The Experts below are selected from a list of 43563 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Kelley Loper - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Minority Language rights and education in china the relevance of human rights law and substantive equality
Social Science Research Network, 2011Co-Authors: Kelley LoperAbstract:This chapter considers the potential role of international human rights law, especially provisions which are applicable to China, in mediating competing interests and objectives when determining Minority Language policy in the education context. In particular, it examines the content of – and the obligations arising from – the right to equality and non-discrimination and the right to equality in education. Equality, as understood in its substantive sense, requires an assessment of the actual situation of disadvantage faced by particular groups and the provision of appropriate remedies. While this principle can help ensure respect for Minority Language rights, political obstacles including state-building priorities often interfere with its practical realization in China.
Enlli Mon Thomas - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
bilingual first Language development dominant Language takeover threatened Minority Language take up
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 2009Co-Authors: Virginia Mueller C Gathercole, Enlli Mon ThomasAbstract:This study explores the extent to which bilingual speakers in stable bilingual communities become fully bilingual in their two community Languages. Growing evidence shows that in bilingual communities in which one Language is very dominant, acquisition of the dominant Language may be quite unproblematic across sub-groups, while acquisition of the Minority Language can be hampered under conditions of reduced input. In Wales, children are exposed to both English and Welsh from an early age, either in the home or at school, or both. The data reported here indicate that regardless of home Language background, speakers develop equivalent, mature command of English, but that command of Welsh is directly correlated with the level of input in Welsh in the home and at school. Furthermore, maintenance of Welsh in adulthood may be contingent on continued exposure to the Language. The data have implications for theories of bilingual acquisition in stable versus immigrant bilingual communities, for optimal conditions for bringing up bilingual children, and for theories of critical periods of acquisition.
Robert F Weber - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
individual rights and group rights in the european community s approach to Minority Languages
Duke Journal of Comparative and International Law, 2007Co-Authors: Robert F WeberAbstract:INTRODUCTION The European Union (EU) (1) is a supranational entity comprised of twenty-five member states, and vests rights with the individual citizens of those Member States. However, Europe as a cultural space consists of many more constitutive groups that are currently left out of the structural legal framework of European integration. Minority Language groups, in particular, have been the subject of efforts by Member States to protect and preserve linguistic diversity within their borders. The extent and variety of solutions employed by Member States to protect their resident autochthonous Languages testifies to the importance of accommodating Minority Languages into the European legal landscape. The thesis of this Article is that the European Court of Justice (ECJ) jurisprudence puts the legality of these measures in jeopardy, and that to ensure the continued vitality of Minority Languages within the Member States, it may be necessary to formulate new protective strategies to replace some of the old methods whose compatibility with the EC Treaty is, by now, dubious. This Article will be divided into three parts that aim: (1) to provide a brief overview of the legal structures Member States have erected to protect the linguistic and cultural diversity within their borders, as well as the efforts made by the various EU institutions to do the same; (2) to elaborate a theoretical and practical distinction between group rights and individual rights; and characterize the process of European economic, social, and political integration, in contrast to the approach taken by the Member States, as fundamentally centered on individual, and not group, rights--an approach which is inadequate to protect Minority Languages; and (3) to examine the salient ECJ cases in this field in the light of the group rights/individual rights distinction, and analyze their effect on efforts to protect and preserve Minority Languages and cultures. In conclusion, this Article recommends an interpretive strategy that would permit the ECJ to consider group rights for Minority Languages as a sui generis subject of Community law and thereby minimize the risk that bona fide group-protective measures will run afoul of the non-discrimination principle contained in EC Treaty Article 12. That failing, the Article argues further that Minority groups and Member States should refocus their political efforts to address Minority Language concerns in the EC Treaty itself, since the expanded notion of EU citizenship and the ECJ's willingness to invoke the EC Treaty's non-discrimination principle in new contexts have placed many Member State efforts to create Minority Language group rights in potential conflict with the EC Treaty. I. LEGAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL TREATMENT OF LINGUISTIC DIVERSITY IN THE MEMBER STATES AND IN THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY It is estimated that one out of every eight citizens of the European Union speaks a Minority Language. (2) Given that the 1997 Treaty of Amsterdam included the first and only treaty reference solely directed to Minority populations, (3) it is hardly surprising that the Member States have addressed the issue of minorities independently of the EC. The Member States' attempts at accommodating minorities have taken on different forms, and have achieved varying success. Because the legal treatment of minorities (and Minority Languages in particular) has been guided primarily by the Member States, any study of Minority rights must begin there, before proceeding to the EC's--and the ECJ's--treatment of the issue. In other words, to know how European integration affects Minority rights, it is essential to analyze the current domestic protections for these groups, and how these legal protections may conflict with the EC Treaty. Five modes of addressing minorities in Member State law are most prevalent (4): first, formal constitutional recognition of multiple official Languages; second, constitutional incorporation of protection for linguistic minorities; third, establishing autonomous zones or communities with special Language rights; fourth, central legislative accommodation and recognition; and fifth, permitting small scale, informal local measures designed to accommodate Minority Languages. …
