERENCES Agbayani, Aguedo F. 1967 "Development and Evolution of the National Language" (privileged speech, House of Representatives, March 6, 1967) (Manila: The Manila Times, March 10, 1967). Aspillera, Paraluman S. 1967 "Your Tagalog Corner" (Manila: The Manila Times, March 5, 1967). Atherton, William 1964 A Bibliography of the Publications of the Summer Institute of Linguistics, Philippine branch (Nasuli, Malaybalay, Bukidnon, Philippines: Summer Institute of Linguistics). Bright, William (ed.) 1966 Sociolinguistics (The Hague: Mouton).

252

Bonifacio P. Sibayan

Bureau of Census and Statistics n.d. Census of the Philippines 1960: Population and Housing, vol. 2, Summary Report (Manila: Bureau of Printing). Bureau of Education 1939 Use of the Dialect as an Auxiliary Medium of Instruction in Primary Grades, Circular No. 71, series 1939 (Manila: Bureau of Public Schools). Bureau of Printing 1963 Political Constitution of the First Republic of the Philippines (Manila: Author). Bureau of Private Schools 1966 1965-1966 Private Schools Statistical Bulletin (Manila: Author). Bureau of Public Schools 1965 1965 Statistical Bulletin (Manila: Author). Bureau of Public Schools and Philippine Center for Language Study 1960-1965 English in grades 1 to 6, 11 vols. (Manila: Author). Commonwealth of the Philippines 1936 An Act to Establish a National Language Institute and Define its Powers and Duties, Commonwealth Act 184 (Manila: Bureau of Printing). 1938 An Act to Amend Commonwealth Act Numbered One Hundred and Eighty-four Entitled 'An Act to Establish a National Language Institute and Define its Powers and Duties', Commonwealth Act 333 (Manila: Bureau of Printing). 1940 An Act Making the Filipino National Language an Official Language from the Fourth of July, Nineteen Hundred and Forty-six, Commonwealth Act 570 (Manila: Bureau of Printing). Dacanay, Fe. R. and J. Donald Bowen (ed.) 1963 Techniques and Procedures in Second Language Teaching (Quezon City, Philippines: Phoenix). Davis, Frederick 1967a "The Language Problem in Philippine Education", Philippine Journal of Education 45, 497-498, 546-547. 1967b Philippine Language-teaching Experiments (Quezon City, Philippines: Alemars-Phoenix). Emerson, Rupert 1962 From Empire to Nation (Cambridge: Harvard University Press). Ferguson, Charles A. 1962 "The Language Factor in National Development", in: Study of the Role of Second Languages in Asia, Africa, and Latin America, Frank A. Rice (ed.): 8-14 (Washington, D. C.: Center for Applied Linguistics). 1966 "National sociolinguistic profile formulas", in: Sociolinguistics, William Bright (ed.): 309-324 (The Hague: Mouton). Ferguson, Charles A. and John J. Gumperz (eds.) 1960 "Linguistic Diversity in Southeast Asia: Studies in Regional, Social, and Functional Variation", UAL 26 (III). Fishman, Joshua A. et al. (eds.) 1966 Language Loyalty in the United States (The Hague: Mouton). Haugen, Einar 1965a "Bilingualism as a Goal in Foreign Language Teaching", in: On Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages I, Virginia French Allen (ed.): 84-88 (Champaign, 111.: National Council of Teachers of English). 1965b "Construction and Reconstruction in Language Planning: Ivar Aasen's Grammar", Word 21, 188-207.

Language Policy and Literacy in the Philippines

253

1966a Language Conflict and Language Planning (Cambridge: Harvard University Press). 1966b "Linguistics and Language Planning", in: Sociolinguistics, William Bright (ed.): 50-71 (The Hague: Mouton). 1967 "Language Planning, Theory and Practice", Paper presented before the section on Sociolinguistics, 10th International Congress of Linguists, Bucarest, Rumania, August 27-September 2, 1967. Hemphill, Roderick J. 1962 Background Readings in Language Teaching (PCLS monograph No 1) (Quezon City, Philippines: Phoenix). Jacobs, Robert (ed.) 1966 English Language Teaching in Nigeria (Lagos, Nigeria: Ministry of Education). Leach, Edmund R. 1954 Political Systems of Highland Burma, reprinted 1964 (Boston: Beacon Press). Le Page, R. B. 1964 The National Language Question (London: Oxford University Press). Mackey, W. F. 1967 Bilingualism as a World Problem (Montreal: Harvest House). Macnamara, John 1967 "Bilingualism in the Modern World", in: Problems of Bilingualism, John Macnamara (ed.), Journal of Social Issues 33. Monroe, Paul (chairman) 1925 A Survey of the Educational System of the Philippine Islands (Manila: Bureau of Printing). Otanes, Fe Τ. and Bonifacio P. Sibayan 1969 Language Policy Survey of the Philippines, Initial Report (Manila: Philippine Normal College language Study Center). Prator, Clifford H. 1950 Language Teaching in the Philippines (Manila: United States Educational Foundation). Quezon, Manuel L. 1936 Message on Creation of an Institute of National Language, Bulletin No 14, series 1955 (Manila: Bureau of Public Schools). 1937 Proclaiming the National Language of the Philippines Based on the Tagalog Language, Executive Order No 136, Bulletin No 14, series 1955 (Manila: Bureau of Public Schools). 1940 Authorizing the Printing of the Dictionary and Grammar of the National Language, and Fixing the Day from which Said Language Shall be Used and Taught in the Public and Private Schools of the Philippines, Executive Order No 263, Bulletin No 14, series 1955 (Manila: Bureau of Public Schools). Ramos, Maximo, Jose V. Aguilar and Bonifacio P. Sibayan 1967 The Determination and Implementation of Language Policy (= PCLS monograph 2) (Quezon City, Philippines: Alemars-Phoenix). Ray, Punyo Sloka 1963 Language Standardization (The Hague: Mouton). Republic of the Philippines 1948 An Act Including the Teaching of Spanish in High Schools of the Philippines, Republic Act 343 (Manila: Bureau of Printing). 1952 An Act Declaring Obligatory the Teaching of Spanish in All Courses of Public and Private Universities and Colleges in the Philippines, Republic

254

Bonifacio P.

Sibayan

Act 709 (Manila: Bureau of Printing). 1957 An Act Amending Section One of Republic Act Numbered Seven Hundred Nine, Entitled 'An Act Declaring Obligatory the Teaching of Spanish in all Courses of Public and Private Universities and Colleges in the Philippines', Republic Act 1881 (Manila: Bureau of Printing). 1967a Constitution of the Philippines (Manila: Bureau of Printing). 1967b An Act to Revise the Laws on Compulsory Teaching of Spanish, Repealing Republic Act Numbered Seven hundred nine, as Amended by Republic Act Numbered Eighteen hundred eighty-one, and for Other Purposes, Republic Act 5182 (Manila: Bureau of Printing). 1970 Education for National Development. New Patterns, New Directions (Makati, Philippines: Presidential Commission to Survey Philippine Education. The Commission). Rice, Frank A. (ed.) 1962 Study of the Role of Second Languages in Asia, Africa, and Latin America (Washington, D.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics). Romulo, Carlos P. 1967 "Pilipino Must Borrow from Other Languages for Vital Development", The Manila Times, April 10, 1967 (Manila). Rubin, Joan and Björn H. Jernudd (eds.) 1971 Can Language Be Planned? (Honolulu: The University of Hawaii Press). Sibayan, Bonifacio P. 1966a "Should We Teach Filipinos to Speak Like Americans?", Philippine Journal of Education 44, 736-738, 789-790. 1966b "Some Problems of Bilingual Education in the Philippines", Philippine Journal of Education 45, 18-20, 70-71. 1971a "Language-planning Processes and the Language-policy Survey in the Phillipines", in: Rubin and Jernudd (1971), 123-140. 1971b "Survey of Language Use and Attitudes towards Language in the Philippines", paper read at the Conference on Socio-linguistically oriented Language Surveys, Harrison House, Glen Cove, New York, September 1971. Stewart, William A. 1962 "An Outline of Linguistic Typology for Describing Multilingualism", in: Study of the Role of Second Languages in Asia, Africa, and Latin America, Frank A. Rice (ed.): 15-25 (Washington, D.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics). Summer Institute of Linguistics 1966 A Supplement to the March 31,1964 Bibliography of the Summer Institute of Linguistics, Philippine branch (Nasuli, Bukidnon, Philippines: Author). 1967 Philippine Orthographies (a summary of the deviations from Pilipino in 23 languages) (Nasuli, Bukidnon, Philippines: Author). Sutaria, Minda Cascolan and J. Donald Bowen (ed.) 1965 Basic Readers for English teaching (= PCLS monograph 4) Quezon City, Philippines: Phoenix). Symposium on multilingualism, Brazzaville 1962 CSA Publication 87 (London: CSA Publications Bureau). Tolentino, Arturo M. 1950 The Government of the Philippines (Manila: R.P. Garcia Publishing Co). UNESCO 1953 The Use of Vernacular Languages in Education (= Monographs on Fundamental education YHI) (Paris: UNESCO). War Department, Bureau of Insular Affairs 1902 Manual of information relative to the Philippine Civil Service (Washington, D.C.: Author).

