The Power of Language Policy

Transcription

1 Maartje De Meulder The Power of Language Policy The Legal Recognition of Sign Languages and the Aspirations of Deaf Communities Jyväskylä 16 December 2016

2

3

4 The power of language policy?

5 Language policy as mechanism of power Johnson (2013) calls for a balance Ethnographic understanding of the agency! of language policy actors

6 Ethnography of language policy How people create, interpret and appropriate language policies Language policy as a multi-layered and multi-sited construct Capturing the processes of language planning Linguistic and social justice

7

8 recognition

9 Sign language recognition:! Legal measures and implementation Strengthen in practice Scrutinize academically Measure against challenges of endangerment and sustaining vitality

10 changing ideological atmosphere Influence on justifications and outcomes? Protection and Promotion of Languages

11 1 JYVÄSKYLÄ STUDIES IN HUMANITIES 301 Maartje De Meulder JAKAJA: Jyväskylän yliopiston kirjasto, PL 35, JYVÄSKYLÄN YLIOPISTO DISTRIBUTOR: University Library of Jyväskylä, P.O. Box 35, FI UNIVERSITY OF JYVÄSKYLÄ FINLAND The Power of Language Policy The Legal Recognition of Sign Languages and the Aspirations of Deaf Communities Maartje De Meulder The Power of Language Policy The Legal Recognition of Sign Languages and the Aspirations of Deaf Communities Acta Academiae Paedagogicae Jyväskyläensis Jyväskylä Studies in Education, Psychology and Social Research Studia Historica Jyväskyläensia Studia Philologica Jyväskyläensia Jyväskylä Studies in the Arts Studies in Sport, Physical Education and Health Biological Research Reports from the University of Jyväskylä Jyväskylä Studies in Computer Science, Economics and Statistics Jyväskylä Studies in Communication Jyväskylä Studies in Biological and Environmental Science Jyväskylä Studies in Computing Jyväskylä Studies in Business and Economics Jyväskylä Studies in Statistics Jyväskylä Studies in Languages Jyväskylä Studies in Humanities RESEARCH SERIES PUBLISHED BY THE UNIVERSITY OF JYVÄSKYLÄ Jyväskylä 2016 Sign Language Recognition: Tensions between Specificity and Universalism in International Deaf Discourses MAARTJE DE MEULDER A Barking Dog That Never Bites? The British Sign Language (Scotland) Bill Abstract MAARTJE DE MEULDER THE POWER OF LANGUAGE POLICY This article describes and analyses the pathway to the British Sign Language (Scotland) Bill and the strategies used to reach it. Data collection has been done by means of interviews with key players, analysis of official documents, and participant observation. The article discusses the bill in relation to the Gaelic Language (Scotland) Act 2005 and posits that, although the bill will raise awareness, it also has significant weaknesses. These include the absence of enforceable rights, the representative imbalance during the negotiation process, the perception of BSL as a tool to access public services, the question who is benefiting from recognition, and most of all the absence of educational linguistic rights and cultural rights. Note: Acronyms used are as follows: AoHL Action on Hearing Loss BDA British Deaf Association CPGD Cross-Party Group on Deafness NDCS National Deaf Children s Society NGBU Nongovernment Bills Unit SCoD Scottish Council on Deafness JYVÄSKYLÄ STUDIES IN HUMANITIES 301 Maartje De Meulder The Power of Language Policy The Legal Recognition of Sign Languages and the Aspirations of Deaf Communities MAARTJE DE MEULDER The Legal Recognition of Sign Languages Abstract This article provides an analytical overview of the different types of explicit legal recognition of sign languages. Five categories are distinguished: constitutional recognition, recognition by means of general language legislation, recognition by means of a sign language law or act, recognition by means of a sign language law or act including other means of communication, and recognition by legislation on the functioning of the national language council. The article further describes three categories of implicit (legal) recognition. Sign languages and their users are often ignored in the context of language policy. However, the recognition of sign languages is one of the major concepts addressed in international deaf discourse (De Meulder forthcoming) and is a fairly new area in the field of (critical) language policy and language rights. The different sorts of rights (if any) granted by means of recognition at the national level are illustrative of the ways in which countries accommodate (or neglect to accommodate) linguistic and cultural diversity. Currently about thirty-one countries (of which the majority are European Union member states) have recognized their sign language(s) in legislation on language status and/or language rights. This is the result of Deaf communities demand for explicit legal recognition of their languages, often in relation to already existing implicit recognition. The difference is that explicit recognition can make implicit recognition work, strengthen it, or supplement it. 1 For the purpose of clarity, recognition in this article simply means the according of legal status to sign language in legislation on language status and/or language Maartje De Meulder is a PhD researcher at the University of Jyväskylä, Finland. 