[PASSED] Protecting Minority Languages

[Stoskavanya]

A worthwhile initiative I hope the WA adopts.

New Draft:

Protecting Minority Languages

CATEGORY:Education and Creativity |AREA OF EFFECT:Cultural Heritage |PROPOSED BY:Stoskavanya

This World Assembly,

Declaring that the existence of an independent language is intrinsically valuable, both as unifying part of cultural heritage and as a different perspective from which to perceive the world,

Acknowledging that political prejudice and societal intolerance is considerably diminishing linguistic diversity throughout the world, and is hastening the extinction of many minority languages,

Recognizing also the importance that the diversity of languages has for academic studies such as linguistics, psychology, history, anthropology, and other pursuits of knowledge;

Hereby,

Prohibits a member nation from purposely enacting measures through law or administrative rule which aim to deliberately eradicate a living minority language, or endorse any other efforts to suppress the active use of a minority language, with the intention of causing language death in its borders,

Again confirms an individual's right to learn and write, emphasizing for the purpose of this resolution an individual's right to learn and practice their native language if they so please,

Encourages multilingual nations to foster healthy linguistic diversity within their borders as recommend from the following committee,

Establishes the World Assembly Language Society (WALS) which shall have two central functions as of the ratification of this resolution:

1. Conducting an academic survey of existing languages, which entails:

i.) Recording the existence of any living native language within the World Assembly.
ii.) Evaluating the vitality of a language and its designation as a language in danger of language death.
iii.) Creating an accessible archive of this information to facilitate linguistic research.

2. Acting as an authoritative body on matters of language preservation and revitalization for nations within the World Assembly, which entails:

i.) Advising and working with receptive governmental bodies on matters of language preservation and revitalization within their jurisdictions.
ii.) Assisting local efforts with the creation and promotion of programs which educate interested students on their endangered language.
iii.) Promulgating suggested guidelines on methods for nations to practice linguistic diversity.

Notes that nothing in this resolution is to be construed as to prevent persons from becoming multilingual, to prevent member nations from establishing a national language, instituting compulsory language education, or any other unreasonable interpretation not in the spirit of protecting minority languages from the threat of language death.

Preventing Linguicide

CATEGORY:Education and Creativity |AREA OF EFFECT:Cultural Heritage |PROPOSED BY:Stoskavanya

Declaring that while in some cases language may be a barrier, language can also be a unifying element and important part of cultural heritage and coexistence,

Acknowledging that growing globalization is hastening the loss of many living native languages,

Recognizing that loss of a native language is not only an erosion of cultural diversity but a loss for academic fields such as linguistics, history, anthropology, and other pursuits of knowledge,

This World Assembly Hereby,

Prohibits a member nation from forcefully enacting measures which aim to deliberately eradicate a living native language through forced assimilation, language discrimination, or any other efforts to shatter cultural identity for the purpose of causing language death,

Again confirms an individual's right to learn and write, emphasizing for the purpose of this resolution an individual’s right to learn and practice whatever language they please,

Establishes the World Assembly Language League (WALL) which is tasked with, among other things;

i.) Classification

A. Recording the existence of any living native language within the World Assembly
B. Evaluating the vitality of a language and its risk of linguicide
C. Identifying populations of native speakers
D. Documenting the basic grammar and phonetics of the endangered language needed for basic proficiency, when possible
E. Collecting core written works of the language, if possible
F. Creating an accessible archive to document research

ii.) Education

A. Assembling and distributing material for the study of the language to interested persons in native populations
B. Assisting with the creation and promotion of programs which educate interested students on the endangered language
C. Advising and working with receptive governmental bodies on matters of language preservation within their jurisdiction
D. Promotion of the language’s written works within the community

Encourages members nations to foster healthy linguistic diversity within its borders,

Notes that nothing in this resolution should be construed as to prevent persons from becoming multilingual, or prevent member nations from establishing a national language, instituting compulsory language education, or any other unreasonable interpretation,

Notes that nothing in this resolution should be construed as to resist natural language change, or to punish member nations for policies which unintentionally and passively cause language death or erosion.

Q/A to common questions in the spoiler.

1. What is language death/erosion?
Language death is a linguistic term for the end or extinction of a language. An endangered language is one with few or no children learning the language with serious risk of the language's termination in the future. One of the processes a language takes from endangered to extinct is called language erosion, where the dwindling community of speakers causes the language to lose diversity of its elements due to under use.

