Language Problems and Language Planning - Volume 39, Issue 1, 2015

The Chinese script simplification movement originated from the debates about Chinese script (hànzì) in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. This movement was once the dominant part of language planning and language policy in China. The article describes the three major stages of Chinese script reform in the 20th century briefly, using Cooper’s ‘accounting scheme’ and its eight components as its organizing framework. In the case of Chinese script reform, two of the stages of the script reform movement — the first and third — failed, while the second was successful. In order to explain both the two failures and the success, this article focuses on the motives of the stages of the script reform movement. The discussions about the motives behind Chinese script reform in the literature generally focus on the contribution which the simplified hànzì has made to the improvement of China’s education; this article seeks to interpret the motives of the three stages of the script reform movement, rather, along the lines of the 7i model proposed by Ager. It concludes that there have been different motives present during different stages of the script reform movement, which in turn have had a powerful impact of the success or failure of particular reform efforts. Finally, it is suggested that the predominant trend in Chinese language planning and policy has now turned from script simplification to standardization.

This paper examines the linguistic obligations of the European Union and the language rights of its citizens as stated in the Treaty of Lisbon. As with the 2004 draft of the EU Constitution, the Treaty fails to address the language rights of minorities, including those seeking to secede from their own countries (e.g., Catalonia, Scotland) in their quest for political, cultural, and linguistic rights. De jure language rights for speakers of minority languages and a more pluralistic approach to language legislation are deemed necessary in the EU.

This analysis of language use and legislation in globalization highlights challenges to and crossings of the borders of Indonesian nationalist ideologies and local language ecologies. Through the specific workings of language and languaging in situ, here explored through three brief examples of language use and ideologies in Central Java, I analyze university English majors’ discussions of the local meaningfulness of English. The analysis demonstrates that institutional language policies are simultaneously subverted by and influential in local language hierarchies. The discussions analyzed come from the students’ written Sociolinguistics class assignments while I was their teacher and from research interviews that they participated in with me, both in which I ask participants about the borders of what can be defined as the English language, and the borders of linguistic ideologies and nationalism in contemporary Indonesia. With an intent stemming from the very origins of language policy research to generate ideas for how state apparatuses might better serve their constituents (Fishman, 1974), this information is essential for understanding the limitations and opportunities that states are instrumental in creating among their citizenries.

This article examines the phenomenon of language shift from a macroeconomic and ideological perspective. More specifically it looks at how phenomena such as nationalism and globalization, which are closely related to the capitalist mode of production, have affected the spread of some languages and the demise of others, usually minority and regional languages. A special emphasis is placed on the ideology of modernity as a major cause for language shift in the world. Each section in the article includes examples from the areas in the world where the author has carried out his own research and possible solutions to the problems set forth.

Although planned languages such as Esperanto have achieved only limited success in their attempt to facilitate international communication so far, they have attracted considerable attention in discussions on the language question. This article examines how the topic is treated in recent publications on linguistics and language policy. The analysis reveals that researchers put forward a number of recurrent arguments for and against. Among arguments in favour of planned languages are their contribution to equal rights in international communication, their positive impact on the learning of other foreign languages, and their cost saving effects. Arguments against them include their bad image and limited communicative functions. Some researchers make predictions about the possible developments in the linguistic structure of Esperanto in the case of its official adoption, taking the development of ethnic languages as a point of departure. Esperanto’s Eurocentricity, its alleged isolation from culture, and the (non)existence of native speakers are among the features that are controversially discussed in the literature. Some conclusions for further interlinguistic research are drawn.