1887
Volume 45, Issue 2
  • ISSN 0272-2690
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9889

Abstract

Abstract

This article revisits a well-known dichotomy (the ‘territorial’ and ‘personal’ principles) and develops a four-element classification of state approaches (from the most generous to the most menacing, from the perspective of speakers of minority languages). The article examines the implications for language policy of geographically dispersed or spatially concentrated patterns of distribution of speakers of particular languages. We begin by exploring the general literature on language policy, focusing in particular on the territorial and personal principles, the use of ‘threshold rules’ at municipal and other subnational levels, and the hybrid language regimes that are often a consequence of sociolinguistic complexity. We consider the extent to which responses to linguistic diversity across Europe may be understood by reference to these principles and categories. We explain why we have selected particular case studies (the Baltic republics, Transylvania, Switzerland, Belgium and Ireland) for further exploration. We conclude that, notwithstanding the value of the typologies we consider, real-life cases are almost invariably more complex, with states implementing policies that defy categorisation, that may change over time, and that may treat different language minorities by reference to different principles.

Available under the CC BY 4.0 license.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/lplp.00074.bur
2021-11-24
2021-11-30
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/lplp.00074.bur.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1075/lplp.00074.bur&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Alesina, A., Baqir, R., & Easterly, W.
    (1999) Public goods and ethnic divisions. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114(4), 1243–1284. 10.1162/003355399556269
    https://doi.org/10.1162/003355399556269 [Google Scholar]
  2. Alesina, A., Devleeschauwer, A., Easterly, W., Kurlat, S., & Wacziarg, R.
    (2003) Fractionalization. Journal of Economic Growth, 8(2), 155–194. 10.1023/A:1024471506938
    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024471506938 [Google Scholar]
  3. Aparicio Fenoll, A., & Kuehn, Z.
    (2016) Does foreign language proficiency foster migration of young individuals within the European Union?In:M. Gazzola and B.-A. Wickström (Eds.), The economics of language policy (pp.331–355). Cambridge (MA)/London: MIT Press. 10.7551/mitpress/9780262034708.003.0011
    https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262034708.003.0011 [Google Scholar]
  4. Arcand, J.-L., & Grin, F.
    (2013) Language in economic development: Is English special and is linguistic fragmentation bad?, inE. Erling and P. Seargeant (Eds.), English and Development: Policy, Pedagogy and Globalization (pp.243–266). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781847699473‑015
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847699473-015 [Google Scholar]
  5. Badie, B.
    (2014) La fin des territoires: Essai sur le désordre international et sur l’utilité sociale du respect. Paris: Fayard.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Barkey, K., & Gavrilis, G.
    (2016) The Ottoman millet system: Non-territorial autonomy and its contemporary legacy. Ethnopolitics15(1), 24–42. 10.1080/17449057.2015.1101845
    https://doi.org/10.1080/17449057.2015.1101845 [Google Scholar]
  7. Batory, A.
    (2010) Kin-state identity in the European context: Citizenship, nationalism and constitutionalism in Hungary. Nations and Nationalism, 16(1), 31–48. 10.1111/j.1469‑8129.2010.00433.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8129.2010.00433.x [Google Scholar]
  8. Bowring, B.
    (1994) Report of a Second Mission to the Republic of Latvia on behalf of the Fédération internationale des ligues des droits de l’homme and the Bar of England and Wales Human Rights Committee. London: Fédération internationale des ligues des droits de l’homme.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Brubaker, R.
    (1992) Citizenship and nationhood in France and Germany. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. (1996) Nationalising states in the old ‘new Europe’ – and the new. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 19(2), 411–437. 10.1080/01419870.1996.9993918
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.1996.9993918 [Google Scholar]
  11. Burckhardt, T.
    (2018) Linguistic disenfranchisement and labour mobility in Europe. In:M. Gazzola, B.-A. Wickström and T. Templin (Eds.), Language policy and linguistic justice: Economics, philosophical and sociolinguistic approaches. (pp.313–335). New York/Berlin: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑75263‑1_10
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75263-1_10 [Google Scholar]
  12. (2021) Linguistic territoriality in Switzerland: Exploring the roots of a constitutional principle. Language Problems and Language Planning, 45(3), 188–218.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Burckhardt, T., & Gazzola, M.