2. Isn't this covered under the CoCR?
The CoCR protects persons of a language from discrimination, but not the language itself. There is many of underhanded ways a state could try to eliminate a language without being discriminatory to persons per se, which this resolution tries to address.

3.Why so many duties of your committee?
The community utilizes nonintrusive steps invented by Anthropologists to prevent language death. Efforts have been made to reduce the Society's workload by not requiring it to record every language's grammar, or any non-spoken/artificial language.

4. How about sacred/artificial languages?
This resolution does not target them, only native languages acquired or previously acquired at birth, a mother tongue language, which served as a communities primary language.

5. Is there prior WA legislation on this topic?
The only resolution dealing with this problem was GA#243 Language Preservation, which was repealed on the basis of its unrealistic work burden.

6. Why'd you change the draft?
Concerns about the cost and practicality of reversing language loss through a WA committee.

Author's Commentary Analysis on Proposal's Text

"Prohibits a member nation from purposely enacting measures through law which aim to deliberately eradicate a living minority language, or endorse any other efforts to shatter active discourse in the language with the intention of causing language death in its nation,"

The intention of this clause is not to protect the speakers of the language directly from discrimination (whom are already protected under the Charter of Civil Rights), but the language itself from policies which seek to purposely eliminate discourse of the language within a nation's borders, either through brazen legal prohibitions of the language's practice, or more subtle methods to discourage its use. An important element of this clause to keep in mind is that:
a.) these policies severe enough to put the language at risk of endangerment or death within its nation. Simply instituting an official language for use in governmental functions and or in public sectors is not sufficient enough to be covered with this provision, though it is addressed later.
b.) The policies to be enacted have to be deliberate, made the intention of attacking the language's practice. Policies created with a population's goodwill in mind that inadvertently cause decay in proficiency of a language, such as educational initiatives or economic integration of the populace, does not constitute a deliberate attempt to harm the language, and is thus not prohibited.

"Again confirms an individual's right to learn and write, emphasizing for the purpose of this resolution an individual's right to learn and practice their native language if they so please,"

The purpose of this clause in essence is to produce a right for a population to practice their language. The wording of the clause does this by establishing GA 234 Freedom to Read and Learn as a foundation, and extending its meaning to convey this new sentiment. This was necessary because I want this to be a Cultural Heritage proposal, not a Human Rights proposal, so I couldn't create a standalone right. Declaring something a right gives it more respect and protection, which is why I see it as a constructive tool to protect vulnerable languages.

"Encourages a multilingual nation to foster healthy linguistic diversity within its borders as suggested from the following committee,"

This seeks to protect minority languages by creating an environment where they are tolerated. I wrote as a replay in my thread:

"Healthy linguistic diversity is intentionally broad; but basically it boils down to the dominant culture in a society being tolerant towards minority languages' existence; refraining from enacting an aggressive language policy or pushing for destructive language purism. I understand that every nation needs some form of social integration which may include a preference for the dominant language, which why this is merely just an encouragement; the first Prohibits clause applies only if these policies lead to language death. I figured that the specifics of the definition would be articulated by my language committee, which nations could look to for guidance."

The purpose for the clause is self-explanatory; it is not a full-stop prohibition like the first clause, recognizing the realities and intricate nature of protecting a language, but it seeks to remove systemic and social burdens that many minority languages face as a contributing factor of language loss.


Onto the committee. The first part of the committee's role is to gather academic information on the endangered languages of the WA. The duties written were specifically selected to assist global efforts to combat language loss by disclosing linguistic data and information on the world's languages. Previous iterations of this proposal had the committee do tasks such as documenting the basic grammar and collecting cultural works. This, however, was edited out in later revisions in order to reduce the workload of the committee.

Now, for the controversial 'preservation and revitalization' part of committee. Previous legislation/proposals on language have failed due to a.) cost vs. benefit concerns, and b.) practically of the committees work load. Much of the concern on the GA forum was the effectiveness of a single WA committee attempting to preserve and revitalize all these languages. This is why the committee has been retooled to being a mere authoritative body on the matter of language preservation and revitalization, developing and promulgating methods and studies to the WA population on how best to achieve this. The committee only goes 'into the field' as to say when it is requested by either a nation's government or local population, where it acts in a supportive rule.

By doing this it is hoped that WA money will only go to genuine efforts that are meaningful and realistic, rather then throwing money away in revitalization attempts that are hopeless, or where the population is apathetic/unwilling. By limiting the scope of the committee to only these cases, the workload is also greatly diminished.

[Araraukar]

OOC: Ok, a few things without even looking at the proposal text...

