Course materials © for/by Peter
L. Patrick. Contains other copyrighted material used for educational
purposes. Please respect copyright.
Notes for LG102, Intro
Sociolinguistics
Week
8, Autumn term
Case Study:
(See Fasold 1984 and sources there, from which this is summarised; it largely describes the situation in the 1970s, based on Joan Rubin’s research. The discussion also makes use of Fishman’s special senses of the terms ‘nation’, ‘nationality’, ‘ethnic’ and ‘nationist’ – see Fasold’s treatment.)
·
Guaraní
is an indigenous Amerindian language, a branch of the Tupi family. There are
about 5 million Guaraní speakers, nearly all of them (4.7m) in
·
Spanish/Guaraní
bilingualism is unusual for
Geographical distribution:
·
Urban
areas are bi‑lingual in Spanish and Guaraní.
·
Rural
areas were largely mono-lingual in Guaraní till recently (52% according to Ethnologue, language code GUG).
·
Even
in rural states, it’s largely the big towns in which Spanish is spoken.
Language functions:
·
Guaraní
fills the unifying function, and marks the speaker as a “real
Paraguayan”,
·
thus to some extent filling the authority function too.
·
But
it doesn’t convey the historical
function well, because of its recent written history
·
though it is, in another sense, a “traditional”
language!
Language attitudes:
·
Guaraní
monolinguals have a feeling of inferiority that is connected with intelligence
judgments and aesthetics.
·
Guaraní
gives no special status, since neraly everyone knows it, but it is “required”.
·
Spanish
however has an elevating, prestige‑conveying function.
·
But
‘Spanish-only’ conveys outsider status.
Language status:
·
Both
Guaraní and Spanish are “national” languages by constitution,
·
but only Spanish is an “official” language, i.e. a language of
governing ‑‑ a nationist
result (Fishman’s term).
Language in education:
·
For
education, Guaraní seems an obvious choice (to outsiders!).
·
Why?
It’s the language of home; and of
nationalism, too.
·
But
Spanish was always strictly enforced until the 1970s, with grim results.
·
The
main practical problem was a lack of educational
materials in Guaraní.
·
What
was the rationale for using Spanish in school?
·
The social function of education was as a
form of elevation, nation‑building through the creation of an educated elite (though drawn from the middle classes).
This dictates using a language of prestige.
·
One solution recommended by language planners:
conduct primary education in Guaraní, later years in Spanish.
Other indigenous and ethnic languages:
² Indians
of the
·
There
are 13 languages in 5 linguistic groups for 24,000 speakers. Linguistic
practices range widely.
·
The
Angaité consider Guaraní to be prestigious, speak it to their children and
sometimes at home.
·
The
Chulupí, on the other hand, are known for their cultural and linguistic pride.
They speak only Chulupi at home and are poor or unwilling learners of Guaraní and
Spanish.
·
They
also tend to be purists about the mixing of Spanish with Chulupí in radio broadcasts.
·
The
differential behavior of the Chulupí (who stick to their language) and the Angaité
(who abandon it) qualify them as a ‘sub‑national nationality’ and an ‘ethnic
group’, respectively, by Fishman’s criteria, since
·
The
Chulupí consciously use, promote and police their language’s authenticity (but
are not striving for autonomy).
·
Q:
What is the direction of reasoning between the linguistic and social phenomena
here?
·
A:
Linguistics is used to diagnose/label social categories; it could develop a
rationale for different treatment of the 2 minority groups.
Conclusion:
(From this
information you should be able to make comparison with the Peruvian situation
described by Zavala, online)
[This material
by Ralph Fasold has been summarised and edited by PL Patrick for classroom
use.]
LG102 Intro Sociolinguistics page
Return to Peter L. Patrick's home page
Last updated 23 November 2004