Volume 38, Issue 2 - Special issue: What do minority languages mean? European Perspectives, Guest-editors: Malika Pedley and Alain Viaut

The Gaelic language in Scotland presents a useful case study for the conceptualisation of minority languages. A key issue has been the extent to which Gaelic is understood as belonging to a discrete minority within Scotland and a bounded territory in the northwest of the country, or as a national language of significance to all of Scotland. Using the most obvious, demographic criterion, Gaelic is an extremely minoritised language, now spoken by barely 1.1 % of Scotland's population, and not spoken by a majority for at least five hundred years. Yet Gaelic was formerly the principal language of the Scottish kingdom, until processes of minoritisation began in the twelfth century. The concept of Gaelic as Scotland’s ‘true’ national language has been retained and refined, but co-exists with other interpretations that see Gaelic as belonging only to the territory that retained Gaelic after language shift occurred elsewhere. In recent decades, revitalisation initiatives (loosely connected with growing awareness of Scottish cultural distinctiveness and moves towards self-government) have promoted Gaelic as a language of national significance, an important resource for all Scots. Contemporary government policies advance this understanding even as speaker numbers continue to decline and many Scots view Gaelic as distant or irrelevant.

This article analyzes the legislation of the two territories that have the most advanced legal framework regarding language policies towards Catalan: Andorra and Catalonia. The study of the legislation in relation to contexts of social and institutional use shows how this legal framework is not sufficient to change Catalan from being a minoritized language, since the phenomenon of minoritization is innate to the ecosystem in which languages develop. This ecosystem is conditioned by the presence of Castilian as a lingua franca on both sides of the border between Andorra and Catalonia. In the case of Andorra, its status as a cross-border microstate makes it a plurilingual space with Castilian as a socially cross-cutting language; moreover, the fact that until recently there was no network of state schools hindered Catalan language normalisation efforts. Catalonia, on the other hand, is an even more complex example on account of how the implementation of llengua pròpia policy contradicts the constitutional control the Spanish state exercises on this.

The notion of “linguistic minority” not only incorporates the concept of group but also serves to define that group. Yet the relation between language and group can be considered in various ways. The primary function of language being that of communication, this will necessarily play a key role in defining the contours of any group whose language is different from neighbouring languages. Regardless of whether a group is established in a territory, for as long as it practises and asserts its language, the identificatory relation between that language and that group, and its consequences, implies different degrees of awareness. Any linguistic minority draws on structures of its own which are perceived as its own. To be able to categorise it, will mean emphasising the identificatory relation between language and group. In contrast concepts such as “minority language” rely primarily upon the territorialised legitimacy of a language or upon its demolinguistic data. This link with the group can reinforce linguistic consciousness with the help of its own structures, support that “minority language” does not necessarily imply.

Lombard is one of the 12–15 non-recognized regional languages spoken in Italy. This article focuses on the new speakers of Lombard, i. e. people who have learned or are learning Lombard as a second language. Through an open questionnaire the author has probed into various aspects concerning these new speakers’ competence and learning trajectories, situations and opportunities for using the language, motivations, aims, commitment, metalinguistic awareness and the difficulties encountered in acquiring the language. Issues of authenticity, legitimacy and especially of identity and political allegiances have also been looked at. After a brief outline of the Lombard language and the research on new speakers that has been carried out so far, the article presents the methodology employed, followed by an analysis of the answers provided, which show that new speakers are very different from native speakers in sociolinguistic terms. A discussion of the results and some conclusions close the article.

European discourse on linguistic minorities reflect the construction of inter-ethnic boundaries between national (such as Dutch or French), indigenous minorities (such as Basque, Catalan or Frisian), and immigrant minorities (Arabic, Berber or Turkish). In the European public discourse on immigrant minority groups, two major characteristics emerge: immigrant minority groups are often referred to as foreigners ( étrangers, Ausländer ) and as being in need of integration. It is common practice to refer to immigrant minority groups in terms of non-national residents and to their languages in terms of non-territorial, non-regional, non-indigenous, or non-European languages. This conceptual exclusion rather than inclusion in the European public discourse derives from a restrictive interpretation of the notions of citizenship and nationality. Based on the empirical evidence derived from Language Rich Europe project, a phenomenological perspective on ethnic minorities and inter-ethnic boundary construction will be presented in this paper.