European Language Policies

EU & Council of Europe

Language Planning Instruments:

ECRML & FCNM

Donostia, October 26, 2012

Alex RIEMERSMA

Mercator European Research Centre on Multilingualism and Language Learning

www.mercator-research.eu

European Policies: EU

European Union (1957)Seat: Brussels / EU Parliament also Strasbourg

Structure:

Council of (national) Prime Ministers

Councils of national subject Ministers

European Commission (= Executive)

European Parliament (> 700 seats)

EU Languages

27 member states /

23 official working languages(Letzeburgish treaty language only)

But in practice 3, 2 or 1 working language(s)

and some co-official languages (in the EP)Basque, Catalan, Galician, Welsh.

> 60 Regional and Minority Languages

> 175 Immigrant Languages

EU Language Policies

Mother tongue + 2 other languages

Multilingualism as an asset

Lifelong Learning Program > Erasmus for All

European Policies: EU

European Treaty:“EU respects the religious, cultural and linguistic diversity.”

Definition “Mother tongue” = state language

Principle of “subsidiarity” is in favour of national languages

“All languages are equal” > “mainstreaming” is in fact in favour of English (only) !

EU Parliament Resolutions

• 1981 Arfé > EBLUL 1982 – 2006;

• 1983 Vandenmeulenbroecke > earmarked budget € 1,2 million (> 2006)

• 1987 Kuijpers > Mercator project (1987-2006) 3 partners: Aberysthwyth (media), Barcelona (legislation), Ljouwert / Leeuwarden (education)

Follow up

• EBLUL extinct, followed up by Network to Promote Linguistic Diversity (NPLD): 11 regional authorities & 19 NGOs

• Mercator Network continued,re-gained EU funding from 2009, new Mercator partners:BudapestStockholm

EU Parliament Resolutions

• 2004 Michael EBNER> EU Agency for Linguistic Diversity, but not accepted by EU Commission

2005: Feasibility Study > Networks

2012 François ALFONSI> ?

EU Commission Actions

2007: High Level Group Multilingualism+ on line consultation

2008: EU Communication 2008: Amin Maalouf Report

A Rewarding Challenge (proposal: “adoptive language”)

2011: Civil Society Platform on Multilingualism

EU funded projects & networks

• Euromosaic• Smile• DYLAN• SUS-DIV• Linee• EUNoM• RML2future• MELT• NPLD

EU Agenda 2020

European Policies: CoE

Council of Europe (1949, Strasbourg)(47 member states; 800 million people)

Parliamentary Assemblee

Congress of Local and Regional Authorities (CLRAE)

CoE relevant institutions

Language Policy Division (Strasbourg): a.o.: Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR)

Centre for Modern Languages (Graz): projects for the access to and quality of language teaching

CoE relevant instruments

Charter for Regional or Minority Languages (to protect & to promote)(ETS 148)

Framework Convention on the Protection of national Minorities (FCNM)(ETS 157)

Charter for language planning

• Charter key words:“to protect & to promote” /“to safeguard & to encourage”

• Language planning key words:

State: Citizen:

Capacity Command

Opportunities Use

Desire / Plan Will

16

European Charter on RMLs

Charter of the Council of Europe (1998)25 ratifications (< 47 CoE member states)13 ratifications (< 27 EU member states)

Autochthonous Regional and Minority Languages

No dialects; no immigrant languages

Part II: principles and objectives(non-discrimination; state obligations and education rights)

17

European Charter on RMLs

Part III: undertakings in domains art. 8: Educationart. 9: Judicial authoritiesart. 10: Administration & public servicesart. 11: Mediaart. 12: Cultural affairsart. 13: Economic & social lifeart. 14: Transfrontier exchanges

18

Charter characteristics

Inclusive approach (all domains)