498 Sign Language Studies Vol. 15 No. 4 Summer 2015 Lang Policy DOI /s ORIGINAL PAPER Promotion in times of endangerment: the Sign Language Act in Finland Maartje De Meulder 1 Received: 25 June 2015 / Accepted: 16 February 2016 Ó Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016 Abstract The development of sign language recognition legislation is a relatively recent phenomenon in the field of language policy. So far only few authors have documented signing communities aspirations for recognition legislation, how they work with their governments to achieve legislation which most reflects these goals, and whether and why outcomes are successful. Indeed, from signing communities point of view, it appears most current legislation leaves much to be desired. One reason for this is the absence of language acquisition rights and the right to access services directly in sign language. This paper, through appealing to a critical language policy framework and employing principles of the ethnography of language policy, will illustrate this by critically analyzing the ambitions and motives, as expressed by the Finnish Association of the Deaf, for a Sign Language Act in Finland. It also compares the situation of signers in Finland with that of the Sámi, the other minority group mentioned in the constitution with designated language legislation. The findings suggest that the Act is innovative and internationally unique in different aspects but does not reflect FAD s most important pursuits, and is very different from the Sámi Language Act. An exploration of the reasons behind this difference, which makes Finland s sign languages both promoted and endangered, can make significant contributions to the field of sign language policy but also to the wider (critical) language policy field. Keywords Sign language legislation Sign language planning and policy Finland Critical language policy & Maartje De Meulder maartje.demeulder@verbeeld.be Department of Languages, Sign Language Centre, University of Jyvaskyla, P.O. Box 35, Jyvaskyla, Finland 123 Buttering Their Bread on Both Sides? The Recognition of Sign Languages and the Aspirations of Deaf Communities Maartje De Meulder Joseph J. Murray ISSN ISBN When deaf people from different countries discuss their national sign language(s) being recognized, they often assume they have a shared image in their minds of how they can understand the concept, what it could or should entail, and why it is important. This international discourse is linked to a specific sign in International Sign (IS) for RECOGNITION. Similarly, when the World Federation of the Deaf (WFD) urges their members to have their national sign languages recognized, a cross-national understanding among their members of what this means is implied, although the practical implementation of this will need to be achieved through national legislation. JYVÄSKYLÄ STUDIES IN HUMANITIES 301 Also, the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) urges ratifying states to recognize and promote the use of sign languages (Article 21e) and recognize and support the specific cultural and linguistic identity of deaf people, including sign languages and deaf culture (Article 30.4) (my emphasis). The inclusion of the concept of recognition in an international convention such as the UNCRPD again points to the cross-national use of the concept, although its interpretation and implementation is left to the discretion of ratifying states, and again determined by national contexts. Sign language recognition is one of the major concepts used in international deaf political discourse. However, to date the meaning of the concept has not warranted much critical academic reflection. When it is used, by deaf political organizations and individual deaf people alike, it is implied to mean both the international deaf political demand for recognition (and the internationally oriented aspirations behind this demand) as well as the specific national implementations of this universal idea. This is the very tension between universalism and specificity inherent in the topic of sign language recognition. British Sign Language (BSL), one of Scotland s autoch thonous minority languages, is used by 12,533 people 1 (Scottish Census 2011). Scottish BSL signers 2 are not territorially concentrated Maartje De Meulder is a PhD researcher at the University of Jyväskylä, Finland. 446 Sign Language Studies Vol. 15 No. 4 Summer

12 Sign language communities:! desired recognition outcomes Groupdifferentiated citizenship Inclusion Key issue: Linguistic and cultural self-determination

13 Three developmental stages 1 Identity value Symbolical recognition 2 Instrumental value! Individual linguistic rights 3 Educational linguistic and! language acquisition rights

14 Dual category membership Disability Linguistic minority Linguistic rights as accessibility accommodation Differential language planning Different degree of scrutiny/different discourse! compared to spoken minority languages Linguistic rights for deaf children

15 Theoretical implications Language Policy and Planning Deaf Studies Political Theory Legal Theory Applied linguistics & Sociolinguistics

16 Maartje De Meulder The Power of Language Policy The Legal Recognition of Sign Languages and the Aspirations of Deaf Communities Jyväskylä 16 December 2016