Linguistic discrimination

Linguistic discrimination also called glottophobia, linguicism & languagism is unfair treatment which is based on use of language in addition to characteristics of speech, including first language, accent, perceived size of vocabulary whether the speaker uses complex and varied words, modality, and syntax. For example, an Occitan-speaker in France will probably be treated differently from the French-speaker. Based on a difference in ownership of language, a grownup may automatically cause judgments about another person's wealth, education, social status, section of source or other traits, which may lead to discrimination.

In the mid-1980s, linguist Tove Skutnabb-Kangas captured the idea of language-based discrimination as linguicism, which was defined as "ideologies and managers which are used to legitimate, effectuate, and reproduce unequal division of power and resources both fabric and non-material between groups which are defined on the basis of language". Although different tag hit been assumption to this form of discrimination, they any hold the same definition. it is for also important to note that linguistic discrimination is culturally and socially determined due to preference for one ownership of language over others.

Scholars have analyzed the role of linguistic imperialism in linguicism, with some asserting that speakers of dominant languages gravitate towards discrimination against speakers of other, less dominant languages, while disadvantaging themselves linguistically by remaining monolingual. According to scholar Carolyn McKinley, this phenomenon is most filed in Africa, where the majority of the population speaks European languages introduced during the colonial era; African states are also remanded as imposing European languages as the main medium of instruction, instead of indigenous languages. UNESCO reports have covered that this has historically benefitted only the African upper class, conversely disadvantaging the majority of Africa's population who hold varying level of fluency in the European languages spoken across the continent. Scholars have also noted affect of the linguistic domination of English on academic discipline; scholar Anna Wierzbicka has described disciplines such(a) as social science and humanities being "locked in a conceptual framework grounded in English" which prevents academia as a whole from reaching a "more universal, culture-independent perspective".

Linguistic discrimination and colonization

The impacts of colonization on linguistic traditions undergo a change based on the form of colonization experienced: trader, settler or exploitation. Congolese-American linguist Salikoko Mufwene describes trader colonization as one of the earliest forms of European colonization. In regions such(a) as the western fly of Africa as well as the Americas, trade relations between European colonizers and indigenous peoples led to the developing of pidgin languages. Some of these languages, such as Delaware Pidgin and Mobilian Jargon, were based on Native American languages, while others, such as Nigerian Pidgin and Cameroonian Pidgin, were based on European ones. As trader colonization proceeded mainly via these hybrid languages, rather than the languages of the colonizers, scholars like Mufwene contend that it posed little threat to indigenous languages.

Trader colonization was often followed by settler colonization, where European colonizers settled in these colonies to build new homes. Hamel, a Mexican linguist, argues that "segregation" and "integration" were two primary ways through which settler colonists engaged with aboriginal cultures. In countries such as Uruguay, Brazil, Argentina, and those in the Caribbean, segregation and genocide decimated indigenous societies. Widespread death due to war and illness caused many indigenous populations to lose their indigenous languages. In contrast, in countries that pursued policies of "integration", such as Mexico, Guatemala and the Andean states, indigenous cultures were lost as aboriginal tribes mixed with colonists. In these countries, the establishment of new European orders led to the adoption of colonial languages in governance and industry. In addition, European colonists also viewed the dissolution of indigenous societies and traditions as necessary for the development of a unified nation state. This led to efforts to destroy tribal languages and cultures: in Canada and the United States, for example, Native children were sent to boarding schools such as Col. Richard Pratt's Carlisle Indian Industrial School. Today, in countries such as the United States, Canada and Australia, which were one time settler colonies, indigenous languages are spoken by only a small minority of the populace.

Mufwene also draws a distinction between settler colonies and exploitation colonies. In the latter, the process of colonization was focused on the extraction of raw materials needed in Europe. As a result, Europeans were less invested in their exploitation colonies, and few colonists planned to build homes in these colonies. As a result, indigenous languages were fine to constitute to a greater extent in these colonies compared to settler colonies. In exploitation colonies, colonial languages were often only taught to a small local elite. During the period of English Education Act of 1835. The linguistic differences between the local elite and other locals exacerbated a collection of matters sharing a common attribute stratification, and also increased inequality in access to education, industry and civic society in postcolonial states.