HENRI LAVONDfcS

LANGUAGE POLICY, LANGUAGE ENGINEERING AND LITERACY IN FRENCH POLYNESIA 1

I. DEMOGRAPHIC AND SOCIAL FRAMEWORK

French Polynesia (the appellation which replaced 'Etablissements Fran?ais d'Oceanie' in 1957) consists of five island groups: the Society Islands (divided into the Windward and Leeward Islands), the Australs, The Tuamotus, the Gambiers, and the Marquesas, which correspond noticeably to as many great cultural and dialectal divisions of the preEuropean era. Although the total land area measures no more than 4,000 square kilometers (1,000 for Tahiti alone), it is dispersed over a stretch of ocean comparable in size to Europe. The present (1968) population must be about 93,000 (extrapolating from the 1962 census figure of 84,500). More than one-third dwell in Papeete and its 'suburbs', half live on Tahiti, and four-fifths in the Society Islands alone (Insee: 17-31). The demographic imbalance between the Societies, Tahiti in particular, and the other four archipelagos, which house only one-fifth of the territory's population, is becoming more accentuated as a result of the heavy flow of migration to Tahiti from the other islands. This is not the least important factor in the ascendancy of the Tahitian dialect over the other Polynesian dialects. Four large ethnic groups make up the territory's population: Polynesian stock, European stock (popa'a), Chinese stock (tinito), and Revised from Current Trends in Linguistics 8 (2) (1971): 1110-1128. Reprinted with permission. 1 I wish to express my thanks to Inspector Paul Krault, Superintendent of Education, as well as to M. A. Grand, Inspecteur d'Administration, for their assistance in the preparation of this article.

256

Henri Lavondis

'mixed' (half-breed -'demi'). Race is not the criterion by which an individual recognizes himself or is recognized by others as belonging to one of the four categories. Racial mixtures exist in all four, especially the Polynesian, where no one can be counted definitely as pureblooded. A person who considers himself Polynesian may very well be much more Caucasian in appearance than one who calls himself 'demi'. The ethnic categories are distinguished by a complex set of sociological criteria: manner of living, level on the social and professional scale, economic behavior, choice of language, etc. The 'demi' category is particularly difficult to define (Finney 1964: 46-48; Kay 1963: 329330; Moench 1963: 4-6; Panhoff 1964: 14-15, 126-133). Briefly, this category includes descendants of mixed European and Polynesian stock who, more than those of mixed blood classified as Polynesians, have chosen to follow Western ways and have succeeded in doing so. It should also be noted that an individual may choose to be connected sometimes to the Polynesian and sometimes to the 'demi' category, depending on where and with whom he is; he may be a Polynesian in his home village and a 'demi' in Papeete. This indicates how much this is a matter of opinion, and how cautiously official census figures should be viewed. The 1962 census gave the following ethnic composition (Insee: 34-35): Polynesian 'Demi' Chinese and part-Chinese European

62,747 8,492 9,577 2,696

II. LINGUISTIC SITUATION

Consequently, the inhabitants of French Polynesia speak languages from three sources: Europe, Asia, and Oceania. The European languages are French and English. English, although it does not of course occupy a position comparable to that of French, is better known in Polynesia than in the other overseas French territories. One cannot but be impressed by the number of persons among the territory's native population, especially the 'demi', who have a good knowledge of English. High school English teachers marvel at the facility with which the native students learn English, a facility which, they opine, exceeds that of the French-born pupils, and which they attribute to some rather dubious phonetic similarities between English and Tahitian. As a matter of fact, English owes its position to special historical and geographical conditions. Tahiti did not become a French protectorate

Language Policy and Literacy in French, Polynesia

257

until 1842. From 1796 to 1862, when the London Missionary Society was active in Tahiti, English exerted an almost exclusive influence, and therefore was still important at the beginning of the protectorate. Tahitian, and even the local spoken French, bear very evident marks of this period of English influence, which left distinctive traces in vocabulary (O'Reilly 1962: 69-81). Even today, the geographical position of Tahiti, whose nearest neighbors are English-speaking countries (Hawaii, Australia, New Zealand, the United States), the particularly strong trade and tourist relations with those countries, and American-Tahitian intermarriages are sufficient to maintain English in a prominent position. An idea of the importance of the Anglo-Saxon influence in the territory may be gained from the fact that it is quite the thing for the 'demi' middle class to do their shopping in Honolulu and to have medical treatment in Hawaii or on the U.S. mainland; that among the Tahitian poor, English language units of measure (foot, inch, gallon) are the only ones used; and that the only family reading is that on the labels of canned goods coming mostly from English speaking sources. It is difficult to give an estimate of the number of people who have some knowledge of English. Let us merely point out, with reservations to which we shall refer later, that in the 1962 census, 3.9% of the population over fifteen years of age (or a little under 2,000 persons) indicated a language other than French, Tahitian, or Chinese under the heading of languages they could read and write. In most cases, this other language is very probably English. Chinese is spoken in Tahiti as a result of immigration organized originally to supply manpower for the plantations. The first wave arrived in 1865-1866. A second wave, much larger and more spontaneous than the first, moved into the territory over a period of several years, from 1909 to 1928 (Moench 1963: 17-26). The Chinese of Tahiti came from Kwangtung Province. "At least 80% - and possibly as high as 90% - of Chinese in the Society Islands speak Hakka, originally a northern China language closely related to Mandarin... The remainder of the Chinese population are Cantonese, or as they call themselves, 'Punti' which means 'native'. The Punti minority may be divided into speakers of several fairly distinct dialects of Cantonese . . . " (Moench 1963: 14). It is worth remembering that a second language is a vital necessity for the population of Chinese descent. The demands of commerce, the activity preferred by the Chinese, make it necessary for businessmen in rural areas to be bilingual in Chinese and Tahitian, and in Papeete to be trilingual in Chinese, French, and Tahitian. As a result, the Chinese language has regressed. One important contributing factor has been the requirement since 1938 that Chinese businessmen keep their books in

258

Henri Lavond&s

French. For a while, several kept their accounts in both French and Chinese, but this practice is falling into disuse (Coppenrath 1967: 82). There is a tendency for French and Tahitian to enter into the language of daily conversation, producing linguistic melanges of which Moench (1963: 15) gives an amusing example. Linguistic interferences between Chinese and Tahitian are numerous (Weinreich 1953). They relate not only to phonology, but also to the grammar of Tahitian as spoken by the Chinese. Among the urban middle class, this Chinese influence is blamed for the present alteration of the Tahitian language. Research would be necessary to determine whether this argument has any foundation in fact or merely reflects anti-Chinese prejudices. It is also very possible that the knowledge of Chinese, particularly written Chinese, is dying out among the younger generation. This may be inferred from the 1962 census data: the proportion of persons of both sexes who "read and write Chinese" is 61% for the Chinese population aged fifteen and over, only 47% for those between the ages of fifteen and twenty (Insee: 142, 135, 145). It should be mentioned, however, that some data indicate that there is a tendency to use spoken and written Chinese in business, where it would aid in insuring secrecy. The large majority of the population of the territory is of Polynesian descent. Although the 1962 census does not offer confirmation, it appears that the rate of growth of the Polynesians is much higher than that of the other population groups. The Polynesian language characteristic of this ethnic group is subdivided into a number of dialects of very uneven importance. Tahitian is spoken throughout the Societies (both the Windward and Leeward Islands). According to Hooper, however, a dialectal form of Tahitian is still spoken on the tiny isle of Maupiti because of its distance from Tahiti and the difficulty of communications (Hooper 1966: 92). Immigrants from other dialect areas of the territory speak their own dialect among themselves, at least for a time, but speak Tahitian in interethnic relations. Tahitian is at the height of its expansion. It has become the language of intercourse for all of the territory's Polynesian population. It is understood and, to varying extents, spoken in all of the archipelagos. There are several reasons for the predominance of Tahitian: the overwhelming demographic and economic ascendancy of Tahiti; the role of the minor officials (medical orderlies, auxiliary police, teachers) who are mostly Tahitian speakers; the function of Tahitian as the language of trade with the schooners that are the islands' sole direct link with the outside world. Finally, we should emphasize the leading part played in the spread of Tahitian nowadays by the Tahitian language broadcasts from Radio Tahiti. For many of the islands, transistor radios, which are increasingly widespread today, represent the only contact - except for the

Language Policy and Literacy in French Polynesia

259

rare schooners - with the outside world, near and far, which is the object of insatiable curiosity on the part of the Polynesians. The daily listen-in to the Tahitian language evening broadcast (5:00 to 7:00 p.m.), a time of day that fits perfectly into the rhythm of Polynesian life, which is one or two hours out of phase with the European schedule, is in the nature of a religious ritual that takes precedence over every other pursuit. The audience is especially interested in the personal messages that substitute for telegrams where there are no postal services available, messages concerning the comings and goings of the schooners, and the 'listeners' records' which serve to revive the bonds of affection among relatives separated by distance. In all cases that I have observed in the farther islands, when the French language broadcast begins at 1900 hours (7:00 p.m.), the radios are turned off even by listeners who have a good understanding of French. In the rare cases where they continue to listen, the people try to tune in on the musical programs from Honolulu. Radio Tahiti is a powerful means of making the Polynesians aware of themselves as a linguistic community, and even simply as a community. Sufficient information is not available for evaluating the position of dialects other than Tahitian, but it is certain that they are regressing. With respect to the Austral Islands, P. Verin asserts without further particulars that "the linguistic corpus constituted by the dialect of Rurutu is still very well preserved" (1965: 290). From the sketch he gives of the dialectology of the island group, it is evident that each island possessed a clearly differentiated dialect, presenting affinities with Tahitian and the dialects spoken in the Cook Islands (Venn 1965: 290-296). There appears to be no recent information on the dialects of the Tuamotus; Stimson and Marshall's dictionary (1964), particularly the chart of dialect divisions, may be referred to for a description of the situation in the past. The personal and quite subjective impression gained by the author of this article during a schooner trip that included nine stops lasting several hours at various islands is that a form of the dialect much altered by the influence of Tahitian is still used in daily conversation on some islands. The high rate of mobility of the Tuamotu population, the strong current of emigration to Papeete, with the resulting depopulation of the archipelago (between the census of 1956 and that of 1962, although the overall population of Polynesia increased 11%, that of the Tuamotus declined 15%), mean that the regression of the dialects can only become more pronounced in the future. No information is available on the language situation in the Gambiers. In short, the present state of the dialects other than Tahitian spoken

