|
A Universal Declaration of Linguistic Rights was drawn up at a meeting of institutions and NGOs which took place in Barcelona, Spain, 6-9 June 1996. Signatories affirmed 52 Articles covering a wide range of issues including concepts and rights, general principles, public administration and official bodies, education, proper names, communications media and new technologies, culture and the socio-economic sphere. Participants also took into account non-sovereign peoples, the subordination of non-dominant languages, and linguistic and cultural diversity.
The meeting was firmly anchored in the fact that 'the majority of the world's endangered languages belong to non-sovereign peoples and that the main factors which prevent the development of these languages and accelerate the process of language substitution include the lack of self-government and the policy of states which impose their political and administrative structures and their language.'
It also asserted that 'invasion, colonisation, occupation and other instances of political, economic or social subordination often involve the direct imposition of a foreign language or, at the very least, distort perceptions of the value of languages and give rise to hierarchical linguistic attitudes which undermine the language loyalty of speakers. In addition, the languages of some peoples which have attained sovereignty are immersed in a process of language substitution as a result of a policy which favours the language of a former colonial or imperial power.'
Participants in the meeting considered 'that universalism must be based on a conception of linguistic and cultural diversity which prevails over trends towards homogenisation and exclusionary isolation, and that in order to ensure peaceful coexistence between language communities, a series of overall principles must be found so as to guarantee the promotion and respect of all languages and their social use in public and in private' (Preliminaries).
The overriding purpose of the Universal Declaration of Linguistic Rights (UDLR) resolved itself into a call 'to correct linguistic imbalances with a view to ensuring the respect and full development of all languages and establishing the principles for a just and equitable linguistic peace throughout the world as a key factor in the maintenance of harmonious social relations.'
This is remarkably similar to the call issued by Seán MacBride in the conclusions and recommendations of Many Voices, One World which reviewed injustices and inefficiencies in the world's information and communication order:
The contemporary situation demands a better, more just and more democratic social order, and the realisation of fundamental human rights. These goals can be achieved only through understanding and tolerance, gained in large part by free, open and balanced communications.1
The MacBride Report covers the language issue in a brief section under 'Means of communication', arguing that millions of people all over the world 'are discriminated against, since currently the spread of information tends to take place in the terms, and the idiom, of the linguistically powerful' (p. 50). It goes on to recommend that 'language policy should be an intrinsic part of communication policies, since the choice and promotion of languages opens up or eliminates possibilities for wider and equal communications' (p. 51).
Thus the context is the broad one of universal human rights, national, ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities, and the rights of indigenous peoples. It is fundamental to the debate about the democratisation of communication, and consequently finds a place in the People's Communication Charter recently endorsed, among others, by WACC, in which Article 9 reads:
All people have the right to a diversity of languages. This includes the right to express themselves and have access to information in their own language, the right to use their own languages in educational institutions funded by the state, and the right to have adequate provisions created for the use of minority languages where needed.2
Language liberation
The Universal Declaration of Linguistic Rights (UDLR) is the first fully developed claim to be able to exercise the essential characteristic that distinguishes human beings: freedom of speech in the language of our choosing. As American feminist and theologian Mary Daly wrote - in a different context and with a different audience in mind - 'The liberation of language is rooted in the liberation of ourselves.'3
The following demands, in the spheres of mass communication and culture, are revealing in the implications they have for mass media, community media, and new technologies of communication.
Article 35. All language communities have the right to decide the extent to which their language is be present in all the communications media in their territory, whether local and traditional media, those with a wider scope, or those using more advanced technology, regardless of the method of dissemination or transmission employed.
Article 36. All language communities are entitled to have at their disposal all the human and material resources required in order to ensure the desired degree of presence of their language and the desired degree of cultural self-expression in the communications media in their territory: properly trained personnel, finance, buildings and equipment, traditional and innovative technology.
Article 37. All language communities have the right to receive, through the communications media, a thorough knowledge of their cultural heritage (history, geography, literature and other manifestations of their own culture), as well as the greatest possible amount of information about any other culture their members may wish to know.
Article 38. The languages and cultures of all language communities must receive equitable and non-discriminatory treatment in the communications media throughout the world.
Article 39. The communities described in Article 1, paragraphs 3 and 4, of this Declaration, and the groups mentioned in paragraph 5 of the same article, are entitled to an equitable representation of their language in the communications media of the territory where they are established or where they migrate. This right is to be exercised in harmony with the rights of the other language groups or communities in the territory.
Article 40. In the field of information technology, all language communities are entitled to have at their disposal equipment adapted to their linguistic system and tools and products in their language, so as to derive full advantage from the potential offered by such technologies for publication, translation and information processing and for the dissemination of culture in general.
Article 41. 1. All language communities have the right to use, maintain and foster their language in all forms of cultural expression. 2. All language communities must be able to exercise this right to the full without any community's space being subjected to hegemonic occupation by a foreign culture.
Article 42. All language communities have the right to full development within their own cultural sphere.
Article 43. All language communities are entitled to access to the works produced in their language.
Article 44. All language communities are entitled to access to intercultural programmes through the dissemination of adequate information, and to support for activities such as teaching the language to foreigners, translation, dubbing, post-synchronization and subtitling.
Article 45. All language communities have the right for the language specific to the territory to occupy a pre-eminent position in cultural events and services (libraries, videotheques, cinemas, theatres, museums, archives, folklore, cultural industries, and all other manifestations of cultural life).
Article 46. All language communities have the right to preserve their linguistic and cultural heritage, including its material manifestations, such as collections of documents, works of art and architecture, historic monuments and inscriptions in their own language.
Minority languages
In most countries of the world, the dominant or 'official' language was imposed at a time of conquest. With variations in time, this is no less of true of the United Kingdom than it is of Latin America. Language became a tool of political and economic assimilation during empire-building, and remained a hegemonic force in the mass communications of the 20th century. Nation-states were (perhaps still are) intolerant of minority languages in case they prove subversive.
Nevertheless, a healthy tension can exist between dominant and minority languages, which in turn can lead to linguistic pluralism:
In earlier times minorities dreamed of radio and television services in the image of those that existed in the dominant languages - powerful single services that commanded a mass audience and that wielded great influence, which they hoped would be used for the rehabilitation of their languages. When the explosion of minority media came, things proved rather different. The coming of the new language channels coincided with wider proliferation of satellite and cable services, so that linguistic pluralism became part of a greater pluralism. In these conditions no groups are wholly imprisoned by their own national media.4
Europe is the context of the above quote. However, the situation is rapidly changing in other continents and the new millennium may yet prove an opportunity to abandon long cherished notions of colonialism and dependency - beginning with language. On the other hand...
1 Many Voices, One World: Towards a new, more just and more efficient world information and communication order. Report by the International Commission for the Study of Communication Problems. Paris: UNESCO, 1980, p. 253.
2 The People's Communication Charter is 'a step towards a global movement to shape the cultural environment in accordance with people's needs and interests.' The full text, which is subject to ongoing revision, was published in Media Development 3/1996. Comments should be sent to the Centre for Communication and Human Rights. Fax: (31 20) 611 5296. E-mail:
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
3 Daly, Mary. Beyond God the Father: Toward a Philosophy of Women's Liberation. Boston: Beacon Press, 1973.
4 Thomas, Ned, 'Linguistic minorities and the media' in Lee, P. (ed.) The Democratisation of Communication. Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 1995, p. 183.
|