Common responsibility of state and language community

Template or menu-system > tailor made approach

Monitoring system

International comparison & cooperation

Charter menu system

Article 8: Education

Pre-school provisions

Primary Education

Secondary Education

Vocational Training

Higher Education

Adult Education19

Charter menu system

Article 8: Education

Level i: obligatory

Level ii: partly obligatory

Level iii: optional

Level iv: on request of parents

Always: “where appropriate” = sufficient demand / proportionality

20

21

Monitoring system

Consulting body according art. 7.4: “needs and wishes” of the people

Periodical reports by treaty parties

Committee of Experts (each treaty party one member) / on-the-spot visits

Bi-annual report Secr.-General to Assembly of Council of Europe

> Recommendations to treaty parties

22

Common European Standards

Core goals in language command

Time investment

Teaching OF and teaching IN

Continuity of teaching & learning

Teaching materials

Teacher training and qualification

Valuable tests on language command

23

Literature References

François GRIN, Language Policy Evaluation and the Charter for Regional + Minority Languages (2003)

The European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages: Legal Challenges and Opportunities (2008)

Framework Convention National Minorities (FCNM)

Individual Human Rights

More general descriptions > interpretations (+ discussions) in the monitoring process

18 members in the Advisory Committee

State reports

Thematic Reports

24

FCNM articles re Education

Art. 4: non-discrimination / integration

Art. 6: education for tolerance

Art. 8: religious diversity and tolerance

Art. 9: awareness raising for journalists

Art. 12: intercultural perspectives

Art. 13: private educational provisions

Art. 14: right to learn minority language25

FCNM thematic report Education

Protection of minority cultures and languages, effective equality and access to education

Actors at central and local level: school heads, teachers, parents and students

Tools: bi- and plurilingual curricula and qualified teachers, multicultural environments

26

Project “From Act to Action” Example: Implementing language acts in Finland, Ireland and Wales

Brussels, December 8th 2005Siv Sandberg, Åbo Akademi University

Finland

Making language legislation work in Finland, Ireland and Wales

1. Comparing different systems (national level): legal and institutional framework

2. Comparing different mechanisms supporting the enactment of language legislation

3. Comparing individual public authorities

Combining two views

The practitioner’s point of viewProviding information on what works Identifying good practices Producing tools for diagnoses and

performance measurementThe academic point of view Comparing the effects of different

institutional arrangements

Three crucial levels of analysis

1. Relationship between the national authority in charge of language act and the individual public authorities

2. The individual organization

3. The interface between the organization and the citizens/customers

The importance of covering all three levels

Because: …does not necessarily mean that…

Good interplay between central monitoring agency and language officers in individual authorities…

…the level of commitment to bilingualism in organization as a whole is sufficient.

Good implementation of specific language policy within the organization…

…the citizens are satisfied with the level of services provided.

Factors affecting performance

1. The national context2. The local context

(number of minority language speakers, tradition, supply/demand)

3. The institutional context (type of authority)

4. “Universal factors” (staff, organization, leadership)

Constructing the ideal system?:Four aspects to be elaborated further

…versus

National initiative Local initiative

Specific language focus Language as part of broader quality focus

Systematic approach to language issues

Person based approach to language issues

Complaint-driven systems (Ombusman / Observatory)

Pro-active, leadership based systems

Coherent EU Language Policy

EU Legal base and / or Treaty partner to European Charter for RML, FCNM

Vitality & empowerment of all languages Co-responsibility in stead of “subsidiarity” Incentive to inclusiveness of RML / IML Partnership to permanent networks of

stakeholders for regular strategic review

EU Agenda 2020

Linguistic Diversity as a priority

Co-operation between EU and the Council of Europe & ECML (= European Centre for Modern Languages in Graz)

National EU Agencies to raise awareness and assist endangered language communities to apply

EU Research Agenda 2020

Eurobarometer on Languages to include:Mother tongue + father tongue

Multilingual education: continuity & common standards

Media >>> Social media

Plurilingual Literacy

Application of CoE instruments

Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR): - can do – statements for L1, L2, Lf - parallel assessments of L1, L2, Lf

European Language Portfolio:- electronic - plurilingual approach

• Eskerrik asko

• Mange Takk

• Diolch

Tankewol

• Trugarez

• Grazia

• Graciis

• Dankscheen • Mercé plan

• Kiitos

• Dz'akuju so

• Köszönöm

• Hvala

• Multumesc

• Merci