260

Henri Lavondes

in French Polynesia has not been the object of serious research and should be an interesting subject of study for a linguist. With respect to the Marquesas, however, a stay of nearly a year, mainly on the island of Ua Pou, allows me to express the opinion that although the position of the dialects is undoubtedly threatened, it is still very solid. Marquesan dialects are divided into two groups: those of the northern group, which includes three inhabited islands, and those of the southern group, also three inhabited islands. Speakers of one group can understand those of the other. Intercomprehension is possible between speakers of both groups. Dialect variations exist within each group, and even from valley to valley on a single island. The variations are slight, but sufficient, nevertheless, for the people of Nuku Hiva to ridicule the inhabitants of Ua Pou, who are considered bumpkins by the other islanders, by calling them the ta koe (that is, the people who say ta koe instead of ta'oe for the second person possessive adjective). The dialects of the big islands, Nuku Hiva and Hiva Oa, are considered to have higher prestige, and are often imitated by speakers on the other islands, especially when they are attempting to impart a literary- or solemn turn to their remarks. This is particularly apparent in the harangues of the chiefs to the people of their districts. The influence of the prestige dialects on those of lesser repute is manifested in frequent borrowings of forms. As a result, two or three forms of the same word may be used alternately by the same speaker, not always with a stylistic value (for example: in Ua Pou, koe, 'oe = you, singular; ko'aka, 'oaka, koana = to obtain; 'aki, 'ani = sky, etc.). It is worth noting that these variations admit some phonetic alternations (k/', k/n, for example) while rigourously excluding others (f/h). Thus, at the present stage, interpenetration of the dialects is manifested by a multiplication of variants rather than by the substitution of one dialectal form for another. The reasons for the preservation of the dialect in the Marquesas are numerous, and primarily geographic and demographic. The Marquesas are far from Papeete, and communications with the capital are slow and infrequent. Up until very recently, emigration to Tahiti was comparatively slight; according to the 1962 census, only 10% of the total native population resided outside the archipelago. There are other reasons, of historical and religious nature. The great majority of the population is Catholic. Protestants make up barely ten percent, and are a numerically important minority only in three valleys of the island of Ua Pou. In contrast with the Protestants, who use Tahitian in their religious services and are oriented toward Tahitian culture, the Catholic missionaries, all European-born, do not know Tahitian, and use only Marquesan in worship and in daily life. Finally, certain more or less

Language Policy and Literacy in French Polynesia

261

conscious political aspirations on the part of the Marquesans work toward linguistic conservatism. The people of the Marquesas, aware of their cultural and economic lag in comparison with Tahiti and possessed of an inferiority complex with respect to the Tahitians, fear lest this imbalance find expression in an actual control over their islands by the Tahitians. They see this foreshadowed by the fact that by far the greatest number of the minor officials (auxiliary police, hospital attendants, farming advisors, and school teachers) working in the Marquesas are not Marquesan-born. The preceding remarks should not, however, be taken to mean that Marquesan has remained entirely unchanged since pre-European times and that the great tides of acculturation that have swept over the rest of French Polynesia have spared the Marquesas. Although it is difficult to define the nature and size of the phenomenon without detailed study of this particular problem, it seems certain that Marquesan has become impoverished since contact with Europeans began. New words borrowed from English during the first half of the nineteenth century (under the influence of the whalers) and then from French, did not compensate for the loss. A check made by having some young people point out the words they knew on a few pages of a Marquesan-French dictionary reveals that almost two-thirds of the terms in the book (Dordillon 1901) are unfamiliar to them. Even taking into account that the dictionary in question contains dialect words and terms relating to preEuropean culture that they would not ordinarily know, the impoverishment seems unquestionable. The Marquesans themselves are aware of it, and think their dialect is threatened with oblivion. But, curiously enough, they think that French is the language that bids fair to supplant it. This opinion is contradicted by the facts, and its underlying explanation should probably be sought in the confused political aspirations mentioned above. Indeed, the assertion is a paradox in this island group where the French language is less known than anywhere else in Polynesia. In Ua Pou, only one or two people besides the schoolteachers and minor functionaries have a passable knowledge of French. The rest speak it poorly or not at all. Practical knowledge of Tahitian, however, is almost general. Some differences in bilingualism appear between the sexes; a rudimentary knowledge of French is more widespread among women than men. Often, the women attended a primary boarding school conducted by missionary sisters in Atuona, where pupils live entirely cut off from their families during the school year, and, in earlier times, even for their entire school career. In this way, an artificial microenvironment of French culture is created, which seems to favor the acquisition of a practical knowledge of the rudiments of French. Knowledge of Tahitian, though, is more widespread among the men

262

Henri Lavondds

than the women; it is the language they use in their business transactions with the schooners. With respect to the language problems, therefore, the attitude of the Marquesans is ambivalent. Knowledge of French is an ideal that is very difficult to achieve under existing circumstances but intensely desirable because it is a necessary condition for social and economic advancement, and particularly the attainment of coveted official positions. Knowledge of Tahitian is an easily accessible goal, thanks to frequent contact with the small number of immigrant Tahitian officials, the relationship between the two languages, and the educational influence of Radio Tahiti. Furthermore, although they deny it for political and psychological reasons, Tahitian and the culture it conveys enjoy immense prestige with the Marquesans. In comparison with the overwhelming boredom that is the lot of the dwellers in the outer islands, Tahiti presents the fascinating mirage of a lively and brilliant civilization. The young people, especially, are infatuated with everything Tahitian, adopting the songs and dances and strongly influenced by the language. So, in the Marquesas, a gallicization desired by the administration, accepted by the missionaries, and dreamed of by the people is opposed by a de facto tahitianization. It should be possible to conclude this account of the linguistic situation with a chart showing the number of persons who speak one or more of the languages and dialects to which we have referred. But, failing an investigation bearing on this problem specifically, we must be satisfied with partial and necessarily rough estimates or data that relate to the entire population but were collected for a non-linguistic purpose during the 1962 census. An example of a partial estimate is furnished by Finney's work; it deals with Aoua, a quarter in the Paea district that is sufficiently representative of a rural area in Tahiti strongly influenced by Papeete, and concerns only the knowledge of spoken French. "Although I made no formal survey, I estimate that about 30 percent of the Aoua speak French with some fluency; that another 50 percent can at least carry on a simple conversation in French; and that only about 20 percent of the Aoua are completely, or almost completely, unable to speak the language" (Finney 1964: 52). As for the results of the 1962 census, they are given in Table 1, which presents a resume of the responses to the question addressed to everyone fifteen years old and above asking "whether he could read and write any language, and if so, the highest certificate he could have obtained". TTie census takers had to indicate one or several of the following answers: none, Tahitian, French, Chinese, another language. Several reservations should be made as to the significance and validity of the responses, and the organizers of the census are the first to make them. They note that the replies "n'ont fait l'objet d'aucune verifica-

Language Policy and Literacy in French Polynesia

263

tion... [elles] traduisent done simplement les declarations des interesses et peuvent dans ces conditions etre biaisees, les recenses aynat tendance ä donner des reponses les surclassant" (Insee: 42). The census organizers also wonder whether the census takers may have confused 'ability to write a given language' with 'ability to speak it'. It should also be remembered that the purpose of the census was not to find the languages spoken in the territory, but only to determine the rate of literacy. More particularly, the census took no note of the existence of dialects other than Tahitian, and the replies may have thereby been influenced, especially in the Marquesas, where the exceptionally high rate of illiteracy indicated may very well mean that many of the people there can write only Marquesan. Nevertheless, despite these qualifications, and partly because of them, we may agree with the census organizers that "ultimately, these results can give an idea of the languages spoken", and therefore it did not seem useless to include them in this study. TABLE 1

Population of age 15 and over by origin, and languages read and written (according to Insee: 145) Origin Languages read and written

α .2 (Λ υ α >> Ο OL,

None Tahitian only French only Chinese only One or more languages other than the preceding only Tahitian and French Tahitian and Chinese Tahitian and other French and Chinese French and other Chinese and other Tahitian, French, and Chinese Tahitian, French, and other Tahitian, Chinese, and other French, Chinese, and other No response TOTALS

α ra

P u Q

Λ 9}

&

TH Ρ W

2,161 21,567 978 10

98 875 413 2

9 17 1,324

58 9,168 23 51 17 44 1

4 2,466 1 10 1 28

12 135

28 312

5 257

11 1 591 35,021

—

—

—

6 1 440 —

3 62

4) Vi ü R βI 3 Ü 288 461 350 1,413

8 709 452 2 638 44 6 774 92

17

1 14

2 40 32

4,177

2,024

5,311

— —

—

Μ Ö •s ο 21 93 120 3

77 108 —

44 6 147 —

—

72

«•Η Ο Η 2,577 23,013 3,185 1,428

159 12,586 476 113 663 703 7 810 795

71

13 42 725

762

47,295

— —

264

Henri Lavondes

III. LANGUAGE POLICIES

Table 1 gives an idea of the languages read and written in the territory. The problem now is to discover to what extent the situation is the expression of spontaneous tendencies, and to what extent it is the result of one or more language policies consciously formulated by the various authorities capable of exerting influence in this connection. The three principal forces in confrontation are the territorial government authorities, the missions, and the opinions and behavior of the public insofar as they constitute resistance against or acquiescence to the policy pursued by one or the other authority. Rather than a deliberate, organized policy aimed at definite objectives, France's position with regard to language problems in Polynesia appears to be an attitude inherited from the era when she still commanded a vast colonial empire. A single policy was then applied through the infinitely varied colonies. It resulted from the doctrine of 'assimilation', the objective of which was to make all the colonial peoples 'Frangais ä part entiere'. In linguistic matters, the result of the doctrine was a policy of gallicization. It appears from the preceding that the language policy applied by France in Polynesia cannot be viewed as one conceived specifically for the territory. On the contrary, it is astonishing that the same policy has been applied in countries where a multitude of mutually unintelligible languages and dialects coexist, such as sub-Saharan Africa and New Caledonia, and in countries with a single language or dialect that plays the role of language of common intercourse and is destined beyond question to become the national language, such as Madagascar or Tahiti. This unitary policy is a legacy of the spirit of centralization that has characterized the French Government since the National Convention and the Napoleonic era. Therefore, French language policy should be studied not merely on the level of Polynesia, but in relation to the overall community formed by France and all those territories that once comprised the French Union. Such a study would unquestionably be of interest, but would surely exceed the compass of this article. It is education on all levels (primary and secondary) and in all forms (public and private) that is the chief instrument of the policy of gallicization. From the most elementary level, all education is dispensed in French. At no stage in public education is Tahitian taught. Use of the vernacular is forbidden in the schools, not only to the teachers, but to the pupils, who may not speak it in class or even during recreation. The object of these measures is to help the children to acquire a practical knowledge of French and keep them from considering it a dead language that they cannot use in daily life. Outside school, French occupies a dominant position. The Polyne-

