Viešoji nuomonė ir kalbų politika

L. KALĖDIENĖ. Public opinion and language policy 287 DISCUSSION LAIMA KALĖDIENĖ Lietuvių kalbos institutas PUBLIC OPINION AND LANGUAGE POLICY DOES LITHUANIA NEED A LANGUAGE POLICY? The results of a representative socio-linguistic survey of the public (which will be discussed below) forced us to rethink Lithuanian language policy once again, although the website of the State Lithuanian Language Commission contains only guidelines for Lithuanian (called the state language) language policy: Guidelines for State Language Policy 2009-20131. The use of Russian, Polish and other languages is regulated by the Law on National Minorities of the Republic of Lithuania2, Articles 4 and 5 of which often give rise to ambiguities. In addition to the Law on the State Language of the Republic of Lithuania3, the Law on the Protection of Consumer Rights of the Republic of Lithuania4, and indirectly the Law on the Term Bank of the Republic of Lithuania5, somewhat slow the spread of English in the public sphere. The use and teaching of languages in the education system, in addition to the relevant laws on education and science, is directly regulated by the instructions of the Minister of Education and Science, and in higher education institutions – by orders of the rector or dean. Thus, each language has its own message, its own laws, its own guidelines, and a person often cannot cope with only one language. Should this be the policy for all languages spoken in Lithuania? 1 See http://www.vlkk.lt/lit/10110 (accessed 25 October 2009). 1989, pp. 34–35. 3 Ibid., 1995, No. 15-344; 2002, No. 68-2760. 4 Ibid., 2007, No 12-488. 5 Ibid., 2004, No 7-129. 288 LANGUAGE CULTURE | 82 A systematic and comparative study of the world's language policies was attempted by Jacques Leclerc from Laval University in Canada. In 1988, he began collecting language policy documents from various countries, translated them into French, classified them and published 470 language policy documents from different countries and regions on the Internet in 19996. An analysis of their language policies was carried out in 20087. Our language policy there is called the policy of differentiated legal status: the official language has more rights than other languages, which are also recognised. We are also called the representatives of a policy of supporting the official language and excluding minority languages. It is noted that Lithuanians are characterized by defensive purism, so-called linguistic protectionism. Lithuanian language policy is almost identical to that of our neighbours and brothers of fate – Latvians and Estonians (we are often also grouped and described in a similar way). Unfortunately, after a year of looking at such a wealth of language policy experience, no answer was found on the quality of language policy in Lithuania – the breed is variegated, and the world is even more so. In order to find out whether the language policy implemented in Lithuania meets the expectations of language users, their opinions were asked during a sociolinguistic survey8. Using a quantitative method of sociology (multi-stage random sampling), 1513 residents aged 15–74 years of two Lithuanian cities – Vilnius and Klaipėda (later Kaunas) – were interviewed9. The sample was prepared as follows, 6 See http://www.tlfq.ulaval.ca/axl/index.html (accessed 30 October 2009). 7 Lithuania: http://www.tlfq.ulaval.ca/axl/europe/lituanie.htm (accessed 30 October 2009). 8 In 2007–2009, the Lithuanian State Science and Study Fund supported the project Language Use and National Identity in Lithuanian Cities (Cities and Languages) (http://projektai. and researchers of the Lithuanian Language Institute. 9 A number of authoritative sociological scholars are critical of the academic significance of public opinion polls and even tend to vu.lt/miestaiirkalbos/, žiūrėta 2009 10 08). Projekto vadovė Meilutė Ramonienė; be Vilniaus universiteto mokslininkų, jame dalyvavo Vytauto Didžiojo ir Klaipėdos universitetų question the existence of public opinion (Blumer 1969: 197–199). Their main argument is that social knowledge is a complex phenomenon that depends on the position of the individual and his social relationships in society, and therefore it is impossible to calculate it mechanically. Very often, due to their social status, respondents may not have an opinion or “borrow” it from friends, neighbors, the media. Therefore, surveys reflect more people's emotional and stereotypical reactions, rather than good L. KALĖDIENĖ. Public opinion and language policy 289 that every resident of Vilnius and Klaipėda should have the same chance to be surveyed. In the interviews held at the respondents’ homes, 64 questions were asked: ethnic composition of the respondents’ parents and their own and their families, national and local identity, native and non-native language, their use and level of proficiency, peculiarities of language use in public and private space, educational and desired language in the respondents’ and their children’s schools, use and evaluation of dialects and other. One of the unexpected results was that 8% of respondents indicated that they have not one, as usual, but even two mother tongues, half of them were Lithuanian and Russian. All these respondents were from mixed families10. Asked how well they speak their mother tongue, most respondents said they speak it well, especially Lithuanians and Russians (only 5% of Lithuanians and 4% of Russians think they are averagely good at writing in their mother tongue). 