UNESCO in the field of Education

19

Why do people fi ght over language?

Paul B. Garrett

Is language important enough to fi ght about? How do confl icts over language get started? What are the underlying causes?

Th e idea of fi ghting over language might seem strange, but it’s all too common. Why do people sometimes feel so strongly about their language that they take up arms against speakers of another?

What is it about language that can generate tensions that last for generations? Th e answers to these questions lie in the close relationship between language and identity, particularly ethnic identity.

Many of us who speak only English tend to think of monolin-gualism as the normal state of aff airs. We may also tend to think that there is a one-to-one correspondence between language and nation:

in France they speak French, in Japan they speak Japanese, and so

on. But worldwide there are close to seven thousand languages—and only about two hundred nations. Th at means a lot of multilingual nations! And because languages tend to coincide with ethnic groups, that means a lot of multi-ethnic nations as well. Of course, some are more multilingual and multi-ethnic than others. At one extreme are countries like Japan, where the vast majority of people are ethnically Japanese and speak Japanese. At the other extreme are countries like India and Nigeria, each of which has about four hundred languages and ethnicities within its borders.

In many areas of the world, people of diff erent language back-grounds interact every day. For the most part things go smoothly enough; but sometimes tensions arise, and sometimes these tensions erupt into outright confl icts. Th is is especially likely when speakers of one language feel threatened or oppressed by speakers of another.

When that’s the case, language diff erences become powerful markers of social, cultural, and political diff erence. And wherever you fi nd language confl ict, you’re sure to fi nd struggles over other issues as well, such as territory, religion, and political power.

Th e weapons used in these confl icts may be far more than harsh words. Language confl icts can escalate into riots, wars, even geno-cide. Confl icts over language played a major part in the separation of Bangladesh from Pakistan in 1971. What began as a Bengali lan-guage movement escalated into a nine-month war for independence in which more than three million people died.

In other parts of the world today, language is at the heart of ongoing confl icts characterized by constant tensions and sporadic outbreaks of violence. In Sri Lanka, the Tamil Tigers (speakers of the Tamil language) have been rebelling for decades against a govern-ment dominated by the Sinhala-speaking majority. And in Spain, the separatist group ETA has sometimes used acts of terrorism in pursuit of its goal of an independent Basque homeland, where Basque would be the national language.

Why do people fight over language? 85

Language confl icts don’t always lead to violence. But they can create tensions that persist for years, aff ecting the lives of millions on a daily basis. Take the case of Canada—generally a peaceful place, but one that has had its share of language confl ict. Canada as a whole is offi cially bilingual, but most French-speaking Canadians live in the province of Quebec. Surrounded by English-speaking provinces, they oft en feel that their language and culture are under siege. Th ey feel particularly threatened by the presence of English speakers within Quebec itself, where historically, English speakers have been a disproportionately powerful minority.

In 1977, French speakers in Quebec tried to protect their language by passing a law that in many ways restricted the use of English. For example, it required that all signs in public places be in French, and French alone. Th is became a focal point of resentment among English speakers, including small business owners like Allan Singer. For years, Mr. Singer had run his modest shop beneath a simple handpainted sign that read, ‘Allan Singer Limited—Printers and Stationers’. Under the new law, Mr. Singer’s sign became illegal; he would have to replace it, at his own expense, with a sign in French.

Well, Mr. Singer refused to do that—and he took his case all the way to Canada’s Supreme Court. Th e court’s ruling was a compro-mise of sorts, but it refl ected the realities of Canadian society in a way that most Canadians found fair and just. Th e court decided that Mr. Singer did not have the right to keep his sign in English only.

But the new law could not require him to replace it with a sign in French only, to the exclusion of English—or of Spanish, Chinese, or any other language that he might wish to use in addition to French.

So business owners in Quebec could be required to use French on their signs, but the law could not interfere with their freedom to post bilingual or multilingual signs—signs refl ecting the linguistic diversity of Quebec, and of Canada as a whole.

Ultimately, this brouhaha over signs provided an opportunity for Canada to clarify its commitment to protecting the language rights of all of its citizens. But the underlying tensions haven’t gone away.

On two occasions—in 1980 and 1995—Quebec’s citizens even went to the polls to vote on whether their province should secede from Canada, and become an independent French-speaking nation. It didn’t happen; but the 1995 vote was extremely close, with a margin of less than one percent.

In these and other confl icts, much more than language is at stake. Th e language that we speak is part of who we are. It gives us a powerful sense of belonging with those who speak like us, and an equally powerful sense of diff erence from those who don’t.

Little wonder, then, that when someone attacks our language—or even just our accent—we feel that we are being attacked. And we respond accordingly. Discriminate against a language, and you discriminate against its speakers; disrespect my language, and you disrespect me.

About the author

Paul B. Garrett, Assistant Professor of Anthropology at Temple Univer-sity, Pennsylvania, is a linguistic anthropologist whose research focuses on the creole languages and cultures of the Caribbean—particularly the island of St. Lucia, where he has conducted long-term ethnographic fi eldwork. His other research interests include language contact, ide-ologies of language, and the political economy of language. For more information see his Web page: http://www.temple.edu/anthro/faculty.

htm#garrett

Suggestions for further reading

In this book: Th e topic of how social contexts infl uence the way languag-es function and interact is addrlanguag-essed in chapters 8 (pidgins and creollanguag-es), 21 (glossolalia), 38 (Cajun), 39 (German in the U.S.), and 40 (Gullah).

Why do people fight over language? 87

Elsewhere:

Harris, Roxy and Ben Rampton, eds. Th e Language, Ethnicity and Race Reader (Routledge, 2003). Th is collection of classic and contemporary readings examines the relationships between language and such issues as identity, ethnic diversity, nationalism, colonialism, and migration.

Joseph, Brian D. et al., eds. When Languages Collide: Perspectives on Language Confl ict, Language Competition, and Language

Coexistence (Ohio State University Press, 2003). Fift een essays

examine cases of language contact worldwide (due to trade, migration, war, etc.), considering the factors that give rise to both peaceful and confl ictual outcomes.

Schmid, Carol L. Th e Politics of Language: Confl ict, Identity, and Cultural Pluralism in Comparative Perspective (Oxford University Press, 2001). Focusing on the many languages spoken within the U.S., this book examines both historical and contemporary confl icts and controversies.



What does it mean