Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-8zxtt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-12T16:21:04.501Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Public understanding of language planning and linguistic rights: The debate on the current Portuguese orthographic reform

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 April 2016

Sílvia Melo-Pfeifer
Sílvia Melo-Pfeifer*
Affiliation:
Universität HamburgDidaktik der sprachlichen und ästhetischen Fächer Von-Melle-Park 8, 20146 Hamburg, Germanysilvia.melo-pfeifer@uni-hamburg.de
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study focuses on the tensions around Portugal's language policies and citizens’ perceptions of their linguistic rights in the context of the current orthographic reform. Unlike other linguistic rights studies, this enquiry does not focus on endangered languages or linguistic minorities. Instead, there are three major ingredients that embody linguistic-rights claims by European Portuguese speakers: the right to be heard on orthographic reform in a democratic society, ownership and authenticity of the Portuguese language, and the need for protection against external (or, more specifically, Brazilian) hegemony. A critical discourse analysis approach to the arguments put forward by European Portuguese opponents of the orthographic reform shows that the ongoing discussion: (i) is neither about language nor about rights, but about competition; (ii) is based on linguistic dichotomies and recategorization of speakers and languages; (iii) manipulates the rhetoric of threat, endangerment, linguistic rights, and democracy; and (iv) opens up intra-linguistic and inter-variety spaces for conceptualizing linguistic rights claims. (Language ideological debate, public understanding, language planning, linguistic rights, orthographic reform)

