1887
Volume 36, Issue 2
  • ISSN 0272-2690
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9889
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

The constitutions and legislative statutes of the fifty states in the United States are given an exhaustive screening to identify legal language defining the linguistic obligations of the state and the language rights of individuals and groups. The author suggests that in the United States, “hands-off” is good language policy not only nationwide but also statewide because states adopting a hands-off linguistic policy are consistent with the Constitution of the United States while states adopting a “hands-on” policy are in conflict with it. States adopting hands-on language legislation in their constitutions or statutes are deemed to be “nativist” because they seem unfavorable toward speakers of minority languages, while states adopting a hands-off policy are “non-nativist” because they seem favorable (or at least neutral) toward speakers of minority languages.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/lplp.36.2.03fai
2012-01-01
2019-10-19
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/lplp.36.2.03fai
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