    (2018) Le plurilinguisme européen après le Brexit. Quels effets sur la participation démocratique et la mobilité des citoyens européens ?inJ.-C. Barbier (Ed.), Un retour des nations en Europe ? Réflexions sur la crise politique de l’Union européenne (p.75–103). Paris: La Documentation Française.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Cardinal, L., & Léger, R.
    (2017) La complétude institutionnelle en perspective. Politique et Sociétés, 36(3), 3–14. 10.7202/1042233ar
    https://doi.org/10.7202/1042233ar [Google Scholar]
  15. (2018) The politics of multilingualism in Canada: A neo-institutional approach. In:P. A. Kraus and F. Grin (Eds.), The politics of multilingualism (pp.19–37). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/wlp.6.02car
    https://doi.org/10.1075/wlp.6.02car [Google Scholar]
  16. Cardinal, L., & Sonntag, S.
    (2015a) Traditions étatiques et régimes linguistiques: Comment et pourquoi s’ opèrent les choix de politiques linguistiques?Revue internationale de politique comparée, 22(1), 115–131. 10.3917/ripc.221.0115
    https://doi.org/10.3917/ripc.221.0115 [Google Scholar]
  17. Cardinal, L., & Sonntag, S. K.
    (Eds.) (2015b) State traditions and language regimes. Montreal, QC/Kingston, ON: McGill-Queen’s Press-MQUP.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Chouinard, S.
    (2014) The rise of non-territorial autonomy in Canada: Towards a doctrine of institutional completeness in the domain of minority language rights. Ethnopolitics, 13(2), 141–158. 10.1080/17449057.2013.794495
    https://doi.org/10.1080/17449057.2013.794495 [Google Scholar]
  19. Coakley, J.
    (2012) Nationalism, ethnicity and the state: Making and breaking nations. London: Sage. 10.4135/9781473915107
    https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473915107 [Google Scholar]
  20. (2016a) Introduction: dispersed minorities and non-territorial autonomy. Ethnopolitics, 15(1), 1–23. 10.1080/17449057.2015.1101842
    https://doi.org/10.1080/17449057.2015.1101842 [Google Scholar]
  21. (2016b) Conclusion: Patterns of non-territorial autonomy. Ethnopolitics, 15(1), 166–185. 10.1080/17449057.2015.1101840
    https://doi.org/10.1080/17449057.2015.1101840 [Google Scholar]
  22. (Ed.) (2017) Non-territorial autonomy in divided societies: Comparative perspectives. Abingdon: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. (2018) National identity and the ‘Kohn dichotomy’. Nationalities Papers, 46(2), 252–271. 10.1080/00905992.2017.1360267
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00905992.2017.1360267 [Google Scholar]
  24. (2021) Geographical retreat and symbolic advance: Language policy in Ireland. Language Problems and Language Planning, 45(3), 240–261. 10.1075/lplp.00079.coa
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lplp.00079.coa [Google Scholar]
  25. Csata, Z., & Marácz, L.
    (2016) Prospects on Hungarian as a regional official language and Szeklerland’s territorial autonomy in Romania. International Journal of Minority and Group Rights, 23(4), 530–559. 10.1163/15718115‑02304005
    https://doi.org/10.1163/15718115-02304005 [Google Scholar]
  26. Csata, Z., Hlatky, R., Liu, A. H. and Young, A. P.
    (2021) Ethnic polarization and human development: The conditional effects of the territoriality principle in Transylvania, Romania. Language Problems and Language Planning45(3), 165–187. 10.1075/lplp.00076.csa
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lplp.00076.csa [Google Scholar]