Type
Articles
Information
Language in Society , Volume 45 , Issue 3 , June 2016 , pp. 423 - 443
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arzoz, Xabier (2007). The nature of language rights. JEMIE 6(2):1–35.Google Scholar
Bagno, Marcos (2011). O que é uma língua? Imaginário, ciência & hipóstase [What is a language? Imaginary, science & hypostasis]. In Lagares, Xóan & Bagno, Marcos (eds.), Políticas da norma e conflitos linguísticos, 355–87. São Paulo: Parábola Editorial.Google Scholar
Baxter, Alan (2012). Portuguese as a pluricentric language. In Clyne, Michael (ed.), Pluricentric languages, 11–44. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Billig, Michael (1995). Banal nationalism. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
Blommaert, Jan (1999). Language ideological debates. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Blommaert, Jan (2005). Discourse: A critical introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cameron, Deborah (2008). Language endangerment and verbal hygiene: History, morality and politics. In Duchêne & Heller, 268–85.Google Scholar
Canagarajah, Suresh (2006). Ethnographic methods in language policy. In Ricento, Thomas (ed.), An introduction to language policy: Theory and method, 153–69. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Catach, Ninah (1991). L'ortographe en débat [Debating orthography]. Paris: Éditions Nathan.Google Scholar
Chand, Vineeta (2011). Elite positionings towards Hindi: Language policies, political stances and language competence in India. Journal of Sociolinguistics 15:6–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chimbutane, Feliciano (2011). Rethinking bilingual education in postcolonial contexts. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Clyne, Michael (2012). Pluricentric languages: Introduction. In Clyne, Michael (ed.), Pluricentric languages, 1–10. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Duchêne, Alexandre, & Heller, Monica (eds.) (2008). Discourses of endangerment. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Garcez, Pedro (1993). Debating the 1990 Luso-Brazilian Orthographic Accord. WPEL 9:43–56.Google Scholar
Garcez, Pedro (1995). The debatable 1990 Luso-Brazilian Orthographic Accord. Language Problems and Language Planning 19:151–78.Google Scholar
Geerts, Guido; van den Broeck, Jef; & Verdoodt, Albert (1977). Successes and failures in Dutch spelling reform. In Fishman, Joshua (ed.), Advances in the creation and revision of writing systems, 179–246. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Heller, Monica, & Duchêne, Alexandre (2008). Discourses of endangerment: Sociolinguistics, globalization and social order. In Duchêne & Heller, 1–13.Google Scholar
Johnson, David (2013). Language policy. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Johnson, Sally (2002). On the origin of linguistic norms: Orthography, ideology and the first constitutional challenge to the 1996 reform of German. Language in Society 31:549–76.Google Scholar
Kang, Yoonhee (2012). Singlish or Globish: Multiple language ideologies and global identities among Korean educational migrants in Singapore. Journal of Sociolinguistics 16:165–83.Google Scholar
Keating, Clara; Solovova, Olga; & Barradas, Olga (2015). Migrations, multilingualism and language policies in Portugal and the United Kingdom: A polycentric approach. In Moita Lopes, 144–62.Google Scholar
Kozinets, Robert; Dolbec, Pierre-Yann; & Earley, Amanda (2014). Netnographic analysis: Understanding culture through social media data. In Flick, Uwe (ed.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative data analysis, 262–76. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
Makoni, Sinfree, & Pennycook, Alastair (ed.) (2007). Disinventing and reconstituting languages. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Marcoccia, Michael (2003). Parler politique dans un forum de discussion [Political talk in a discussion forum]. Langage et société 104:9–55.Google Scholar
Martin-Jones, Marilyn; Blackledge, Adrian; & Creese, Angela (2012). Introduction: A sociolinguistics of multilingualism for our times. In Martin-Jones, Marilyn, Blackledge, Adrian, & Creese, Angela (eds.), The Routledge handbook of multilingualism, 1–26. Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
May, Stephen (2005). Language rights: Moving the debate forward. Journal of Sociolinguistics 9(3):319–47.Google Scholar
May, Stephen (2012). Linguistic rights: Promoting civil multilingualism. In Martin-Jones, Marilyn, Blackledge, Adrian, & Creese, Angela (eds.), The Routledge handbook of multilingualism, 131–42. Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
May, Stephen (2015). Language rights and language policy: Addressing the gap(s) between principles and practices. Current Issues in Language Planning 16(4):355–59.Google Scholar
Melo-Pfeifer, Sílvia (2010). Quando a política linguística sai à rua—Análise de um fórum de discussão acerca do Acordo Ortográfico [When linguistic policy takes to the street—Analysis of a discussion forum about the orthographic reform]. In Marçalo, Maria João, Fonseca, Maria do Céu, Gonçalves, OlgaVilela, Ana Luísa, & Silva, Ana Alexandra (eds.), Língua portuguesa: Ultrapassar fronteiras, juntar culturas. Évora: Universidade de Évora. Online: http://www.simelp2009.uevora.pt/pdf/slg42/05.pdf.Google Scholar
Miller, Jon (2004). Public understanding of, and attitudes toward, scientific research: What we know and what we need to know. Public Understanding of Science 13:273–94.Google Scholar
Millet, Agnès; Lucci, Vincent; & Billiez, Jacqueline (1990). Orthographe mon amour! [Orthography, my love!]. Grenoble: Presses Universitaires de Grenoble.Google Scholar
Moita Lopes, Luiz (ed.) (2015). Global Portuguese. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Nisbet, Matthew, & Goidel, Robert (2007). Understanding citizen perceptions of science controversy: Bridging the ethnographic–survey research divide. Public Understanding of Science 16:421–40.Google Scholar
Phillipson, Robert; Rannut, Mart; & Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove (1995). Introduction. In Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove & Phillipson, Robert (eds.), Linguistic human rights: Overcoming linguistic discrimination, 1–22. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Pinto, Paulo Feytor (2001). Como pensamos a nossa língua e as línguas dos outros [How we think about our language and those of the others]. Lisboa: Editorial Estampa.Google Scholar
Rajagopalan, Kanavillil (1999). Of EFL teachers, conscience, and cowardice. ELT Journal 53(3):200–206.Google Scholar
Rajagopalan, Kanavillil (2001). The politics of language and the concept of linguistic identity. CAUCE 24:17–28.Google Scholar
Ricento, Thomas (2006). Theoretical perspectives in language policy: An overview. In Ricento, Thomas (ed.), An introduction to language policy: Theory and method, 3–9. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sebba, Mark (2007). Spelling and society: The culture and politics of orthography around the world. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sebba, Mark (2009). Sociolinguistic approaches to writing systems research. Writing Systems Research 1(1):35–49.Google Scholar
Signorini, Inês (2015). Portuguese language globalism. In Lopes, Moita, 47–65.Google Scholar
Simões, Antonio (2014). Portuguese. In Fäcke, Christiane (ed.), Manual of language acquisition, 412–32. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove (2006). Language policy and linguistic human rights. In Ricento, Thomas (ed.), An introduction to language policy: Theory and method, 273–91. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove, & Phillipson, Robert (eds.) (1995). Linguistic human rights: Overcoming linguistic discrimination. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Stevenson, Patrick (2008). Research area report—Thematic area B: Language policy and planning. Project Linee—Languages in a network of European excellence. Online: http://linee.info/work-packages/thematic-area-b-language-policy-and-planning.html?PHPSESSID=01050eb04d41b43cb092603a450fa464.Google Scholar
Tollefson, James (2002). Language rights and the destruction of Yugoslavia. In Tollefson, James (ed.), Language policies in education: Critical issues, 179–99. London: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
UNESCO (1996). Universal declaration on linguistic rights. Barcelona: World Conference on Linguistic Rights.Google Scholar
Wee, Lionel (2005). Intra-language discrimination and linguistic human rights: The case of Singlish. Applied Linguistics 26(1):48–69.Google Scholar
Wiley, Thomas (2002). Accessing language rights in education: A brief history of the U.S. context. In Tollefson, James (ed.), Language policies in education: Critical issues, 39–64. London: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar