Linguistic discrimination is the unfair treatment of an individual based solely
on their use of language. This use of language may include the individual's
native language or other characteristics of the person's speech, such as an
accent, the size of vocabulary, and syntax. It may also involve a person's
ability or inability to use one language instead of another; for example, one who
speaks Occitan in France will probably be treated differently from one who
speaks French. Based on a difference in use of language, a person may
automatically form judgments about another person's wealth, education,
social status, character or other traits. These perceived judgments may
then lead to the unjustifiable treatment of the individual.
In the mid-1980s, linguist Tove Skutnabb-Kangas, captured this idea of
discrimination based on language as the concept of linguicism. Kangas defined
linguicism as the "ideologies and structures which are used to legitimate,
effectuate, and reproduce unequal division of power and resources between
groups which are defined on the basis of language." Although different names have
been given to this form of discrimination, they all hold the same
definition. It is also important to note that linguistic discrimination is
culturally and socially determined due to a preference for one use of language
over another. Linguistic prejudice
It can be noted that use of language such as certain accents may result in an
individual experiencing prejudice. For example, some accents hold more prestige
than others depending on the cultural context. However, with so many dialects,
it can be difficult to determine which is the most preferable. The best answer
linguists can give, such as the authors of "Do You Speak American?", is that it
depends on the location and the individual. Research has determined
however that some sounds in languages may be determined to sound less pleasant
naturally. Also, certain accents tend to carry more prestige in some societies
over other accents. For example, in the United States, an absence of an accent
or "speaking American" is widely preferable. Also, in the United Kingdom,
the Received Pronunciation is associated with being of higher class and thus more
likeable. In addition to prestige, research has shown that certain accents
may also be associated with less intelligence, and having poorer social
skills. An example can be seen in the difference between Southerners and
Northerners in the United States, where people from the North are typically
perceived as being less likable in character, and Southerners are perceived
as being less intelligent. Language and social group saliency
It is natural for human beings to want to identify with others. One way we do
this is by categorizing individuals into specific social groups. While some
groups may be readily noticeable, other groups are less salient. Linguist Carmen
Fought explains how an individual's use of language may allow another person to
categorize them into a specific social group that may otherwise be less
apparent. For example, in the United States it is common to perceive
Southerners as less intelligent. Belonging to a social group such as the
South may be less salient than membership to other groups that are
defined by ethnicity or gender. Language provides a bridge for prejudice to occur
for these less salient social groups. Examples of linguistic discrimination
Linguistic discrimination is often defined in terms of prejudice of
language. It is important to note that although there is a relationship between
prejudice and discrimination, they are not always directly related. Prejudice
can be defined as negative attitudes towards an individual based solely on
their membership of a social group, while discrimination can be seen as the
acts towards the individual. The difference between the two should be
recognized because an individual may hold a prejudice against someone due to
their use of language, but they may not act out on that prejudice. The following
are examples of linguistic prejudice that may result in discrimination.
= Linguistic prejudice and minority groups =
While, theoretically, any individual may be the victim of linguicism regardless
of social and ethnic status, oppressed and marginalized social minorities are
often its most consistent targets, due to the fact that the speech varieties
that come to be associated with such groups have a tendency to be
stigmatized. = In Canada =
Quebec and Anglophone community The Charter of the French Language,
first established in 1977 and amended several times since, has been accused of
being discriminatory by English speakers. The law makes French the
official language of Quebec and mandates its use in government offices and
communiques, schools, and in commercial public relations. Though the proportion
of English speakers had been in decline since the 1960s, the law accelerated
this, and the 2006 census showed there had been a net drop of 180,000 native
English speakers. Conversely, the law has been seen as a
way of preventing linguistic discrimination against French speakers,
as part of the law's wider objective of preserving the French language against
the increasing social and economic dominance of English. Speaking English
at work continues to be strongly correlated with higher earnings, with
French-only speakers earning significantly less. Despite this, the
law is widely credited with successfully raising the status of French in a
predominantly English-speaking economy, and has been influential in other
countries facing similar circumstances. = In the United States =
Perpetuation of discriminatory practices through terminology
Here and elsewhere the terms 'standard' and 'non-standard' make analysis of
linguicism difficult. These terms are used widely by linguists and
non-linguists when discussing varieties of American English that engender strong
opinions, a false dichotomy that is rarely challenged or questioned. This
has been interpreted by linguists Nicolas Coupland, Rosina Lippi-Green,
and Robin Queen as a discipline-internal lack of consistency that undermines
progress; if linguists themselves cannot move beyond the ideological
underpinnings of 'right' and 'wrong' in language, there is little hope of
advancing a more nuanced understanding in the general population.
African-Americans and linguicism Because some African-Americans speak a
particular non-standard variety of English which is often seen as
substandard, African-Americans are frequently the targets of linguicism.
African American Vernacular English is often perceived by members of mainstream
American society as indicative of low intelligence or limited education.
Furthermore, as with many other non-standard dialects and especially
creoles, AAVE sometimes has been called "lazy" or "bad" English.
The linguist John McWhorter has described this particular form of
linguicism as particularly problematic in the United States, where non-standard
linguistic structures are frequently judged by teachers and potential
employers to be "incorrect," in contrast to a number of other countries such as
Morocco, Finland and Italy where diglossia is an accepted norm, and use
of non-standard grammar or vocabulary in conversation is seen as a mark of
regional origin, not of intellectual capacity or achievement.
