Language Problems and Language Planning - Volume 33, Issue 2, 2009

Taking fluctuations in Luxembourgish language policy as a springboard for discussion, this paper is informed by two interrelated theoretical points that have been flagged in recent language policy scholarship. The first is the move to view language policy as encompassing much more than documents declaring “official” and “national” languages, which is connected to the assertion that language policy is never absent and that it is necessary for scholars to grapple with both explicit and implicit dimensions of policy. Second, a case is made for exploring the dynamics of language policy in a wide range of settings, considering both “top-down” implementations and acts “from below” ranging from compliance to resistance. A close look at the interrelationship between language policy mechanisms and social practices shows that events unfolding at the global and local levels need to be taken into account in addition to those at the level of the state.

This paper explores the link between explicit Luxembourgish language policy and the actual practices as well as expressed attitudes of a group of speakers of Luxembourgish, with the aim of studying the role of World War II in the advancement of Luxembourgish as Luxembourg’s national language. The first two sections introduce the theoretical approach of the paper and provide an overview of the history and present situation of Luxembourg and Luxembourgish. The following two sections present the findings of a sociolinguistic study of language choice, language values and identities, and linguistic (in)security among a group of Luxembourgish letter-writers, as well as recent interview data provided by the sole surviving correspondent. The final section brings together these results and the claims made regarding the role of World War II in the changing status of Luxembourgish and points out the complexity of this discussion.

This paper takes a language ideological approach to describe the ongoing processes of the construction and negotiation of emergent romano- or lusobourgish ethnicities and identities within Luxembourgish society. The first two sections discuss the main theoretical assumptions of the language ideological approach and provide an overview of the language situation in Luxembourg. The following two sections present the results of an ethnographic study of language use, language ideologies and identity construction among luso-descendant adolescents attending a number of youth centres in Luxembourg city. The final section considers the implications of these results for language-in-education policy and, more particularly, the importance of creating “literacy bridges” for transnational students, rather than some form of mother-tongue education, as a first step towards the elusive goal of educational equity.

For decades the primary focus of language policy research has been activities by states and their agencies, while policy activities in workplaces have attracted little attention. Addressing this gap, this paper investigates language management policies in financial institutions in the multilingual context of Luxembourg. Shohamy’s (2006) theoretical framework, largely based on the context of the state, is adopted and extended to financial institutions. Financial institutions operate in the globalised context of international banking and represent an interesting focal point for examining language policy in the globalising world. Explicit and implicit dimensions of policy are investigated by exploring the discrepancy between explicit language management policies on the working language of financial institutions and reported language use practices. Two international banks are discussed in this paper to provide insight into the complex nature of language policy and the importance of both top-down and bottom-up pressures on language practices.

By examining specific articles on the subject, this commentary explores how language policies and use in Luxembourg individually and collectively inform the complex intersections of multilingualism/ecology, identities/agency and nationalism/ideology. These studies suggest theoretical and policy implications by investigating the topics of agency, ideology and ecology as these unfold in everyday situated practices. The papers specifically offer contributions to our understanding of multilingualism, transnational identities, and nationalism. The commentary concludes by suggesting the need for policies relevant to diverse linguistic and ethnic identities which, thus, foster educational and social equity.

Personal experiences have rarely been viewed as part of the domain of language policy, since policies are generally created from the top down, often to meet ideological or political agendas. The study of linguistic practices in a small country like Luxembourg offers particular opportunities to consider how language policy needs also to be formulated from the bottom up, since it has a direct effect on the rights and opportunities of often marginalized populations. Confronting these questions in small countries, which are hedged about with all of the complexities of their larger neighbours, may offer solutions that can be applied in due course in larger countries too.