7% of Poles say that they are also averagely successful in writing in Polish, and the same number say that they are quite poor in writing in Polish. About 10% of Poles believe that they are not only bad at reading, but also bad at speaking. On the other hand, as many as one third of the representatives of other nationalities stated that they do not know how to write in their mother tongue, a quarter – that they do not know how to read, and 12% of the respondents say that it is difficult even to speak their mother tongue. Although it was expected that all Lithuanian residents speak Lithuanian and Russian fairly well, it was not even thought that only 1% of the survey participants would indicate that they do not speak Lithuanian at all. It was expected that already more than 3% would state that they do not speak Russian. However, 42% of the respondents do not speak English at all, very few speak French, and three quarters of the respondents would not communicate in German at all. Incidentally, the total unwillingness to learn languages was quite surprising: only one in five residents of Vilnius or Klaipėda expressed the desire to learn different languages. That fifth of respondents11 is already learning or intends to learn English. Non-Lithuanians revealed that they most often learn Lithuanian by themselves – 27% of respondents learn Lithuanian by reading, surfing the Internet, watching television in one way or another. Most complained that they had difficulty learning Lithuanian. As the most important motivation for learning they cited the desire to talk with a balanced opinion. Roger Hood also points out that it is important to distinguish between public approval and the opinion of well-informed individuals: public opinion polls can be misleading. (1989: 150–158). 10 For the perception of the mother tongue, see Ala Likhachiva. The comprehension of Lithuanian Russian and Russian-speaking people's mother tongue. – KK 82, 2009, 253–258. 11 Since the youngest respondents were 15 years old, the “fifth part” was obviously secondary school pupils, and the rest were university students. 290 LANGUAGE CULTURE | 82 Lithuanians (71 per cent), more than a third learns out of respect for the country, 29 per cent – for better job prospects. When asked to rate languages, almost all respondents said that their most beautiful and familiar language was their mother tongue. Lithuanian language is considered the most necessary language in Lithuania because it is most suitable for business, higher education and public life. The most prestigious is almost unanimously recognized English. As expected, young respondents are better at Lithuanian and English: only 1% of non-Lithuanian respondents stated that they never write in Lithuanian. Older respondents are more likely to try to communicate in Russian than in English, while younger respondents are more likely to do the opposite. Young people are more affected by globalisation: the fact that as many as 14% of very young people consider themselves primarily as global citizens or Europeans is not a manifestation of globalisation. National identity is not very important to them, but they consider Lithuanian to be their mother tongue. The most surprising thing of this survey could be considered the fact that even half of the respondents would like to send their children to bilingual Lithuanian-English schools. Especially the younger ones want this. One of the most important issues that emerged from the survey is the choice of the language (or languages) of instruction in order to facilitate more effective communication between members of society. This is not only widely discussed in society, but also in language policy, especially in educational planning. A part of the public is inclined to believe that the main language of instruction in Lithuania should be Lithuanian, but there are quite a few who believe that instruction can take place in various languages, especially emphasizing the need for English. The importance of the English language, its direct influence on national languages, and its impact on the status of national languages are constantly increasing worldwide (Liddicoat, Baldauf 2008). Being the state language, Lithuanian is widely used in Lithuania, but the influence of English, which has risen on a global scale, has its manifestations in our country as well, because the prestige of English is more important than the prestige of their own language. Thus, the Lithuanian ecolinguistic system is also threatened12. 12 Ecolinguistics emerged in the last decade of the last century, it is like a transfer of sociolinguistics, whose aim is the study of language or language functioning in society, L. KALĖDIENĖ. Viešoji nuomonė ir kalbų politika 291 Dabartinės švietimo sistemos vidurinio ugdymo padėties analizė parodė, kad nors socialinis anglų kalbos mokymo poreikis išryškėjo jau anksčiau (2006–2007 mokslo metais 86 proc. bendrojo lavinimo mokyklų mokinių mokėsi anglų kalbos, 47 proc. – rusų kalbos, 18 proc. – vokiečių kalbos, 3 proc. – prancūzų kalbos; Thus, in the 2006-2007 school year, one secondary school pupil studied 1.6 foreign languages13), but Lithuanian educational policy was not adjusted in time to meet the needs of citizens. Early English teaching in primary schools from the second grade, introduced in 2009, is unlikely to be successful because of a shortage of English teachers, as good specialists do not go to work in schools because of relatively poor salaries. English has a wide range of