Language Policy and Literacy in French Polynesia

265

sian dialects are tacitly ignored in every case where the need to communicate does not absolutely demand recourse to the vernacular. French is the official language of all territorial services: government, technical services (agriculture, public works, etc.), justice, police, and so forth. The upper echelons of government authority employ certified interpreters (whose role is particularly important in the courts). On the lower echelons, French territorial officials are assisted by local officials who act as interpreters when the need arises. Also, there used to be an optional test in Tahitian in the examination for recruitment of local officials for all government services, but it was recently deleted for reasons having nothing to do with language policy. All government texts are in French. The territory's official newspaper is in French, except for a small number of cases (mainly legal notices regarding real estate) where a Tahitian translation accompanies the French text. Although, as far as I know, there is no formal regulation on this subject, French is the language employed in the deliberations of the Territorial Assembly, and speeches in Tahitian are rare; their relative infrequency is, furthermore, a telltale sign of the political coloration of the Assembly. Some notices meant for the district population are posted in Tahitian, and a few popular pamphlets on agriculture are published in both languages. Generally speaking, Tahitian is used when it is necessary that the population understand, and especially when their spontaneous cooperation is solicited. Among other concessions to Tahitian, there is one of considerable importance, the Tahitian language broadcasts by Radio Tahiti. We have already had occasion to emphasize the role these broadcasts play in the spread of the Tahitian language and cultural values. Other concessions are of minor significance: a public course in Tahitian for Europeans, given four hours a week in the Papeete City Hall; a course in Tahitian given at the Ecole Nationale des Langues Orientales Vivantes in Paris. The language policy pursued for Chinese differs greatly from that adopted toward Tahitian. This divergence is revelatory of the ultimate intentions at the roots of the two language policies. We have said that the policy practiced toward the Tahitian population is one of gallicization, whose final objective is assimilation. Now, assimilation is precisely what, until recently, was never envisaged for the Chinese population, the majority of whom were assigned the status of aliens, and to whom naturalization was granted only under extraordinary circumstances (Coppenrath 1967: 95). The policy applied to the Chinese minority results from the cautious attitude of the government, troubled by the existence of a 'Chinese problem' in Tahiti (Moench 1963: 3238), and from the violently anti-Chinese attitude of the 'demi' middle class who dominate the Territorial Assembly and find the Chinese their

266

Henri Lavond.es

direct economic rivals (Coppenrath 1967: 84-91). Until recently, the Chinese had every opportunity to open Chinese schools (in which, however, a certain number of hours of instruction in French were obligatory). There were three Chinese schools with over a thousand students. Instruction was given in Hakka up through 1950, then in Mandarin. But the Chinese minority were inclined to make less and less use of the opportunities granted them, and showed a growing preference for French private or public schools which afforded the youth more practical preparation for their active participation in the life of the territory. As early as 1951, the total number of pupils in Chinese schools had fallen to 310, in comparison with the 1,011 attending French private and public schools. It was not until 1964, however, with France's recognition of the Chinese People's Republic, that this de facto disaffection was sanctioned and the Chinese schools were closed by decree. This reversal is due to the fact that recognition of the C.P.R. left only one long-range prospect for settling the lot of the Chinese minority assimilation. Hence the new policy of gallicization in preparation for that step. The language policy of the missions was and is distinctly different from that of the government. The necessity of winning deep-seated adherence from the peoples they intend to evangelize obliges them to use the vernacular. It is the missionaries who have made the most extensive collections of linguistic materials for use in learning the Polynesian dialects spoken in the territory (dictionaries and grammars for Tahitian, Marquesan, and Mangarevan).Very early, they opened schools in which instruction was given in the vernacular. In 1829, Moerenhout was saying that "ä Papara, la plupart des Indiens savent lire et ecrire, grace ä l'assiduite de Μ. Davies, qui n'epargne ni soins ni peines pour leur donner ce premier rudiment d'education" (Moerenhout 1837, I: 278). Historical research would be necessary to discover how the transition from vernacular to French instruction took place. It seems that by 1860, the Catholic missions were making considerable efforts to promote the spread of education in French (Rulon 1964: 90-92), with active support from the colonial administration. Fear that the acquisition of French would threaten the faith of the island Protestants was the essential argument advanced by the Queen of Tahiti when, in 1860, she asked the French Government representative to arrange for two French Protestant missionaries to be sent: "Nous desirons ardemment que nos enfants apprennent la langue frangaise, mais nous ne voulons pas que lorsqu'ils apprennent le frangais, ce ne soit que dans le but de changer de religion" (Vernier n.d.: 171). The title given to his schools by Pastor Vienot, 'Indigenous French Schools', is significant in that it conveys acquiescence, reserved, perhaps, but no less real, to the policy

Language Policy and Literacy in French Polynesia

267

of gallicization. "On enseigne aux eleves, en frangais, les matieres du programme scolaire. On parle frangais meme pendant les recreations et les etudes. Mais pour le cöte spirituel, pour la lecture de la Bible, la preparation des ecoles du jeudi et du dimanche, etc., nos eleves tahitiens retrouvent leur langue maternelle" (Vernier n.d.: 244). In any case, it is certain that the schools conducted by the missionaries and supported by the territory have now fallen into line with the public school curricula and give all non-religious instruction in French. There is, however, one notable exception: in the Catholic and Protestant mission secondary schools, a course in Tahitian is offered to upper form students. This is the only instruction in Tahitian offered to the territory's school population, and obviously it reaches only a very few. Although nowadays the missionary schools share in the policy of gallicization in teaching, they remain completely faithful to the use of the vernacular languages in religious instruction. Tahitian, or the Polynesian of a given island group, is used in religious services. Children are instructed in the vernacular. Finally, because they have translated into the vernacular languages all or part of the Sacred Scriptures, missions of every creed offer their Polynesian faithful the only available reading material in their mother tongue. If we recognize the fact that the parish is the strongest social structure in the Polynesian community, we can see that the language policy followed by the missions in religious affairs is the strongest bastion of defense against the forces threatening to change or annihilate the Polynesian languages. In order to understand the reactions of public opinion to the language policy pursued in the territory, it is necessary to remember that it comes within the framework of a 'colonial situation' (on this concept, see Balandier 1963: 4-38). Unquestionably, local reactions are not what they would be in the case of spontaneous acculturation, and occur in the setting of an overall policy defined by the metropole. We should not forget, however, the generous intention of the policy of assimilation which, at least in theory, offers every Polynesian-born person the possibility of acquiring high social status. This explains the undoubted approval with which Tahitians of lower economic and social class greet the policy of gallicization. Although to my knowledge no inquiry has been made in this connection, I am convinced that any attempt to introduce Tahitian into the primary school system would meet with strong opposition. The population of Tahitian stock would interpret such a step as a trick to prevent them from learning French, the necessary condition for their rise on the socio-economic scale. Nothing demonstrates better the anxiety of the Polynesians to see their children learn French than observation of language behavior within the family. While parents and other adults speak to one another in Tahitian, or in

268

Henri Lavondes

another Polynesian dialect spoken in the territory, they use French to the extent of their ability when talking to their school-age children. The children reply in French or Polynesian, depending on the circumstances. The parents hope thus to facilitate their children's progress in school. Reticent attitudes toward the policy of gallicization are apparent only among the Polynesian elite and the 'demi' middle class, that is, in that stratum where mastery of French is an established fact. The attachment for Tahitian expressed by this section of the population is chiefly sentimental. For these highly acculturated classes, linguistic patriotism becomes a means of claiming roots in the past and of affirming their ethnic personality in contrast to the Europeans. This is doubtless the same sort of phenomenon as the interest shown by the English speakers of New Zealand and Hawaii in Maori and Hawaiian antiquity. On the linguistic level, the attachment on the part of the territory's Polynesian elite to the cultural values redolent of bygone days is manifested in a purist reaction against the real or imagined change that threatens Tahitian these days, and in a concern that Tahitian be granted a more exalted position than the one it now occupies. One project, now under study, would be the establishment of an Academie Tahitienne which, like the Academie Fran^aise, would be responsible for setting standards for the language and enabling it to adapt itself to the modern world by enriching it without changing its nature. Such a project would be of little interest to the Polynesian lower classes, who fear every attempt to promote Tahitian as a move by the French-speaking elite to maintain their cultural lead, although its realization would be a source of considerable satisfaction to the elite.

