Editorial Manager(tm) for Language Policy Manuscript Draft
Manuscript Number: LPOL-48 Title: KAPLAN, ROBERT B. and BALDAUF Jr., RICHARD B. (Eds). Language Planning and Policy in Europe, Vol. 1. Hungary, Finland and Sweden. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters, 2005. Pp. 332. Hb. $64.95. Article Type: Book Review Keywords: book review; language policy Corresponding Author: Professor Tove Skutnabb-Kangas, PhD Corresponding Author's Institution: First Author: Tove Skutnabb-Kangas Order of Authors: Tove Skutnabb-Kangas; Robert Phillipson
Manuscript (Author Information Must Not Appear)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65
KAPLAN, ROBERT B. and BALDAUF Jr., RICHARD B. (Eds). Language Planning and Policy in Europe, Vol. 1. Hungary, Finland and Sweden. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters, 2005. Pp. 332. Hb. $64.95. Reviewed by TOVE SKUTNABB-KANGAS and ROBERT PHILLIPSON This edited volume republishes three monographs of around 100 pages each, which were earlier published in readily available journals in 2000 (Hungary, by Péter Medgyes and Katalin Miklósy, pp. 22-116), 2002 (Finland, by Sirkku Latomaa and Pirkko Nuolijärvi, pp. 125-232) and 1999 (Sweden, by Birger Winsa, pp. 233-330). No editing has taken place, and only the Hungarian monograph has been updated in an appendix (pp. 117-124). In addition it contains a four-page overview of the whole series, an introduction to this first European volume (pp. 6-12) and a list of further reading (pp. 12-21) suggested by the editors. It is puzzling that a new volume should consist of three already published studies. While the editors admit that the volume is not coherent, geographically, linguistically, or otherwise, even if rich in data, the book does not take theories or models of language policy and planning (LPP) forward. The editors write (p. 6) that LPP is not ‘science’, but they want the studies to adhere to the ‘basic tenets of science’. It is also odd, to put it mildly, to publish, in 2005, a book where a lot of the information about the ‘current’ (as the authors repeatedly claim – it was current when the articles were written some 6-10 years ago) situation is misleading. Finland had, for instance, in 2003 a new general Kielilaki/Språklag (Language Act) (number 423, at http://www.finlex.fi/en/laki/kaannokset/2003/en20030423, some background for the Act, at http://www.om.fi/uploads/i0qyauwgw18ziqq.pdf) and a new Saamen kielilaki (Sámi Language Act) (number 424, at http://www.finlex.fi/en/laki/kaannokset/2003/en20031086). In addition, the immigrant and refugee minority situation has changed fairly radically since 1999, and the educational situation of all children, including the indigenous Saami and the minorities in Finland, has experienced many changes, both legally and in terms of statistics. The Swedish situation has also changed substantially, with the extensive new national language policy documents Mål i mun: Förslag till handlingsprogram för svenska språket (Speech: Draft action programme for the Swedish language) of 2002 (see www.sweden.gov.se/sb/d/108/a/1443;jsessionid=aU82FIh19Z88) and Bästa språket: En samlad svensk språkpolitik (Best language: A concerted language policy for Sweden) (see www.sweden.gov.se/sb/d/5359/a/50761;jsessionid=aLkNxSxQwat-) of 2005. Thus, these articles provide interesting historical accounts, but are not up-to-date. The editors’ introduction to the volume contains, in addition to errors (e.g. the claim that no EU treaties guarantee rights to linguistic minorities), what many would consider ethnocentric and belittling claims about the three states and their languages. For instance, all three countries are claimed to be ‘smaller states within the European context … in area’ (p. 9), and the countries named as examples of ‘large’ ones are France (547,030 sq.km) and Germany (356,910 sq.km) (p. 9; both figures differ from those given by Eurostat, see below). In fact, Finland and Sweden (338,145 and 441,370 sq.km, respectively) have a larger area than all other EU countries (27) except France and Spain (see http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page?_pageid=1996,39140985&_dad=portal&_s
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65