For example, an African-American who uses a typical AAVE sentence such as "He
be comin' in every day and sayin' he ain't done nothing" may be judged as
having a deficient command of grammar, whereas, in fact, such a sentence is
constructed based on a complex grammar which is different from, and not a
degenerate form of, standard English. A hearer may judge the user of such a
sentence to be unintellectual or uneducated when none of these is
necessarily the case. The user may be proficient in standard English, and may
be intellectually capable, and educated but simply have chosen to say the
sentence in AAVE for any one of a number of social and sociolinguistic reasons
such as the intended audience of the sentence, a phenomenon known as code
switching. Hispanic Americans and linguicism
Another form of linguicism is evidenced by the following: in some parts of the
United States, a person who has a strong Mexican accent and uses only simple
English words may be thought of as poor, poorly educated, and possibly an illegal
immigrant by many of the people who meet them. However, if the same person has a
diluted accent or no noticeable accent at all and can use a myriad of words in
complex sentences, they are likely to be perceived as more successful, better
educated, and a legitimate citizen. = Oralism =
In 1880, most deaf schools had adopted oralism, an educational philosophy which
prohibits the use of sign languages in favor of oral language. Many sign
languages had all but become extinct during this time, sometimes called the
"Deaf Dark Ages" by deaf people. In the 1960s, the United States became the
first major country to switch back to manualism. Still, many first-world
nations retain oralist educational philosophies and attitudes.
= Linguicism and texts = Linguicism, of course, applies to
written as well as spoken language. The quality of a book or article may be
judged by the language in which it is written. In the scientific community,
for example, those who evaluated a text in two language versions, English and
the national Scandinavian language, rated the English-language version as
being of higher scientific content. The Internet operates a great deal using
written language. Readers of a web page, Usenet group, forum post, or chat
session may be more inclined to take the author seriously if the written language
is spelled and constructed in accordance with the written norms of the standard
language. = Linguistic discrimination due to
prejudice = In contrast to the previous examples of
linguistic prejudice, linguistic discrimination involves the actual
treatment of individuals based on use of language. Examples may be clearly seen
in the workplace, in the advertising industry, and in education systems. For
example, some workplaces enforce an English-only policy. This policy is part
of a larger political movement in the U.S. where English is being pushed
towards being accepted as the official language of the U.S. In the United
States, the federal law, Titles VI and VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
protects non-native speakers from being discriminated against in the workplace
based on their national origin or use of dialect. There are state laws that also
address the protection of non-native speakers, such as the California Fair
Employment and Housing Act. However, industries often argue in retrospect
that clear, understandable English is often needed in specific work settings
in the U.S. Other examples
The Coptic language. At the turn of the 8th century, Caliph Abd al-Malik ibn
Marwan decreed that Arabic would replace Koine Greek and Coptic as the sole
administrative language. Literary Coptic gradually declined within a few hundred
years and suffered violent persecutions, especially under the Mamluks, leading to
its virtual extinction by the 17th century.
Language policy of the British Empire in Ireland, Wales and Scotland. Cromwell's
conquest, the long English colonisation and Great Irish Famine made Irish a
minority language by the end of the 19th century. It had no official status until
the establishment of Republic of Ireland. In Wales, speaking of the Welsh
language in schools was prohibited. Scottish Gaelic also had no official
status until the end of 20th century. Scots was not considered "a suitable
medium of education or culture". Basque: Public usage of Basque was
restricted in Spain under Franco, 1939 to 1965. Galician and Catalan have
similar histories. Kurdish: Kurdish remains banned in Syria
Until August 2002, the Turkish government placed severe restrictions on
the use of Kurdish, prohibiting the language in education and broadcast
media. Vergonha is the term used for the effect
of various policies of the French government on its citizens whose mother
tongue was one of so-called patois. In 1539, with Article 111 of the Ordinance
of Villers-Cotterêts, French became the only official language in the country
despite being spoken by only a minority of the population. Use of regional
languages, such as those of Southern France and of Breton in education and
administration, was prohibited. The French government still has not ratified
the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages.
Magyarisation in the 19th-century Kingdom of Hungary.
Germanisation: Prussian discrimination of Western Slavs in the 19th century,
such as the removal of the Polish language from secondary and primary
schools, the use of corporal punishment leading to such events as Września
school strike of 1901. Russification: 19th century policies on
the territories seized due to partitions of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth,
such as banning the Polish, Lithuanian and Belarusian languages in public
places, later, Polish was banned in schools and offices of Congress Poland.
Under the Russian Empire there were some attempts in 1899–1917 to make Russian
the only official language of Finland. In the Soviet Union, following the phase
of Korenizatsiya and before Perestroika, Russian was termed as "the language of
friendship of nations" to the disadvantage of other languages of the
Soviet Union. Suppression of Korean during Japanese
rule in Korea, 1910 to 1945. Quebec's language policies have been
frequently noted as linguistic discrimination against the province's
anglophone population. Anti-Chinese legislation in Indonesia
Anti-Hungarian Slovak language law Dutch in Belgium after its independence
in 1830. French was for a long time the only official language and the sole
language of education, administration, law and justice despite Dutch being the
language of the majority of the population. This has led to a massive
language shift in Brussels, the capital. Discrimination slowly diminished over
the decades and formally ended in the 1960s, when the Dutch version of the
constitution became equal to the French version.
The policy of Ukrainization in post-1991 Ukraine is considered discriminatory
towards the Russian-speaking population of Ukraine's Eastern and Southern
regions. See also
Linguicide Linguistic imperialism
Minority language Nonstandard dialect
Prestige dialect Language ideology
Language policy Prescriptivism
Indigenous language Official language
Cultural assimilation Cultural genocide
References Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove, Multilingualism
and the education of minority children. Literature
Skutnabb-Kangas et al., Linguistic human rights: overcoming linguistic
discrimination, Walter de Gruyter, ISBN 3-11-014878-1.
R. Wodak and D. Corson, Language policy and political issues in education,
Springer, ISBN 0-7923-4713-7. External links
Action Linguistic Rights: Violations of Linguistic Rights