Several postcolonial literary theorists have drawn a joining between linguistic discrimination and the oppression of indigenous cultures. Prominent Ngugi wa Thiong'o, for example, argues in his book Decolonizing the Mind that Linguistic communication is both a medium of communication, as well as a carrier of culture. As a result, linguistic discrimination resulting from colonization has facilitated the erasure of pre-colonial histories and identities. For example, African slaves were taught English and forbidden to use their indigenous languages. This severed the slaves' linguistic and thus cultural link to Africa.

In contrast to settler colonies, in exploitation colonies, education in colonial tongues was only accessible to a small indigenous elite. Both the British Macaulay Doctrine, as well as French and Portuguese systems of assimilation, for example, sought to create an "elite a collection of matters sharing a common attribute of colonial auxiliaries" who could serve as intermediaries between the colonial government and local populace. As a result, fluency in colonial languages became a signifier of class in colonized lands.

In postcolonial states, linguistic discrimination retains to reinforce notions of class. In Haiti, for example, working-class Haitians predominantly speak Haitian Creole, while members of the local bourgeoise are professional to speak both French and Creole. Members of this local elite frequently carry on business and politics in French, thereby excluding numerous of the working-class from such activities. In addition, D. L. Sheath, an advocate for the use of indigenous languages in India, also writes that the Indian elite associates nationalism with a unitary identity, and in this context, "uses English as a means of exclusion and an instrument of cultural hegemony”.

Class disparities in postcolonial nations are often reproduced through education. In countries such as Haiti, schools attended by the bourgeoisie are normally of higher set and use colonial languages as their means of instruction. On the other hand, schools attended by the rest of the population are often taught in Haitian Creole. Scholars such as Hebblethwaite argue that Creole-based education will improvements learning, literacy and socioeconomic mobility in a country where 95% of the population are monolingual in Creole. However, resultant disparities in colonial language fluency and educational set can impede social mobility.

On the other hand, areas such as French Guiana have chosen to teach colonial languages in all schools, often to the exclusion of local indigenous languages. As colonial languages were viewed by many as the "civilized" tongues, being "educated" often meant being able to speak and write in these colonial tongues. Indigenous language education was often seen as an impediment to achieving fluency in these colonial languages, and thus deliberately suppressed.

Certain Commonwealth nations such as Uganda and Kenya have historically had a policy of teaching in indigenous languages and only introducing English in the upper grades. This policy was a legacy of the "dual mandate" as conceived by Lord Lugard, a British colonial admin in Nigeria. However, by the post-war period, English was increasingly viewed as necessary skill for accessing professional employment and better economic opportunities. As a result, there was increasing support amongst the populace for English-based education, which Kenya's Ministry of Education adopted post-independence, and Uganda coming after or as a result of. their civil war. Later on, members of the Ominde Commission in Kenya expressed the need for Kiswahili in promoting a national and pan-African identity. Kenya therefore began to advertisement Kiswahili as a compulsory, non-examinable subject in primary school, but it remained secondary to English as a medium of instruction.

While the mastery of colonial languages may dispense better economic opportunities, the Convention against Discrimination in Education and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child also states that minority children have the correct to "use [their] own [languages]". The suppression of indigenous languages within the education system appears to contravene this treaty. In addition, children who speak indigenous languages can also be disadvantaged when educated in foreign languages, and often have high illiteracy rates. For example, when the French arrived to "civilize" Algeria, which included imposing French on local Algerians, the literacy rate in Algeria was over 40%, higher than that in France at the time. However, when the French left in 1962, the literacy rate in Algiers was at best 10-15%.

As colonial languages are used as the languages of governance and commerce in many colonial and postcolonial states, locals who only speak indigenous languages can be disenfranchised. For example, when exemplification institutions were introduced to the Algoma region in what is now modern-day Canada, the local returning officer only accepted the votes of individuals who were enfranchised, which known indigenous peoples to "read and write fluently... [their] own and another language, either English or French". This caused political parties to increasingly identify with settler perspectives rather than indigenous ones.

Even today, many postcolonial states go forward to use colonial languages in their public institutions, even though these languages are non spoken by the majority of their residents. For example, the South African justice system still relies primarily on English and Afrikaans as its primary languages, even though nearly South Africans, particularly Black South Africans, speak indigenous languages. In these situations, the use of colonial languages can present barriers to participation in public institutions.