  27. De Schutter, H.
    (2008) The linguistic territoriality principle – a critique. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 25(2), 105–120. 10.1111/j.1468‑5930.2008.00397.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5930.2008.00397.x [Google Scholar]
  28. (2021) Personality and territoriality in theory and in Belgium. Language Problems and Language Planning45(3), 219–239. 10.1075/lplp.00078.sch
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lplp.00078.sch [Google Scholar]
  29. Dembinska, M., Marácz, L., and Tonk, M.
    (2014) Introduction to the special section: Minority politics and the territoriality principle in Europe. Nationalities Papers, 42(3), 355–375. 10.1080/00905992.2013.867934
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00905992.2013.867934 [Google Scholar]
  30. Easterly, W., & Levine, R.
    (1997) Africa’s growth tragedy: Policies and ethnic divisions. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(4), 1203–1250. 10.1162/003355300555466
    https://doi.org/10.1162/003355300555466 [Google Scholar]
  31. Florida, R.
    (2005) Cities and the creative class. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203997673
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203997673 [Google Scholar]
  32. Gazzola, M.
    (2006) Managing multilingualism in the European Union: Language policy evaluation for the European Parliament. Language Policy, 5(4), 393–417. 10.1007/s10993‑006‑9032‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10993-006-9032-5 [Google Scholar]
  33. Grin, F.
    (1994) Immigrant and autochthonous language rights: A territorial approach to multilingualism. In:T. Skutnabb-Kangas, R. Phillipson & M. Rannut (Eds.), Linguistic Human Rights (pp.31–48). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. (2003) Language policy evaluation and the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9780230502666
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230502666 [Google Scholar]
  35. (2010) L’aménagement linguistique en Suisse. Télescope16(3), 55–74.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Kymlicka, W.
    (1989) Liberalism, community and culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Kymlicka, W., & Patten, A.
    (2003) Introduction: Language rights and political theory: Context, issues, and approaches. In:W. Kymlicka & A. Patten (Eds.), Language rights and political theory (pp.1–51). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Laponce, J. A.
    (1987) Languages and their territories. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. (1993) Do languages behave like animals?International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 103(1), 19–30. 10.1515/ijsl.1993.103.19
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl.1993.103.19 [Google Scholar]
  40. Loughlin, J., Kincaid, J. & Swenden, W.
    (Eds.) (2013) Routledge handbook of regionalism and federalism. Abingdon: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203395974
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203395974 [Google Scholar]
  41. Macartney, C. A.
    (1934) National states and national minorities. London: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Marácz, L.
    (2011) Language policies in Central and East European States with Hungarian minorities: Implications for linguistic rights protection of national minorities in the EU. InI. Horváth and M. Tonk (Eds), Minority politics within the Europe of Regions (pp.155–184). Cluj-Napoca: Scientia.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. (2020) Multilingualism in the Hungarian Kingdom (1867–1918): Nature, legal basis and practice. InA. Nuč & A. Wolf (Eds.), Das habsburgische Babylon, 1848–1918 (pp.59–72). Wien: Praesens Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. May, S.
    (2012) Language and minority rights: Ethnicity, nationalism and the politics of language. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. McRae, K. D.
    (1975) The principle of territoriality and the principle of personality in multilingual states. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 1975(4), 33–54.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. (1978) Bilingual language districts in Finland and Canada: Adventures in the transplanting of an institution. Canadian Public Policy, 4, 331–351. 10.2307/3549443
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3549443 [Google Scholar]
  47. (1983) Conflict and compromise in multilingual societies. Switzerland. Waterloo: Wilfred Laurier University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. (1986) Conflict and compromise in multilingual societies. Belgium. Waterloo: Wilfred Laurier University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. (1997) Conflict and compromise in multilingual societies. Finland. Waterloo: Wilfred Laurier University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. (2007) Toward language equality: Four democracies compared. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 187/188, 13–34. 10.1515/IJSL.2007.048
    https://doi.org/10.1515/IJSL.2007.048 [Google Scholar]