IV. LITERACY AND EDUCATION PROBLEMS

The rate of literacy in French Polynesia is remarkably high. According to the 1962 census, only 5.5% of those over the age of fifteen were illiterate (Insee: 42). Further, this rate is regularly regressive: 4.7% for fifteen to nineteen year olds; 5.4% for those aged twenty to fifty-nine; 8.4% for those sixty and over. True, there is reason to recall the reservations previously made concerning the validity of these results; nevertheless, they give a satisfactory picture of the actual situation. One reason for this very low rate of illiteracy is the Polynesian's prodigious receptivity to innovation. Writing speedily became considered a useful novelty; some individuals who could not attend school taught themselves to write with the help of a literate relative. I know of such cases in the Marquesas. But of course the essential reason is the extraordinary effort made by the territory's Education Department, particularly dur-

Language Policy and Literacy in French Polynesia

269

ing the past few years. School attendance has long hovered around the 100% mark. Deschamps and Guiart had already noted that "La situation de l'enseignement... parait, si l'on en croit les statistiques, la plus florissante de tous les pays de l'Union Fran^aise. Le nombre des enfants scolarises (14.310) depasse tres notablement celui des scolarisables (9.345)" (1957: 64). As a matter of fact, this paradoxical attendance rate of over 100% is explained by the choice of an arbitrary figure to define the student population: 15% of the total population. In 1961, this figure was 20%, and still too low, because in 1967 the theoretical school-age population figure was 19,200 although 25,000 were attending primary school. Publication of the 1962 census results made it possible to arrive at a more reasonable estimate of the number of school-age children. School-age population, defined as five-to-fourteen year olds, was 22,673 (children born between 1957 and 1949) according to the 1962 census (Insee: 122), corresponding to an actual 26.8% of the total population. On 1 January 1963, the total primary school enrollment was 20,398; sixth and fifth form pupils (who fall under the above age grouping) numbered 1,484; so the total school enrollment was 21,882. The difference between the two figures is slight, and indicates a 96.5% school attendance rate. Indeed, this difference corresponds to the error resulting from the method of calculation used, and it seems quite legitimate to consider, as the Education Department does, that very close to 100% of the school-age children are attending school. Accordingly, the problems of literacy and education of the territory's population may be deemed solved. It remains to be seen, first, how it has been possible to solve these problems, and then, because an education policy that limits its ambitions solely to the attainment of literacy is manifestly inadequate, how education in Polynesia attempts to achieve its true goal, the preparation of children for life. It is true that an educational policy in Polynesia is favored by such elements as the relatively small size of the territory, on the one hand, which means that a limited effort suffices to solve problems, and the relatively high standard of living of the population, on the other. Other factors, however, are plainly unfavorable: the geographic dispersal of the population of the outlying island groups, the difficulty of communications, and finally, and above all, the youth of a population at the height of demographic expansion (the annual rate of population growth is 3.3%). For the Education Department, the problem is one of assuring the education of generations that grow more numerous every year, while guaranteeing that the quality of education is not lowered but rather, improved. The figures in Table 2 give an idea of the magnitude of the problem and the considerable means employed to deal with it. The education

270

Henri Lavondes

budget has more than quintupled in nine years, while the proportion of the overall territory budget devoted to education has increased constantly, rising from less than 20% to over 27% by 1966. It should be added that the figures in Table 2 do not take all expenses into account. Not included are part of the costs for school construction financed by France (F.I.D.E.S.) and the European Fund (681 million Pacific francs for the 1966-1970 Five-Year plan), and the operating costs for secondary and technical education taken over by France since 1962. During the same period, primary school enrollment rose 64%, and enrollment in secondary and technical schools more than tripled. Such an increase TABLE 2

Statistics on Education (Source: Education Department Files) Budget (in millions of CFP francs) Primary education Enrollment Number of schools Number of classrooms Secondary education Enrollment Vocational education Enrollment Examination results C.E.P.* B.E.P.C.** Baccalaureate Vocational certificate

1958

1961

1964

1967

76,660

171,869

285,612

575,708

15,249 123 401

17,889 133 465

21,471 139 595

24,984 158 809

1,027

1,651

2,873

3,645

157

255

432

550

501 88

595 109

792 246 25 56

821 221 48 60

—

—

36

30

* Certificat d'6tudes primaires (6 yrs.). ** Brevet d'etudes du premier cycle (4 yrs.).

cannot occur without causing serious problems. The gravest of these is the recruitment of primary school teachers. The inadequacy of the teachers is a constantly recurring source of anxiety apparent in the annual reports from the Education Department. In 1967, it was estimated that 40% of the teachers were 'serious and devoted young people who have neither the training nor the professional background to make them effective'. The problem is particularly acute in some of the remote islands, where it is possible to recruit only very mediocre personnel, and where natives of the more favored islands would not work at any price because they dread the harsh living conditions and severe isolation that make life on those islands one of exile. We may add

Language Policy and Literacy in French Polynesia

271

that the number of candidates is only half that of the positions open by examination to future primary teachers, and that the present economic prosperity, and the pressure on the employment market resulting from the establishment of the Pacific Experimentation Center,2 mean that schoolteacher vocations are sparse. It appears that the problem of teacher recruitment will be difficult to solve under present conditions, at least in the near future. The Education Department is attempting to alleviate the situation by recruiting teachers in France and appealing to certain young people fulfilling their military obligation. But these measures are merely a palliative for filling positions on the deprived islands, and are inadequate to meet the overall need. This has not prevented the Education Department from seeking ways to improve the quality of primary education wherever possible. During the period under consideration, despite the considerable increase in school attendance, the average number of pupils per class declined from thirty-eight to thirty-one. Action was also taken against another source of pedagogical ineffectiveness, the one-room or one-teacher school. Now, statistics show that the number of classrooms has increased more rapidly than the number of schools; this a partial indication of a reduction in the number of one-room schools. Where population dispersal made it unfeasible to envisage an increase in the number of classrooms, audacious experiments were attempted. In the Tuamotus and Marquesas, inter-island centers were opened for the older pupils in the one-room schools, who were regrouped in a boarding school system. An effort was also made to improve the curriculum and textbooks, which had been criticized for failure to adapt to the local situation. The reader, Tico and Mareta, presents familiar scenes of Polynesian life to the child; the geography and natural science programs begin with facts about the territory. Finally, in order to help an appreciable number of teachers to improve their French, language lessons are offered by educational radio. In concluding this survey of the problems of primary education in Polynesia, I should, as a recent report from the Education Department does so courageously, bring up the question of its effectiveness. "Almost every child of school age in French Polynesia is in school. But what good will it do them?" Two factors are considered in arriving at a necessarily rough evaluation of the effectiveness of the educational program. One is the ratio of the number of those who pass the examinations to the number of eligible candidates. The other is the age of the primary grade pupils. It is evident that many of the children, too old for their class, will never complete their primary education. There is no 2

PEC is a military organization engaged in testing nuclear weapons.

272

Henri Lavondes

need to go into detail on the calculations required for arriving at this estimate; the results will suffice. The graduation rate from primary schools in Polynesia is estimated at: 60-70% 30-35% 20-30% 20-25% 10-15%

in Tahiti; in the Leeward Islands; in the Australs; in the Marquesas; in the Tuamotus and Gambiers.

The rate of effectiveness varies, therefore, from one island group to the next. Thus, the importance of the differential factors emphasized at the beginning of this study is made apparent: first, geography, which sets Tahiti apart from all the other islands, and then sets the far islands apart from those near Tahiti; second, sociology, because there is no doubt that the distinctly higher rate of effectiveness of a French primary education in Tahiti is explained by the concentration on that island of the 'demi' and European population, resulting in a very Frenchified cultural milieu that is especially favorable to scholarly success. Finally, a sketch of the educational problems in an area which, like French Polynesia, has solved the problems of education and literacy, would be incomplete without some mention of post-primary educational opportunities. Since the last war, secondary education has made enormous strides; in 1946, only 63 children were attending secondary school; in 1967, there were 1,652 secondary school pupils. The number of pupils attending vocational school is still comparatively small compared to secondary school attendance. This may be viewed as a manifestation of the tendency of tropical countries to place too much emphasis on preparation for careers in the 'secteur tertiaire'. An effort is being made, however, to adapt education to the economic needs of the territory; a hotel training school has been opened, and a graduate agricultural school is being established.

V. CONCLUSION

At the conclusion of this brief study, conducted by an anthropologist, not a linguist, and based solely on a general knowledge of the milieu acquired during a four-year stay in the territory and an analysis of immediately accessible documentary sources, it may not be unprofitable to take stock of the results attained, indicate the areas where further research would be especially desirable, and to point out the most difficult of the problems raised, that of the relationship between the French and Tahitian languages.