1. Have you looked through the existing resolutions to make sure this doesn't already exist? I seem to remember something like this at least having made it to vote before.
2. If it existed and was repealed, have you looked at the repeal to see why it was repealed?
3. If it never passed, search this forum and the WA archive (since anything that fails at a vote is archived too) with keywords to see the previous attempts.

[Stoskavanya]

OOC: Ok, a few things without even looking at the proposal text...

1. Category and strength/AoE please?
2. Have you looked through the existing resolutions to make sure this doesn't already exist? I seem to remember something like this at least having made it to vote before.
3. If it existed and was repealed, have you looked at the repeal to see why it was repealed?
4. If it never passed, search this forum and the WA archive (since anything that fails at a vote is archived too) with keywords to see the previous attempts.

Added, Yes Yes and Yes. Why would you think I never looked?

[Araraukar]

Why would you think I never looked?

OOC: Because relative newbies like you never do.

So, did one exist before?

[Grays Harbor]

Again confirms an individual's right to learn and write, emphasizing for the purpose of this resolution an individual’s right to learn and practice whatever language they please,

Fine. However, said same person who wishes to speak, solely, a dead or dying language has no reasonable expectations that everybody else who speaks the primary language of that area must cater to their whims.

[Stoskavanya]

Why would you think I never looked?

So, did one exist before?

Yes, Language Preservation GA 243. It was repealed because it required the committee to do an insurmountable amount of work, and study every type of language, problems which I attempt to address. There was also a draft-less Freedom of Language Act that never passed.

Again confirms an individual's right to learn and write, emphasizing for the purpose of this resolution an individual’s right to learn and practice whatever language they please,

Fine. However, said same person who wishes to speak, solely, a dead or dying language has no reasonable expectations that everybody else who speaks the primary language of that area must cater to their whims.

This is true, and I intend the resolution to combat natural language loss in native populations, not to resurrect dead languages. Nothing in this forces a state to pander to language holdouts, however, I will remind one that language discrimination is against the CoCR

[Grays Harbor]

So, did one exist before?

Yes, Language Preservation GA 243. It was repealed because it required the committee to do an insurmountable amount of work, and study every type of language, problems which I attempt to address.

Fine. However, said same person who wishes to speak, solely, a dead or dying language has no reasonable expectations that everybody else who speaks the primary language of that area must cater to their whims.

This is true, and I intend the resolution to combat natural language loss in native populations, not to resurrect dead languages. Nothing in this forces a state to pander to language holdouts, however, I will remind one that language discrimination is against the CoCR

If it is already illegal according to the CoCR, what is the point of this exercize then?

[Stoskavanya]

If it is already illegal according to the CoCR, what is the point of this exercize then?

I point you to my Q/A

2. Isn't this covered under the CoCR?
The CoCR protects persons of a language from discrimination, but not the language itself. There is many of underhanded ways a state could try to eliminate a language without being discriminatory to persons per se, which this resolution tries to address.

Though I remind you the main purpose isn't civil rights, but combating language loss.

[The New California Republic]

OOC: Do we really need another committee to add to the WA committee pile? Can you not use one of the existing committees for this purpose?

[Stoskavanya]

OOC: Do we really need another committee to add to the WA committee pile? Can you not use one of the existing committees for this purpose?

I agree and assure you I looked for one, but couldn't find a suitable fit. If you have a recommendation please let me know.

Edit: The closest thing I found was the World Assembly Trust for Cultural Heritage (WATCH), but seeing that its purpose was oversight of cultural sites it seemed clumsy to shove the duties of my committee onto it.

[Oresland]

"Well, this seems like a good proposal. Will be supporting it, though the new committee is kind of the only thing that stops me from fully supporting. Too many of them already."

[Araraukar]

I agree and assure you I looked for one, but couldn't find a suitable fit. If you have a recommendation please let me know.

OOC: You already mentioned one:

Language Preservation GA 243 ... the committee

You are allowed to use committees from repealed resolutions, but it should say something like "Re-establishes [committee name] and assigns it the following tasks".

[Stoskavanya]

You are allowed to use committees from repealed resolutions, but it should say something like "Re-establishes [committee name] and assigns it the following tasks".

I suppose, but I don't really see the point, since that committee no longer exists or is listed anywhere, and I would rather be able to name my own.

[Kiravian WA Mission]

"Representing the interests of a highly multilingual country which has done much to prevent language extinction and promote the literary development of small and endangered languages, the Kiravian WA Mission strongly supports this proposal and would be willing to contribute its own resources in support of a World Assembly Language Revitalization Society."