effects on the Lithuanian language itself: the less knowledge of English, the more unpredictable the influence and interference of that language. The official language policy in Lithuania has taken a defensive position and is not prepared to foster and develop the Lithuanian language in the new circumstances: in other countries it is already being implemented, and therefore it will not take long for it to come to Lithuania as well. The fact that the majority of non-Lithuanian citizens have learned Lithuanian as a non-native language also shows that the status of the language has an impact on its future fate. The extremely positive attitude to the need to know the state language Lithuanian can be explained in the same way as the attitude to the knowledge of English. In summary, it can be said that Lithuanian society is no different from the society of other European countries, because it understands the importance of the current main language of communication in Europe, and partly in the world, i.e. English, in their lives and those of their children. Many of the respondents who want bilingual schools have made this decision intuitively, without even hearing about the latest trends and trends in language teaching (cf. Ferguson 2006). GENERAL REMARKS Language policies are developed separately for the languages spoken in Lithuania: Lithuanian language policy is handled by the State Lithuanian Language Commission, Russian, Polish, Polish-Lithuanian and Lithuanian-Russian language policies are handled by the State Lithuanian Language Commission, Polish language policy is handled by the State Lithuanian Language Commission. Michael Halliday's paper New Ways of Meaning: the Challenge to Applied Linguistics (1990) is considered to be the pioneering work on the ecological context of languages. 13 See http://www.smm.lt/svietimo_bukle/docs/apzvalgos/Svietimas_regionuose_2007.pdf (accessed 21 September 2009). 292 LANGUAGE CULTURE | 82 GUDS AND OTHER NATIONAL MINORITIES – Department of National Minorities and Diaspora, which would provide the perspectives of all actively spoken languages in Lithuania, created a coherent vision of language prie Lietuvos Respublikos Vyriausybės, anglų kalbos priežiūra atitenka Švietimo ir mokslo ministerijai. Reikalinga bendra integruota programa, policy. A sociolinguistic survey of the city’s residents helped to clarify public opinion on some sensitive issues of language policy. One of the more serious needs is the fact that half of the respondents expressed the wish to admit their children to bilingual Lithuanian-English schools. It should be noted that almost half of the respondents do not know English at all, although they consider it the most prestigious language. Moreover, many of them, especially the older ones, do not even intend to learn it. Another salient and worrying trend is the shift in the determination of national identity: one in six young people surveyed decided not to be Lithuanians but rather Europeans or world citizens. However, one of the most encouraging results of the survey is the fact that almost all residents of large Lithuanian cities speak Lithuanian, although a couple of decades ago such results would not have been possible to dream about. LITERATŪRA Blu m e r H. 1969: Public Opinion and Public Opinion Polling. – H. Blumer. Symbolic Interactionism: Perspective and Method, Berkley: University of California Press, 195–208. Ferguson G. 2006: Language Planning and Education, Edinburgh University Press. Hall ida y M. 1990: New Ways of Meaning: the Challenge to Applied Linguistics. – A. Fill, P. Mühlhäusler (eds.), 2001: The Ecolinguistics Reader, London: Continuum, 175–202. Hood R. 1989: The Death Penalty: a World – wide Perspective, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 150–158. Lecle rc J. 2007: Laménagement linguistique dans le monde, Québec, TLFQ, Universitaté Laval. – Prieiga per internetą: http://www.tlfq.ulaval.ca/axl/ index.html (žiūrėta 2009 10 30). Lid d icoa t A., Baldauf R. B. 2008: Language Planning in Local Contexts: Agents, Contexts and Interactions. – A. Liddicoat, R. B. Baldauf (eds.), Language Planning in Local Contexts, Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd. Received 10/11/2009 L. KALĖDIENĖ. Public opinion and language policy 293 PUBLIC OPINION AND LANGUAGE POLICY Summary The paper sets out to examine if the present language policy responds to the society’s needs. A conclusion is made that presently Lithuania has no general policy of all languages used in the country; it only has a certain attitude formed towards the state Lithuanian language and legal basis established for the state Lithuanian language. Any other language can adopt some parts of the laws or decrees of the Government. As shown by the results of a representative sociolinguistic research Language Usage and National Identity in the Cities and Towns of Lithuania (Cities and Languages), the situation does not respond to the needs of the society and the changing life. Presently, issues of using and teaching English are of special importance. A search for a better job determines that the society manifests an increased need to learn English; however, there is neither adequate plan of measures to be implemented nor resources; there are no qualified specialists either. The society’s request that bilingual learning/teaching should be started at secondary schools has been rather unexpected. LAIMA KALĖDIENĖ Lietuvių kalbos institutas P. Vileišio g. 5, LT-10308 Vilnius, Lithuania Laima. K[email protected]