-
individual rights and group rights in the european community s approach to Minority Languages
Social Science Research Network, 2006Co-Authors: Robert F WeberAbstract:The European Union rights discourse is dominated by talk of individual, and not group, rights. Individual market actors have been the constitutive atoms of European Union law. Within this legal framework, the onus has been on the Member States to protect and contribute to Minority Language groups. This paper examines some of the ways Member States accommodate and recognize the Minority Language groups residing within Europe, and subsequently analyzes the compatibility of these measures with the EC Treaty in light of the European Court of Justice's (ECJ) willingness to invoke the Treaty in an increasing array of situations. Specifically, the article argues that the expansive view of EU citizenship taken by the ECJ in the Martinez Sala case (confirmed judicially by subsequent cases and legislatively by important directives) increases the range of situations for which the EU's non-discrimination principle may invalidate these Member State group rights measures. The ECJ's willingness to interpret citizenship expansively is troubling because it has not taken a similar expansive interpretation of the concept of Minority group rights. After discussing the theoretical background and practical importance of the distinction between individual rights and group rights, this article discusses the key ECJ cases involving the conflict of group Language rights and individual Community rights. Ultimately, the paper concludes by recommending (1) the ECJ adopt a new interpretive approach to analyzing Member States' bona fide efforts to protect Minority Language groups; or (2) the Member States modify the EC Treaty in one of three ways to permit group rights in the field of Minority Language protection without running afoul of the individual rights of EU citizens embodied in the non-discrimination principle.
Stephen May - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
rearticulating the case for Minority Language rights
Current Issues in Language Planning, 2003Co-Authors: Stephen MayAbstract:While advocacy of Minority Language rights (MLR) has become well established in sociolinguistics, Language policy and planning and the wider human rights literature, it has also come under increased criticism in recent times for a number of key limitations. In this paper, I address directly three current key criticisms of the MLR movement. The first is a perceived tendency towards essentialism in articulations of Language rights. The second is the apparent utopianism and artificiality of 'reversing Language shift' in the face of wider social and political 'realities'. And the third is that the individual mobility of Minority-Language speakers is far better served by shifting to a majority Language. While acknowledging the perspicacity of some of these arguments, I aim to rearticulate a defence of Minority Language rights that effectively addresses these key concerns. This requires, however, a sociohistorical/sociopolitical rather than a biological/ecological analysis of MLR. In addition, I will argue that...
-
uncommon Languages the challenges and possibilities of Minority Language rights
Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 2000Co-Authors: Stephen MayAbstract:This paper outlines some of the key complexities and controversies that surround the advocacy of Minority Language rights, most notably via the movement of Linguistic Human Rights (LHR). I argue that while the LHR movement has much to offer, particularly in articulating how Minority Languages might come to enjoy some of the privileges currently accorded to majority (national) Languages, it must also address more adequately a number of key issues. The first is a widespread rejection of any intrinsic link between Language and identity. The second concerns the difficulty of what actually constitutes a 'group' and whether, on that basis, any group-based rights (such as Language rights)can be accorded. The third concerns the valorisation of individual over collective rights, particularly within modern, liberal-democratic nation-states. Finally, these issues are also framed within a wider discussion of the historical and contemporary construction of nation-states, and the attendant stigmatisation and marginalis...
Evelyn Bosma - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the minimal and short lived effects of Minority Language exposure on the executive functions of frisian dutch bilingual children
Frontiers in Psychology, 2017Co-Authors: Evelyn Bosma, Eric Hoekstra, A P Versloot, Elma BlomAbstract:Various studies have shown that bilingual children need a certain degree of proficiency in both Languages before their bilingual experiences enhance their executive functioning (EF). In the current study, we investigated if degree of bilingualism in Frisian-Dutch children influenced EF and if this effect was sustained over a 3-year period. To this end, longitudinal data were analyzed from 120 Frisian-Dutch bilingual children who were 5- or 6-years-old at the first time of testing. EF was measured with two attention and two working memory tasks. Degree of bilingualism was defined as Language balance based on receptive vocabulary and expressive morphology scores in both Languages. In a context with a Minority and a majority Language, such as the Frisian-Dutch context, chances for becoming proficient in both Languages are best for children who speak the Minority Language at home. Therefore, in a subsequent analysis, we examined whether Minority Language exposure predicted Language balance and whether there was a relationship between Minority Language exposure and EF, mediated by Language balance. The results showed that intensity of exposure to Frisian at home, mediated by Language balance, had an impact on one of the attention tasks only. It predicted performance on this task at time 1, but not at time 2 and 3. This partially confirms previous evidence that the cognitive effects of bilingualism are moderated by degree of bilingualism and furthermore reveals that substantial Minority Language exposure at home indirectly affects bilingual children's cognitive development, namely through mediation with degree of bilingualism. However, the findings also demonstrate that the effect of bilingualism on EF is limited and unstable.
