Are traditional minority languages a bench marking for the rights of migrant languages in the European Union?
In this paper a normative position will be defended. We will argue that minimal territorial minority language rights formulated in terms of the personality principle referring to traditional minority languages granted in the framework of the European Union (EU) are a benchmark for non-territorial li...
Elmentve itt :
| Szerzők: | |
|---|---|
| Dokumentumtípus: | Cikk |
| Megjelent: |
2018
|
| Sorozat: | Belvedere Meridionale
30 No. 4 |
| Kulcsszavak: | Nyelvhasználat - kisebbség - Európai Unió, Migráció |
| doi: | 10.14232/belv.2018.4.3 |
| Online Access: | http://acta.bibl.u-szeged.hu/56975 |
| Tartalmi kivonat: | In this paper a normative position will be defended. We will argue that minimal territorial minority language rights formulated in terms of the personality principle referring to traditional minority languages granted in the framework of the European Union (EU) are a benchmark for non-territorial linguistic rights. Although territorial minority languages should be granted collective rights this is in large parts of Europe not the case. Especially in the Central and Eastern European Member States language rights granted to territorial languages are assigned on the basis of personal language rights. Our argumentation will be elaborated on the basis of a comparative approach discussing the status of a traditional territorial language in Romania, more in particular Hungarian spoken in the Szeklerland area with the one of migrant languages in the Netherlands, more in particular Turkish. In accordance with the language hierarchy implying that territorial languages have a higher status than non-territorial languages both in the EUs and Member States’ language regimes nonterritorial linguistic rights will be realized as personal rights in the first place. Hence, the use of non-territorial minority languages is conditioned much as the use of territorial minority languages in the national Member States. So, the best possible scenario for mobile minority languages is to be recognized as a personal right and receive full support from the states where they are spoken. It is true that learning the host language would make inclusion of migrant language speakers into the host society smoother and securing a better position on the labour market. This should however be done without striving for full assimilation of the speakers of migrant languages for this would violate the linguistic rights of migrants to speak and cultivate one’s own heritage language, violate the EUs linguistic diversity policy, and is against the advantages provided by linguistic capital in the sense of BOURDIEU (1991). |
|---|---|
| Terjedelem/Fizikai jellemzők: | 40-60 |
| ISSN: | 2064-5929 |