Language revitalization


Language revitalization, also referred to as language revival or reversing language shift, is an attempt to halt or reverse the decline of a language or to revive an extinct one. Those involved can include linguists, cultural or community groups, or governments. Some argue for a distinction between language revival and language revitalization.
Languages targeted for language revitalization include those whose use and prominence is severely limited. Sometimes various tactics of language revitalization can even be used to try to revive extinct languages. Though the goals of language revitalization vary greatly from case to case, they typically involve attempting to expand the number of speakers and use of a language, or trying to maintain the current level of use to protect the language from extinction or language death. Language revitalization can face significant barriers, not the least of which can come from governments, such as a general lack of support or funding for the projects, or a system that may actively repress the minority language. Other barriers could be a lack of speakers, a lack of relevant teaching material, or vocabulary loss.
Reasons for revitalization vary: they can include physical danger affecting those whose language is dying, economic danger such as the exploitation of indigenous natural resources, political danger such as genocide, or cultural danger/assimilation. In recent times alone, it is estimated that more than 2000 languages have already become extinct. The UN estimates that more than half of the languages spoken today have fewer than 10,000 speakers and that a quarter have fewer than 1,000 speakers; and that, unless there are some efforts to maintain them, over the next hundred years most of these will become extinct. These figures are often cited as reasons why language revitalization is necessary to preserve linguistic diversity. Culture and identity are also frequently cited reasons for language revitalization, when a language is perceived as a unique "cultural treasure". A community often sees language as a unique part of its culture, connecting it with its ancestors or with the land, making up an essential part of its history and self-image. Endangered or at risk languages can be elevated by making them into a national language, for example the Quechua language of Peru.
Language revitalization is also closely tied to the linguistic field of language documentation. In this field, linguists try to create a complete record of a language's grammar, vocabulary, and linguistic features. This practice can often lead to more concern for the revitalization of a specific language on study. Furthermore, the task of documentation is often taken on with the goal of revitalization in mind.

Reasons for language endangerment

can occur for a variety of reasons, though one of the most common is colonialism. It is estimated that around 30%-50% of languages spoken today may vanish within the next century. Languages loss is often the result of genocide, cultural assimilation, and discrimination, leading to fewer native speakers. Other reasons may be illiteracy, poverty, or human rights violations. In Latin America, where 560 Indigenous languages are in use, about 1/5th of Indigenous peoples do not speak the native language of the region. In the Caribbean, nearly all Indigenous languages have disappeared. Colonial powers have used discriminatory educational practices against Indigenous languages; in 20th century Mexico, schools taught almost exclusively Spanish, in an attempt to assimilate Indigenous Mexicans into a uniform Mexican identity; similarly, institutions in the United States and Canada forcibly assimilated Indigenous children, banning all languages with the exception of English, and .
Creole languages also face endangerment. "Creoles" are often typically formed via the mixing of two or more distinct languages, and are often, but not always formed from so-called "pidgin" languages. Furthermore, Creoles have historically been formed due to colonialism; perhaps the most common instance of Creole languages being used is in former plantation colonies. Creole languages have historically been suppressed in favor of the colonizing language; in St. Lucia, where the majority of the people spoke a Creole language, English was made the only national language. Globalization poses a threat to the continued use of Creoles; as Errington argues, globalization's sociolinguistic impact restrict the ability for Creole and other marginalized languages to survive by creating a climate in which already dominant languages are valued.

Degrees of language endangerment

UNESCO Language Vitality and Endangerment framework

Uses a six-point scale is as follows:
  • Safe: All generations use language in variety of settings
  • Stable: Multilingualism in the native language and one or more dominant language has usurped certain important communication context.
  • Definitively Endangered: spoken by older people; not fully used by younger generations.
  • Severely Endangered: Only a few adult speakers remain; no longer used as native language by children.
  • Critically Endangered: The language is spoken only by grandparents and older generations.
  • Extinct: There is no one who can speak or remember the language.

    Other scales

Another scale for identifying degrees of language endangerment is used in a 2003 paper commissioned by UNESCO from an international group of linguists. The linguists, among other goals and priorities, create a scale with six degrees for language vitality and endangerment. They also propose nine factors or criteria to "characterize a language's overall sociolinguistic situation". The nine factors with their respective scales are:
  1. Intergenerational language transmission
  2. * safe: all generations use the language
  3. * unsafe: some children use the language in all settings, all children use the language in some settings
  4. * definitively endangered: few children speak the language; predominantly spoken by the parental generation and older
  5. * severely endangered: spoken by older generations; not used by the parental generation and younger
  6. * critically endangered: few speakers remain and are mainly from the great grandparental generation
  7. * extinct: no living speakers
  8. Absolute number of speakers
  9. Proportion of speakers within the total population
  10. * safe: the language is spoken by approximately 100% of the population
  11. * unsafe: the language is spoken by nearly but visibly less than 100% of the population
  12. * definitively endangered: the language is spoken by a majority of the population
  13. * severely endangered: the language is spoken by less than 50% of the population
  14. * critically endangered: the language has very few speakers
  15. * extinct: no living speakers
  16. Trends in existing language domains
  17. * universal use : spoken in all domains; for all functions
  18. * multilingual parity : multiple languages are spoken in most social domains; for most functions
  19. * dwindling domains : mainly spoken in home domains and is in competition with the dominant language; for many functions
  20. * limited or formal domains : spoken in limited social domains; for several functions
  21. * highly limited domains : spoken in highly restricted domains; for minimal functions
  22. * extinct: no domains; no functions
  23. Response to new domains and media
  24. * dynamic : spoken in all new domains
  25. * robust/active : spoken in most new domains
  26. * receptive : spoken in many new domains
  27. * coping : spoken in some new domains
  28. * minimal : spoken in minimal new domains
  29. * inactive : spoken in no new domains
  30. Materials for language education and literacy
  31. * safe: established orthography and extensive access to educational materials
  32. * unsafe: access to educational materials; children developing literacy; not used by administration
  33. * definitively endangered: access to educational materials exist at school; literacy in language is not promoted
  34. * severely endangered: literacy materials exist however are not present in school curriculum
  35. * critically endangered: orthography is known and some written materials exist
  36. * extinct: no orthography is known
  37. Governmental and institutional language attitudes and policies
  38. * equal support : all languages are equally protected
  39. * differentiated support : primarily protected for private domains
  40. * passive assimilation : no explicit protective policy; language use dwindles in public domain
  41. * active assimilation : government discourages use of language; no governmental protection of language in any domain
  42. * forced assimilation : language is not recognized or protected; government recognized another official language
  43. * prohibition : use of language is banned
  44. Community members' attitudes towards their own language
  45. * safe: language is revered, valued, and promoted by whole community
  46. * unsafe: language maintenance is supported by most of the community
  47. * definitively endangered: language maintenance is supported by much of the community; the rest are indifferent or support language loss
  48. * severely endangered: language maintenance is supported by some of the community; the rest are indifferent or support language loss
  49. * critically endangered: language maintenance is supported by only a few members of the community; the rest are indifferent or support language loss
  50. * extinct: complete apathy towards language maintenance; prefer dominant language
  51. Amount and quality of documentation.
  52. * superlative : extensive audio, video, media, and written documentation of the language
  53. * good : audio, video, media, and written documentation all exist; a handful of each
  54. * fair : some audio and video documentation exists; adequate written documentation
  55. * fragmentary : limited audio and video documentation exists at low quality; minimal written documentation
  56. * inadequate : only a handful of written documentation exists
  57. * undocumented : no documentation exists