Language Policy and Literacy in French Polynesia

273

The first point to be made is that the linguistic situation in Polynesia is not in any sense a stable one. On the contrary, analysis reveals that it is in a state of flux: advancement of French, maintenance of an English influence, expansion of Tahitian to the detriment of the other dialects, which are in varying stages of regression, probable decline of Chinese resulting from the new political orientation. Furthermore, it has become apparent that the dynamism of this situation cannot be comprehended without analysis of the complexity of factors at work in a multilingual society. Among the differentiating elements that appear relevant, allow me to call attention to: geography (the contrast between rural and urban, and between close and distant island groups); demography (respective numbers of speakers of the diverse languages in contact; contrast among the various age groups); economy (variations in linguistic behavior according to standard of living); sociology ('demi'/Polynesian opposition); culture (position of each language on the scale of prestige); politics (importance of the 'colonial status' factor, and of the 'political' factor in explaining a Marquesan-type dialectical situation). All of these elements, which are not independent variables, should be considered in arriving at an explanation of the present situation and determining the direction in which it is evolving. As Uriel Weinreich points out, they make it possible to explain "the extent, direction, and nature of interference of one language with another" (1953: 4). More thorough study of many points appears necessary. From the purely linguistic point of view, it should be remembered that none of the five principal Polynesian dialects spoken in the territory has been the subject of scientific research. It is high time for such research, before it is too late. Given the reservations inspired by the census data, the linguistic situation in the territory may be considered still largely unknown, especially with respect to dialects other than Tahitian. Moreover, there has been no scientific study that would make it possible for us to take up in this essay the highly interesting question of linguistic interference. Yet, the territory's linguistic situation offers several possibilities for research. Historical studies should be conducted to place the language policy followed in Polynesia in the context of the overall policy pursued in former French colonies. Also worthy of study would be the history of educational policy. As for relations between French and Tahitian, two questions should be tackled: Has the policy of gallicization succeeded, and what is its future? Is another policy possible? The superficial impression received by the tourist when he moves out of Papeete is that knowledge of French is far from general in the territory. Beyond this surface appraisal, and according to the results of the 1962 census - the replies to

274

Henri Lavondes

which have to be considered as biased by a tendency on the part of the respondents to give answers above their class - the fact is that 60% of the population cannot read and write French. For the 'demi' population, the percentage is only 39%; it is 68% for the Polynesian-born population, 54% for the Polynesians of the Windward Islands, 80% for the Polynesian population of the remaining island groups. This comes down to the fact that one in every three Polynesians over fourteen in the territory can read and write French, but only one in five in the island groups. After more than a century of activity in favor of French, this would seem a poor result. And the policy that led to this result has given rise to reservations. "II est certain que nombre d'ecoliers redeviennent illettres quelques annees seulement apres avoir quitte l'ecole par manque de pratique de la lecture et de l'ecriture" (Insee: 42); "on declare que la grande majorite des eleves oublie le frangais d£s sa sortie de l'ecole et que nos programmes congus pour la Metropole, ne peuvent susciter que de vains exercises de memoire" (Deschamps and Guiart 1957: 64). It should be noted, however, that the considerable effort exerted by the Education Department appears to be bearing fruit. According to the 1962 census, knowledge of French is progressing rapidly among the young people: 57% of those aged 15-19 said they could read and write French, compared to 38.6% of those aged 20-60, and 22.9% of those over 60. Regardless of progress in French language proficiency (and it can only be gradual) the fact remains that 80% of the respondents said they could read and write Tahitian, and that Tahitian is the mother tongue of an even higher percentage of the territory's population (Insee: 42-47). Tahitian, therefore, is the first language in number of speakers. But the Polynesians do not, in fact, have any opportunity to enrich and cultivate their knowledge of the language. For this to happen, Tahitian would have to be made part of the curriculum. But that would imply a political choice which it would be inadvisable for us to explore in this article. It is also certain that neither the educators nor the people are prepared to consider or welcome any large-scale approach to this matter. Meanwhile, literate Polynesians who cannot enjoy reading in French (and they constitute an enormous majority, greater even than the statistics imply) have no means of improving their minds. At the present time, Radio Tahiti makes the truest and strongest educational impact on the people, but it is still only an aural impact. Except for the Bible and a monthly religious magazine for each of the churches, the Polynesians have no reading material in their language, no works adapted to their need, no newspaper. The principal benefit they derive from literacy is the ability to carry on personal correspondence. I have known several Marquesan school graduates who maintain such a cor-

Language Policy and Literacy in French Polynesia

275

respondence, but what they do to the language is something to see: mistakes, especially in word separation, are so numerous that their letters are difficult for their correspondents to read. It would not require much to improve the most obvious anomalies in the present situation: a few hours of Tahitian language instruction in the upper primary grades, and the establishment of a Tahitian newspaper. But even such limited measures would run too much counter to present tendencies for their implementation to be considered.3

REFERENCES Balandier, George 1963 Sociologie actuelle de l'Afrique noire, 2nd ed. (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France). Coppenrath, Gerald 1967 Les Chinois ά Tahiti (Paris: Publications de la Societe des Oceanistes, No. 21). Deschamps, Hubert and Jean Guiart 1957 Tahiti, Nouvelle-Caledonie, Nouvelles-Hibrides (Paris: Berger-Levrault). Dordillon, Mgr. I. R. 1904 Grammaire et Dictionnaire de la langue des iles Marquises (Paris: Belin). Finney, Ben R. 1964 "Polynesian peasants and proletarians, socio-economic change in the Society Islands", unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Harvard University (Cambridge, Mass.). Hooper, Anthony B. 1966 "Marriage and household structure in two Tahitian communities", unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Harvard University (Cambridge, Mass.). [Insee] n.d. Resultats statistiques du recensement general de la population de la Polynisie frangaise effectui le 9 novembre 1962 (Paris: Institut National de la Statistique et des Etudes Economiques). Kay, Paul de Young 1963 "Aspects of social structure in a Tahitian urban neighbourhood", Journal of the Polynesian Society 72: 325-371. 3

This paper was originally written at the end of 1967. Since that time, no change important enough to transform the situation described supra occured in language policy. But the evolution of mental attitudes is worth noting. Educators are somewhat more conscious of difficulties arising in teaching exclusively in French young people whose mother tongue is Tahitian. A change can also be perceived among people of the middle class and more especially among university students. These French speaking strata fear separation from the Polynesian speaking lower classes and would like a generalised knowledge and promotion of Tahitian to act as a cement to consolidate this pluriethnic society. Contemporary (1972) local circumstancies seem to be now favourable to adopting measures more far-reaching than those suggested supra.

276

Henri Lavondes

Moench, Richard 1963 "Economic relations of the Chinese in the Society Islands", unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Harvard University (Cambridge, Mass.). Moerenhout, J. A. 1837 Voyages aux ties du Grand Ocian, reproduction de FSdition princeps (Paris: Maisonneuve). O'Reilly, Patrick 1962 "Le frangais parle ä Tahiti", Journal de la Societi des Ocdanistes 18: 69-81. Panoff, Michel 1964 Les structures agraires en Polynisie frangaise (Paris: Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes, Centre Documentaire pour l'Oceanie, Rapports et Documents, No. 1). Rulon, Henri 1964 "Organisation, programme et livres de l'Ecole de Papeete ä sa fondation en 1860", Journal de la Sociiti des Oceanistes 20: 90-92. Stimson, Frank J., and Donald S. Marshall 1964 A dictionary of some Tuamotuan dialects of the Polynesian language (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff). Verin, Pierre 1965 L'ancienne civilisation de Rurutu (lies Australes, Polynesie frangaise). La Periode classique. Tananarive. Vernier, Charles n.d. Tahitiens d'autrefois, Tahitiens d'aujourcThui (Paris: Societe des Missions Evangeliques). Weinreich, Uriel 1953 Languages in contact (New York: Publications of the Linguistic Circle of New York 1) (reprinted in 1957 by Mouton).

SECTION THREE

Codification, Cultivation, and Elaboration Studies

SALIH J. ALTOMA

LANGUAGE EDUCATION IN ARAB COUNTRIES AND THE ROLE OF THE ACADEMIES

The aim of this paper is to delineate issues and trends which have dominated the teaching of Arabic in more than a dozen Arab states during the postwar period (1945-1965) (see Table I) and to outline the role of the language academies regarding language problems in general and language education in particular. Although specific examples are taken from the U.A.R. (Egypt) and Iraq, much of the discussion holds true for other countries not only because they share basically the same problems, but also because they follow similar or nearly identical curriculums and textbooks. However, special reference will be made to other countries whenever the need arises. The paper is divided into three sections: the first deals with three general problems directly affecting the language program; the second covers language education: content, textbooks and methodology; and the third discusses the role of the academies.

1. DIGLOSSIA, THE WRITING SYSTEM A N D ARABIZATION

1.1

Diglossia

Language education in Arab countries is complicated by the fact that Classical Arabic (hereafter = CA), around which the program revolves, differs considerably from the colloquial Arabic spoken daily by school Reprinted from Current Trends in Linguistics 6 (1970): 690-720. The author would like to thank Indiana University for a research grant that allowed him to prepare this article.

280

Salih J. Altoma TABLE I

Educational Systems and the Language of Instruction in thirteen independent Arab states 1965-1966

Country Algeria Iraq Jordan Kuwait Lebanon Libya Morocco Saudi Arabia Sudan Syria Tunisia U.A.R. (Egypt) Yemen

Primary No. of years 6 6 6 4 5 6 5 6 4 6 6 6 6

Language of Instruction Arabic/French Arabic/Kurdish* Arabic Arabic Arabic Arabic Arabic/French Arabic Arabic Arabic French/Arabic Arabic Arabic

Secondary (intermediate or preparatory Language and senior levels) of Instruction No. of years French/Arabic 7 5 Arabic 6 Arabic Arabic 8 7 Arabic Arabic 6 7 French/Arabic 5 Arabic 8 Int. Arabic Senior English/Arabic Arabic 6 French/Arabic 6 6 Arabic Arabic 7

* Kurdish is used only in Kurdish regions. children. A n attempt to describe salient differences between CA and one spoken variety was made by the writer in his work: The Problem of Diglossia in Arabic: A Comparative Study of Classical and Iraqi Arabic.1 The study, which took the high school curriculum of Arabic grammar as a base of comparison, shows the wide variation not only in aspects related to the complex system of case endings but also in many other features of phonology, morphology, syntax and lexicon. This implies that the pupils have to unlearn or suppress most of their linguistic habits while trying to acquire new ones based on CA as the language program requires.2 The burden of internalizing or reinforcing these acquired habits is compounded by conflicting practices: on the one hand the program deliberately neglects the actual speech of the pupils, and, on the other, CA in practice does not encompass all classes, since teachers themselves (especially of other subjects) tend to use the colloquial for one reason or another.3 In the absence of pertinent stud1

The work appeared in 1969 as a monograph in the Harvard Middle Eastern Studies series. 2 The curriculum of different educational levels cites, as a major objective, the correct use of CA in reading, writing and conversation. 3 f ä h ä yusayn attributes this practice to the fact that teachers are not competent in using CA. He remarks: "Like almost everyone else, I should like teachers to use