[Alpha Cassiopeiae]

"I'm sceptical about supporting new committees, but I will admit there is a genuine need for one here. We support the draft as written."

[Separatist Peoples]

"We oppose this. There is no reason to spend money teaching a useless, dying language to anybody. Leaving behind a traditional language in favor of the common tongue is part of the life cycle of a culture. Let's not interfere with the natural order of things."

[Kenmoria]

"We oppose this. There is no reason to spend money teaching a useless, dying language to anybody. Leaving behind a traditional language in favor of the common tongue is part of the life cycle of a culture. Let's not interfere with the natural order of things."

"I would disagree, language death can be part of a failing culture and result in a loss of tradition and native practices. It also can be damaging to linguists as it means there are a smaller area of languages to study. We currently support the intention of the draft."

[Separatist Peoples]

"We oppose this. There is no reason to spend money teaching a useless, dying language to anybody. Leaving behind a traditional language in favor of the common tongue is part of the life cycle of a culture. Let's not interfere with the natural order of things."

"I would disagree, language death can be part of a failing culture and result in a loss of tradition and native practices. It also can be damaging to linguists as it means there are a smaller area of languages to study. We currently support the intention of the draft."

"Cultures fail. Retaining something incapable of surviving in the modern world is a waste of resources. Let them die."

[Wallenburg]

"We oppose this. There is no reason to spend money teaching a useless, dying language to anybody. Leaving behind a traditional language in favor of the common tongue is part of the life cycle of a culture. Let's not interfere with the natural order of things."

"Hear hear. Language is meant to communicate between people. If you cannot use your language to communicate, it is of no use to anyone."

[Stoskavanya]

"Hear hear. Language is meant to communicate between people. If you cannot use your language to communicate, it is of no use to anyone."

"We oppose this. There is no reason to spend money teaching a useless, dying language to anybody. Leaving behind a traditional language in favor of the common tongue is part of the life cycle of a culture. Let's not interfere with the natural order of things."

If you don't believe language has a greater intrinsic value for a people's identity, aesthetics, or academics, then that is fair. But with that logic I question the point of having an education/cultural heritage section at all. The committee's money, which has a pretty low cost compared to most committees established in this assembly, is well spent if one does believes in World Assembly role to protect unique perspectives in the world(s).

[Wallenburg]

"Hear hear. Language is meant to communicate between people. If you cannot use your language to communicate, it is of no use to anyone."

"We oppose this. There is no reason to spend money teaching a useless, dying language to anybody. Leaving behind a traditional language in favor of the common tongue is part of the life cycle of a culture. Let's not interfere with the natural order of things."

If you don't believe language has a greater intrinsic value for a people's identity, aesthetics, or academics, then that is fair. But with that logic I question the point of having an education/cultural heritage section at all. The committee's money, which has a pretty low cost compared to most committees established in this assembly, is well spent if one does believes in World Assembly role to protect unique perspectives in the world(s).

"Education is essential to the production of sharp minds and skilled workers. Cultural heritage, well, it's nice to preserve masterpieces of art, even when their creators and cultures are long gone."

[Kenmoria]

If you don't believe language has a greater intrinsic value for a people's identity, aesthetics, or academics, then that is fair. But with that logic I question the point of having an education/cultural heritage section at all. The committee's money, which has a pretty low cost compared to most committees established in this assembly, is well spent if one does believes in World Assembly role to protect unique perspectives in the world(s).

"Education is essential to the production of sharp minds and skilled workers. Cultural heritage, well, it's nice to preserve masterpieces of art, even when their creators and cultures are long gone."

"One could argue that a language is the collective masterpiece of an entire civilisation. Back onto the draft, the 'Prohibits' clause should just use 'aim' instead of 'aims'."

[New Doltania]

"Killing languages through law is a file practice. New Doltania is multi-lingual and is in favour of this draft resolution."

[The New California Republic]

OOC: After some thought, I think that if a language is truly dying, then let it. Any measures to prop it up artificially is merely delaying the inevitable, piling money into something that is already in the process of dying is a pointless exercise. Languages rise, evolve, and fall. It is just part of the nature of the existence of languages that they eventually die, so let them. So on that basis I am against.

[Bears Armed]

OOC: These records would be useful if descendants of a "dead" language's dead speakers wanted to revive its use again, perhaps as part of a general revival of interest in their ancestral culture or perhaps as a way of asserting their identity as a distinct group.
In RL, in recent times, we've seen this with [at least] Cornish and Wampanoag...