chema=PORTAL&screen=detailref&language=en&product=Yearlies_new_regio&root =Yearlies_new_regio/F/fa/faa/faa10512). Hungarian and Swedish are claimed to have ‘long histories’ (p. 8); obviously for the editors oral Finnish histories do not count as history. In the EU context, the editors claim that ‘[m]any of what are now perceived as minor languages (including national language [sic.] now reduced to minority status) may have had significant histories, in some cases may have a standard variety’ (p. 11; emphases added). Perceived by whom? No EU national/official languages are reduced to a minority status: all 23 official languages have equal legal status, and all of them have a standard variety. Several references are missing, author names are misspelled, etc. And the ‘Further Reading’ list with its literally hundreds of mistakes does no credit to LPP. Most letters ä, ö and å in Finnish and Swedish references have been rendered as a, o and a, respectively, likewise, the German ü as u, even in author names; capitals have been added to Nordic titles where we do not use them; German words are misspelled, etc. The authors of the articles have seen their tasks very differently. All three papers are extremely detailed. The Swedish article puts ‘particular emphasis on minority languages’ (p. 233) (though immigrant minority languages are almost absent despite the fact that 16.7 % of ‘Swedes’ had at the end of 2006 two parents born in other countries (http://www.scb.se/templates/tableOrChart____26040.asp). There is also very little about Swedish except as the dominant language forced on historical minorities. The main focus is on Meänkieli (Tornedalen Finnish), one of the five languages officially accepted as minority languages in Sweden’s ratification of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages. The article is historically rich but disorganised and erratic in its description, with a lot of central literature not reported on, many errors and questionable claims. Ideologically it is biased in favour of Meänkieli and against the Finnish of the immigrant minority. The Hungarian article has as its ‘primary focus’ the Hungarian language (because 98% of the population speak Hungarian as their mother tongue); the ‘secondary focus’ is on foreign language instruction (p. 22). The Hungarian study benefits by familiarity with the administration of state education, including foreign language education, but fails to do justice to sociolinguistic research on Hungarian domestically and in the central European region. The authors’ sociolinguistic naivety can be seen in conflicting statements: Hungarian in neighbouring states is reported as being ‘limited in all spheres of life’, which is incompatible with ‘functional distribution’ (pp. 48-49). LPP for minority languages is just as important as for the majority language; demographics (2% minorities) cannot be used as an excuse for excluding them. The Finnish article is a model of detailed documentation and analysis, providing a balanced overview of policies towards all the languages used in the country, in a historical context. If there is any bias, this might be in the description of some of the positive plans on paper in relation to the Saami, the Roma and the Deaf as closer to implementation than they actually are (at the same time as the authors are also critical of Finnish policies). There could have been more emphasis on the positive aspects of the Finnish education system and bilingual legal system (in relation to Finnish and Swedish, the official national languages). Finally, the volume contains no index or list of contents for the individual articles, making it unsuitable for reference purposes. As LPP is still taking shape as a research
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65
activity of increasing relevance to governments and scholars worldwide, it is disappointing that a specialist publication of this kind is so disparate, selective, and flawed. This is an inauspicious start for a series that claims to aim high. ABOUT THE REVIEWERS Tove Skutnabb-Kangas, Emerita, University of Roskilde, Denmark and Åbo Akademi University, Finland, has written or edited around 50 books and almost 400 articles and book chapters, in 31 languages, about minority education, linguistic human rights, linguistic genocide, the subtractive spread of English, etc. She was the Linguapax award recipient in 2003. For publications, see http://akira.ruc.dk/~tovesk. Email:
[email protected]. Robert Phillipson is a Professor at Copenhagen Business School. Among his books are Linguistic Imperialism (Oxford University Press 1992) and English-only Europe? Challenging Language Policy (Routledge 2003). His research interests include the role of English in globalisation, linguistic neoimperialism, language rights, macrosociolinguistics and language pedagogy. For details of CV and publications, several of which can be downloaded, see http://www.cbs.dk/staff/phillipson. Email:
[email protected]