Language Education in Arab Countries

281

ies, it is not possible to determine accurately the 'kind' of CA employed in the class situation or the extent of its use, but there are indications which suggest that even teachers of Arabic at high school level tend to use other than CA in their instruction or in conversation with their students outside the class.4 As a result of this conflicting policy, the student's exposure to, and practice in, CA within the school are, by mere quantitative measures, inadequate for attaining the desired objectives. Official instructions issued by educational authorities do urge teachers to avoid the colloquial, but are often disregarded by either the teachers' inability to speak CA correctly and with ease for a prolonged time or their desire to eliminate misunderstanding or achieve maximum communication in teaching their subjects. In view of the fact that the dichotomy is not confined to school situations, numerous solutions have been proposed for eliminating or reducing its effects. The proposed solutions can be roughly divided into two categories: the first, representing a small group, calls for promoting a variety of spoken Arabic as the standard language in place of CA, or advocates modifications in CA; the other insists on the preservation of CA and raising it to the status of a naturally spoken language. Those who favor the former think often of a cultivated middle language based on the form spoken by educated speakers of a particular region (such as Egypt) or of different Arab countries. Anis (1960: 64-71), a leading Egyptian linguist, presents the language of educated Egyptians as the possible future language for all Arab countries and cites a number of factors favoring such development including the following: (1) Egypt is numerically the largest single Arab country, (2) it enjoys political and cultural prestige not equalled by that of other Arab countries, and (3) Egyptian Arabic represents the spoken variety most widely used in literature, movies, radio programs and other modes of expression. Frayha (1955: 183-196), of the American University of Beirut, focuses his attention on a common variety spoken by educated speakers from different Arab countries. Although he is aware of the variations in pronunciation or lexicon existing within this variety, he Classical Arabic in every class regardless of the course, but I am reluctant to insist because they do not know the language well enough and, if required to speak it, would fail to communicate the subject matter to their pupils" (llusayn 1954: 89). 4 A questionnaire addressed to high school teachers of Arabic in Iraq reveals the following findings: 30.5% of the teachers considered CA with its case endings to be the easiest medium for the students to comprehend their subjects, whereas 69.5% chose other varieties of Arabic. On the question of the use of CA outside the class, only 6% claimed that they used it always, while 47.6% often, 26.2% rarely and 20.2% did not use it at all. As to the use of the colloquial in instruction, 90% indicated that they used it either often or rarely, see Al-Toma (1957: 122-127).

282

Salih J.

Altoma

maintains that its structure is essentially the same whether the speakers come from Egypt, Iraq, Syria or other areas, and suggests four steps for developing it into an official language5 (see 2.2 below). Each of the above suggestions has the potentiality of greatly reducing the difficulties, but these as well as other similar reforms have been constantly rejected primarily for extra-linguistic factors: political, religious, and cultural.® The classicists, whose views are reflected in the work of the various language academies and have thus far determined language programs, maintain that CA can and should replace the colloquials as the common spoken language. Their views as to what kind of CA and how it should be elevated to a spoken language vary from one to another depending on whether they envisage a modified CA or they object to any change.7 But all share a strong faith in the role of universal literacy and of mass communications media in gradually bridging the gaps between the two forms of Arabic. They point to the fact that the spread of education has already classicized the colloquial and therefore propose linguistic planning which would accelerate the spread of CA and extend its use to all activities which require or adopt the colloquial as an idiom.8 The classicists' approach is greatly undermined by theoretical and practical weaknesses. First, their assessment of classicization has been based on impressions rather than detailed objective studies which would measure the type and extent of classical penetration. All present traces of CA in the colloquials indicate that the morphological and syntactical systems of the latter remain basically intact. The process of classicization has been primarily confined to the use of classical phonemes in place of their reflexes, set of CA phrases, and lexical borrowings. Second, the classicists, in their understandable search for the ideal, unduly ignore linguistic principles when they persist in their notion of the colloquial as a corruption of CA lacking the qualities which "make it worthy of the name of a language" (Husayn 1954: 86) or when they 5

On the development of a related variety labelled CA without case endings or Modern Inter-Arabic, see Bishai (1966). 4 A summary of these factors as reflected in Arabic writings is presented by Chejne (1965). 7 Classicists do not represent a unified rigid stand regarding CA or the colloquials; among them there are few who tolerate the use or study of the colloquial and admit the need for modifications in CA (note, for example, Al-]Ju§ri 1958: 44-49, and Al-Khüll, see 2.2. below. Others question the value of the colloquials and reject changes in CA: Al-Afghani 1962: 216-218; Farrükh 1961). 8 Al-Bazzäz (1961b), a leading Arab statesman and former prime minister of Iraq, outlines his linguistic planning by which CA would ultimately replace the colloquials, and suggests the imposition of measures restricting the use or the study of the colloquial.

Language Education in Arab Countries

283

blame other factors such as the curriculum, textbooks, students or the lack of qualified teachers9 (Farrükh 1961: 115-116). Third, their opposition to the use of the colloquial runs counter to several trends, educational, literacy and political, which extend, rather than restrict, its role. In view of the high percentage of illiteracy,10 and the drive for universal education, the colloquial will continue to serve as an effective means of instruction, formal or informal, being readily accessible to its speakers. Stylistically, it has acquired prominence in fiction and drama as an important structural element of realistic or effective presentation.11 Politically, the spread of revolutionary or socialist oriented movements in the postwar years has developed a sympathetic attitude toward the language or literature used or understood by the masses and elevated the spoken language to a higher status as is evident in President Nasser's highly colloquial speeches. To all these must be added the fact that, in spite of numerous efforts made recently, there exists no central authority or unified policy which would contribute effectively toward minimizing the effects of the dichotomy whether within each state or on a pan-Arab level. 1.2 The Writing System Two defects in the writing system have given rise to a large number of proposed reforms: the plurality of letter variations and the usual absence of vowel signs. Most letters in the present system have initial, medial and terminal variations. It is assumed that two major difficulties result from this plurality: economic and cultural or educational. The former pertains to the expense, effort and time involved in using hundreds of variations for printing purposes. The latter implies an unnessary burden on the learners, be they children or illiterate adults, to understand and use the various letters according to their position or relation to each other. The absence of vowel signs, the second defect, creates a more serious problem due to the fact that it makes it difficult to read correctly without a large measure of alertness and discrimination even for well-educated readers. The proposals which have been suggested for rectifying these and β

Philistin's article (1958) reflects the view that the problem is essentially pedagogical, and that the solution should be sought in the training of competent teachers. According to Philistin the teacher's inability to teach or use adequately Classical Arabic fosters a belief among the students that Arabic cannot be learned, see pp. 50-51. 10 According to Unesco's Statistical yearbook 1965 (Paris, 1966), the percentage of illiteracy of most Arab states is still very high, often exceeding 60%. 11 For arguments for or against the literary use of the colloquial, see Al-Toma (1961a), Cachia (1967).

284

Salih 7. Altoma

other defects12 range from those calling for romanization or the creation of a new script,13 to others based on the preservation of the Arabic script and the use of one character or a restricted number of variations for each letter. Although most reform-minded scholars in the Arab world favor the preservation of the Arabic script, a few proposals have been made in favor of romanization since the latter part of the nineteenth century.14 Among the leading proponents of romanization was Fahml, a former Egyptian minister and a member of the Egyptian Academy. In his proposal submitted to, and examined by, the Egyptian Academy, 19431944, Fahml stressed the efficiency of the Roman alphabet as used by many languages, and maintained that its adaptation to Arabic would solve the problems of learning and understanding Arabic, and would greatly bridge the distance between the Arabs and other peoples.15 Taking cognizance of the fact that the Roman alphabet lacks symbols for certain Arabic consonants, he suggested the use of ten Arabic characters in this proposed alphabet. The proposal ultimately failed to receive the support of the Academy not only because of its rather complicated mixture of Arabic and Roman scripts, but rather because of the opinion, shared by most scholars, that the defects of the present system can be rectified without recourse to romanization. Nevertheless, other writers, after Fahml, continued to lend their support to the principle of romanization as the best solution for the defects of the writing system.16 However, recent developments seem to point to the emergence of a modified system based on the Arabic script, and the principle of reducing letter variations to a minimum number. Four proposals aiming at such systems deserve special attenion, those of Taymour, Khattar and Lakhdar and the proposal approved by the Egyptian Academy. Taymour, an influential novelist, playwright and academician, sub18

Other defects noted by reformers include the absence of long vowels in certain words, or the complex set of rules regarding the shape the glottal stop should take in different positions or vowel environments. 14 The earliest proposal for a new script was voiced by Az-Zahäwl (1863-1936) in his perceptive study of the defects of the Arabic alphabet (Az-Zahäwl 1896). For other details on proposed reforms note Al-Toma (1961b: 403-415). 14 On proposals made before the second World War, see Qudsi (1923) and Madkür (1962: 12). 1β Among the merits Fahml listed for his proposal are the use of vowels and one form for each symbol and the simplified transition from Arabic to learning other languages which use the Roman alphabet; The Egyptian Academy (1946: 28-34). »« See Müsä (1945: 137-139; 1955: 44); Frayfca (1955: 189-193); §abri (1964: 289303); cAql (1961), the Lebanese poet, used a romanized alphabet in printing an entire collection of his colloquial poetry.

Language Education in Arab Countries

285

mitted his proposal to the congress of the Egyptian Academy held in Cairo, 1951. It called for the use of thirty characters consisting primarily of the variants presently used in initial position (Taymour 1951a: 36, 1951b: 18). In describing the merits of his proposal, Taymour stressed the fact that it does not involve a break with tradition, and that it facilitates considerably the task of printing, reading, and promoting literacy. Khattar's unified Arabic is similar in principle, but differs in its attempt to create thirty symbols having the essential identifying trait of the existing letters (Khattar 1955). Lakhdar devised, while working as a director of the Moroccan Institute of Fundamental Education, a printing system which reduced the characters to 67. It was actually tested in printing a newspaper designed for newly literate readers and was adopted by the Moroccan government with an ultimate objective in mind of using the system for printing textbooks and extending its use to other Arab countries (Monteil 1960: 51-52). However, the Egyptian Academy, which has been concerned with the problems since 1938, did not endorse any of these or other proposals, but preferred to entrust a committee set up for this purpose with the task of reforming the writing system. In 1956, a joint committee representing both the Academy and the Cultural Department of the Arab League called for two important changes: the reduction of letter variants and the use of vocalization in printed literature especially in school textbooks. By 1960, the Academy gave its full support to a new system for printing consisting of 135 symbols or characters (The Egyptian Academy 1961: 20-25). The proposed system still retains two or more variants for most letters, nevertheless it has reduced the number of characters required for printing vocalized texts to about one third of the number used at present. The efficiency of the system was tested in printing a pamphlet dealing with the problems, and it is the Academy's hope that Ministries of Education in different Arab countries will put it into wider use.17 1.3

Arabization

Arabization can be viewed as a process aiming at achieving maximum use of Arabic in different Arab countries in oral and written communication. It covers issues ranging from the general question of making Arabic the official language of the state, the language of instruction, to matters related to the preparation of technical and scientific terminology in Arabic. In this broad sense, all Arab countries are faced with one phase or another of Arabization. But it is in North African countries 17

The writer received a letter from the Academy's Secretary, Dr. Madkür, dated April 22, 1967, in which he pointed out that the Academy's recommendations were being implemented in the preparation of textbooks.

286

Salih J.

Altoma

and, to a certain extent, in the Sudan, that Arabization presents a special challenge to the teaching of Arabic and its role as a language of instruction.18 Therefore, our discussion will be confined to Arabization as it proceeded in these countries. Prior to the independence of Morocco and Tunisia (1956) and Algeria (1962), French dominated the educational system, while Arabic was relegated to a marginal position and treated more or less as a foreign language. Upon attaining their independence, these countries had to face the unavoidable question of the place of the national language, i.e. Arabic, in the educational program. As a matter of ultimate objective, all declared that the educational system should be Arabized. However, there emerged differences regarding the courses to be followed in achieving this objective. 1.3.1 In Morocco two opposing trends became apparent.19 The first, strongly associated with nationalism and Islam, favored an immediate and maximum Arabization; the other, while acknowledging the importance of Arabization, felt that it was more important to provide the pupils with basic education in French, and to maintain an effective educational system than to proceed with Arabization at any cost.20 However, the former prevailed at the Ministry of National Education during the early years of independence. In accordance with the Ministry's plan for 1956-1957, the first grade was to be completely Arabized, and instruction in the r e m a i n i n g four grades was to be equally divided between Arabic and French. But by the end of 1958, it was realized 18

The role of Arabic as a language of instruction in another Arab country, Iraq, has not been satisfactorily defined in areas where non-Arab minorities, particularly Kurds, are concentrated. In such areas, Kurdish has been used as a language of instruction in the primary schools, but, in recent years, demands were made to extend the use of Kurdish as the language of instruction at various levels in the 'Kurdish region'. At certain points in the negotiations of 1964 between the central authority and Kurdish leaders, the government seemed willing to extend Kurdish as the language of instruction to the end of the intermediate level (three years beyond the elementary school. See Ad-Durrah 1966: 381-382). Another Arab country, Mauritania, has not yet embarked on Arabization, and has retained French as its official language in spite of the fact that Arabic is the national language (Sasnett and Sepmeyer 1966: 690-697). " For a detailed examination of these and other trends see Zartman (1964: 155161). On the view of the traditionalists, see Al-Fäsl (1963a and b), As-§atiräwi (1959), and Al-Baghdädl (1960). 20 An editorial published in Al-lstiqlal, October 16,1956, reflected the dimensions of the problem by declaring: "If we are happy to see our language finally given the importance it deserves, we are no less eager that our children go to school. If the number of teachers capable of teaching in Arabic is insufficient, we would prefer to see our children learn French rather than leaving them in the streets" (Zartman 1964: 158-159).

Language Education in Arab Countries

287

that Arabization in the primary schools had resulted in lowering the quality of education due to a number of factors including the shortage of qualified teachers and inadequate planning.21 A commission for the reform of education endorsed in 1958 the principle of Arabization but proposed that French be used in teaching science and arithmetic, and suggested the formation of a subcommission to formulate plans for Arabizing education. The problems were reviewed by the Superior Council of National Education and a new plan was agreed upon for progressive Arabization beginning with 1960-1961 (Arab Information Center 1966: 149, Zartman 1964: 187-188). In January 1960, an Institute of Studies and Arabization was set up to prepare necessary materials in Arabic, such as textbooks and dictionaries, and to develop the linguistic base for Arabization of the three educational levels over fifteen to twenty years. It was natural for Morocco to turn to other Arab countries for guidance and assistance and consequently an Arab conference on Arabization was held in Rabat in 1961 leading to the creation of a permanent bureau for coordinating Arabization under the aegis of the Arab League. Since its inception in 1962, the Bureau has sponsored several conferences reviewing pertinent problems, issued a periodical Al-Lisän Al-'Arabi22 devoted to various aspects of Arabization, and prepared pedagogical materials and several technical dictionaries. Of the latter, the following dictionaries have been prepared: a dictionary based on textbooks (primary school) used in all Arab countries, France, Britain, and Italy,23 and three other dictionaries for high school subjects: chemistry, mathematics and physics. As a result of these efforts and other measures which aimed at training Moroccan teachers, considerable progress was made toward Arabizing the primary schools. Although the Unesco yearbook of 1965 states that by October 1964 primary education was entirely Arabized, other sources cite 1967 as the terminal year for Arabizing the primary school.24 As for the language of instruction in the secondary schools, French 81

The shortage of teachers is viewed as the primary reason for the setback in Arabization. Writing for Unesco's The World Survey of Education, III (New York, 1961), the Ministry of National Education stated: "Arabization is essential in a country whose religion, everyday language and traditions are based on the Arabic language. Nevertheless, while it is natural that Arabic should be the cultural vehicle for Morocco, Arabization must not lose sight of facts. Arabization, of course, is bound up with the staffing question. The problem is to recruit and train Moroccan teachers" (842). 22 By 1967, five volumes of the periodical had appeared. 23 Bin 'Abdullah, the secretary general of the Bureau, considers this dictionary a tool serving to spread technical terms used in Western countries and to unify the terminology current in the Arab world. See Bin 'Abdullah (1966: 62-63). 2 * Unesco (1962: 104; 1965: 248); Bin 'Abdullah (1966: 66); Al-Lisän AVArabi (1966: 4, 59).

288

Salih J. Altoma

remains predominant (20 out of 33 weekly hours given in French).25 This seems to have been the policy since 1957 when a commission on secondary education decided that, pending the training of competent teachers, all specialized subjects be taught in French or Spanish.28 In the meantime, efforts have been made to Arabize secondary education within seven years, effective 1967, as indicated in the plan submitted by the Permanent Bureau for Arabization.27 1.3.2 In Tunisia, the drive for immediate Arabization was not destined to prevail, in spite of demands made for such a course of action (Lelong 1956: 415-422, Gordon 1964: 74). The Tunisian government felt that: "After the almost complete neglect of Arabic during the Protectorate, it was almost impossible to raise Arabic to being the sole vehicle of instruction immediately. A shortage of qualified teachers and the absence of adequate textbooks forbade such action as much as it might have been desired. Gradual well-timed progress was in order to avoid confusion and harm to the students in their various stages of education."28 During the first two years of independence (1956-1958) the first and second grades were Arabized, but bilingual instruction was pursued in the remaining grades.29 In the secondary school, the language of instruction remained divided almost exactly as it was before independence, between one third in Arabic and two thirds in French. Although officials have continued to declare that the ultimate objective is to completely Arabize the instruction, questions have been raised as to whether Tunisia is not practically or deliberately prolonging bilingual instruction (Brown 1965: 160, 165). According to latest available data, Arabic has already become the vehicular language for all subjects in the so-called Normal Section of the secondary schools, and the bilingual classes in which French serves as the language of instruction are to be Arabized as qualified Tunisian teachers become available.50 t5

In areas formerly under Spanish rule, Spanish continues to dominate. *· See the Ministry's report to Unesco (1964: 113), which points out that, as a rule, all subjects are taught in French with the exception of the Arabic language and Islamic subjects. The report adds: "It has sometimes been possible for history and geography as well as philosophy to be taught in the original literary sections by Arabic speaking teachers." « Al-Lisän Al-usül an-nafrw (Damascus). 1962 Ifä4ir al-luga al-lArabiyya fi aS-iäm (Cairo). AJjmad, Muhammad Khalafalla 1948 "Tayslr an-naqd wa al-baläga fi marljala at-talim a0-0änawi", AlMutamar ae-eaqäfi Al-eArabJ Al-Awwal, ed. by Arab League, 143-147 (Cairo). Akil, Fakhir 1953 The basic vocabulary of the arabic primary reading (Damascus). Akrawi, Matta 1945 "I$läb al-xatt Al-cArabI", Al-Muqtafaf 106: 245-252, 352-361, 435-442. 1960 "Educational planning in a developing country: the Sudan", International Review of Education 6: 257-282. Al-'Aläyili, 'Abdullah 1963 Al-Marji\ vol. I (Beirut). Ali, Nasr El Hag 1960 "Educational problems in the Sudan", Sudan Notes and Records 41: 66-77. Al-ÄlQsI, Jamal Ad-Din and Abdul Ri