engleski

Revaluing Minority Language Rights: The Core and the Periphery

Minority language rights are on the upswing nowadays. Kymlicka (2001) sees this as a defense mechanism against the formation of the nation-state with its assimilatory policy, but a further reason is the various postnational aspects of globalization (Wright 2004). Since nationalism a priori rejects the role of minority languages in public communication, the majority needs to be persuaded one way or another (not to say forced) to relax its language policy: not giving up its own national feelings, but permitting others to express their national identification too. If there is enough political good will, new patterns can be found for the satisfaction of all. Some new patterns have their value, so that countries abandon rigid measures and soften their attitudes. Such is the case with membership in the European Union. In 1993, in the context of EU expansion, the European Council adopted the "Copenhagen Criteria" which all future members would have to meet. But the new criteria were not retroactive. Whoever was already "in" didn't have to comply with them. Of course, it's a paradox that these very countries insist on fulfillment of the new criteria but don't themselves accept them and probably never will. For the EU, then, protection of minorities has become an article for export, not for domestic use (De Witte 2002) but on the periphery of its interests. The ''old'' members or ''core countries'' have once again shown the high place they occupy in the hierarchy, "more equal than others". Double standards go far to undermine the credibility of the Union, for they reveal its unfair and selective application of minimum criteria for the defense of minority language rights. Clearly, the lack of codification of minority rights leads to a false perception of the problem, so that both governments and minority communities view it as a matter for national, rather than supranational (language) policy. The EU's reticence on minority problems contributes to such a perception and to neglect of the existing international standards. Minority rights, fragmentation of the national territory and multilayered identities affect linguistic behavior (Wright 2004). Only when all member-states reach a consensus on the minimum of rights that each must guarantee its minorities (the "old", the "new" and the most recent newcomers on the periphery) will we be able to speak of the codification of minority rights. In this way we will eliminate double standards and maintain language diversity ; with other mechanisms of language policy the "new" minorities (migrants and refugees) can gain competence in the majority languages and avoid segregation within minority and/or majority language communities. Double, multiple and multilayered identities are the proof of what has been said. Large-scale population migrations and the arrival of new language communities show a need for reevaluating the existing European language policy and for creating new standards in our multicultural and multilingual world.

minorities, revaluing language rights, European language policy

nije evidentirano