Language Problems and Language Planning - Volume 41, Issue 3, 2017

In September 2015 the United Nations (UN) adopted 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) offering an internationally agreed blueprint for economic, environmental and social development. However those most in need and specifically targeted by the SDGs face significant barriers in accessing information and knowledge about the goals and sustainability in a language or medium that can be understood. Drawing on previous research on the UN’s language policy and practice ( McEntee-Atalianis, 2006 , 2015 , 2016 ) and analyses of recent UN reports and resolutions on multilingualism, information policy and practice and the SDGs, this article examines the current status of multilingualism and information transfer within the Organisation. Significant linguistic and digital barriers are identified. It is argued that the UN must plan in more linguistically plural and inclusive ways by developing a tri-sectoral communication network strategy involving civil society, public and private sectors in order to facilitate knowledge transfer and participation, thereby ensuring that no one is left behind.

El proceso globalizador ha traído consigo una reestructuración en todos los niveles, un cambio profundo en la manera en la que se distribuyen los recursos y el poder (político, económico, cultural, comunicativo, etc.). En este sentido, en el ámbito lingüístico, la difusión y hegemonía internacional de unas pocas lenguas e identidades hipercentrales se ha visto muy auxiliada por el surgimiento de organismos y agentes transnacionales y supraestatales, así como por la producción de industrias culturales globales. No obstante, frente a estas tendencias homogeneizadoras de la mundialización, las sociedades han respondido al impacto globalizador con una intensificación de flujos locales y contactos interregionales. De esta manera, las distintas comunidades lingüísticas han buscado relocalizar su identidad y han emergido nuevos sistemas de estratificación normativa en las tradicionales ‘periferias lingüísticas’. En consecuencia, la política y la planificación lingüísticas en torno al español y, en especial, los principales organismos de regulación idiomática en el mundo hispánico (las Academias de la lengua) se han visto en la necesidad de reorientar, no sin dificultades, sus líneas y estrategias de actuación. Tal y como se explica en este trabajo, el pluricentrismo lingüístico se ha presentado como un modelo de estandarización más adecuado para atender a las nuevas demandas y reivindicaciones identitarias en estos tiempos de interacción entre lo global y lo local.

This paper explores how Esperanto (Esperantists) plays an important role in Chinese language reform during 1911–1958. It divides the period into three stages and describes Esperantists’ activities from three perspectives accordingly: roles, goals/results and motives. The paper reveals Esperantists’ roles have transformed from “people with influence” to “people with expertise” and then “people with power.” From the perspective of goals/results, the first stage failed because it didn’t achieve the goals as expected while the second and third stages were successful. In order to further explain reasons for the failure or success, this article goes on to analyze the three stages from Ager’s 7i Model (motives). It shows that these motives as social factors largely affecting language planning are not of paramount importance in accounting for the different results. The paper concludes that the study of planned language will be valuable for language planning through the case of Esperantists’ activities in Chinese language reform and suggests further investigations on different language schemes associated with Esperantists in China.

This article explores the shifting relations that took place from the last decades of the 19th to the first years of the 20th century between two of the most innovative language movements of the time: the spelling reform and the artificial language movements. The article focuses on the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany and France. Although both movements shared a similar language ideology which run counter to the organicist perception of language and emphasized its democratic function, the article shows how the shifting political environment in which they operated affected their relation. The article identifies three stages. In a first stage, and convinced that the reform of the spelling and the promotion of an artificial, neutral language were not mutually exclusive projects, the spelling reformers were favorably inclined towards artificial language projects. In a second stage relations began to skew when some reformers advocated for the “natural Esperanto” solution, which implied the promotion of a small language to the status of the international lingua franca. In the last stage, when nationalist sentiments and international rivalries mounted, the spelling reformers broke ties with the artificial language movement and worked to improve as much as possible the international standing of their own languages.