  51. Nimni, E.
    (Ed.) (2005) National cultural autonomy and its contemporary critics. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. (2007) National-cultural autonomy as an alternative to minority territorial nationalism, Ethnopolitics, 6(3), 345–364. 10.1080/17449050701487363
    https://doi.org/10.1080/17449050701487363 [Google Scholar]
  53. Nimni, E., Osipov, A., & Smith, D. J.
    (Eds.) (2013) The challenge of non-territorial autonomy: Theory and practice. Oxford: Peter Lang. 10.3726/978‑3‑0353‑0511‑1
    https://doi.org/10.3726/978-3-0353-0511-1 [Google Scholar]
  54. Royal Commission
    Royal Commission (1967) Report of the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism: General introduction: Book 1: Official languages. Ottawa: Government Printer.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Safran, W.
    (1997) Citizenship and nationality in democratic systems: Approaches to defining and acquiring membership in the political community. International Political Science Review, 18(3), 313–335. 10.1177/019251297018003006
    https://doi.org/10.1177/019251297018003006 [Google Scholar]
  56. Scholte, J. A.
    (2005) Globalization: A critical introduction. London: Macmillan International Higher Education. 10.1007/978‑0‑230‑21207‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-230-21207-7 [Google Scholar]
  57. Scott, J. B.
    (1930) Nationality: jus soli or jus sanguinis. American Journal of International Law, 24(1), 58–64. 10.2307/2189299
    https://doi.org/10.2307/2189299 [Google Scholar]
  58. Slama, S.
    (2017) Jus soli, jus sanguinis, principes complémentaires et consubstantiels de la tradition républicaine. Pouvoirs 2017/1 (160), 19–34. 10.3917/pouv.160.0019
    https://doi.org/10.3917/pouv.160.0019 [Google Scholar]
  59. Smith, D. J., & Cordell, K.
    (Eds.) (2008) Cultural autonomy in contemporary Europe. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Smith, D. J., & Hiden, J.
    (2012) Ethnic diversity and the nation state: National cultural autonomy revisited. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203118320
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203118320 [Google Scholar]
  61. Stojanović, N.
    (2010) Une conception dynamique du principe de territorialité linguistique: la loi sur les langues du canton des Grisons. Politique et sociétés, 29(1), 231–259. 10.7202/039962ar
    https://doi.org/10.7202/039962ar [Google Scholar]
  62. Van Parijs, P.
    (2004) Europe’s linguistic challenge. Archives Européennes de Sociologie/European Journal of Sociology/Europäisches Archiv für Soziologie, 45(1), 113–154. 10.1017/S0003975604001407
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003975604001407 [Google Scholar]
  63. (2011a) Linguistic justice for Europe and for the World. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780199208876.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780199208876.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  64. (2011b) The linguistic territoriality principle: Right violation or parity of esteem?InP. De Grauwe & P. Van Parijs (Eds.), The linguistic territoriality principle: Right violation or parity of esteem? [Re-Bel e-book 11] (pp.5–20). Brussels: Re-Bel Initiative.
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Vizi, B.
    (Ed.) (2016) Territoriality, language rights and minorities – European perspectives, Special Issue, International Journal of Minority and Group Rights, 23(4). 10.1163/15718115‑02304001
    https://doi.org/10.1163/15718115-02304001 [Google Scholar]
  66. Wickström, B.-A.
    (2019) The percentage rule for minority language rights: Inadequate or discriminatory, Język. Komunikacja. Informacja, 14, 72–84.
    [Google Scholar]
  67. (2020) On the political economy of minority rights. Three ways to manipulate a minority: goals, rules, and border poles. European Journal of Political Economy, 64: doi:  10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2020.101894
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2020.101894 [Google Scholar]
  68. Williams, C. H.
    (2013) Linguistic minorities in democratic context. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/lplp.00074.bur
Loading
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error