Linguistic Policies and the Survival of Regional Languages in France and Britain (review)

Professor Judge reports the changes in attitudes and policy in an area where France had seemed unmoving, and successful in creating the unified nation-state envisaged by Napoleon. Her general approval of multilingualism, ‘which should be seen in terms of cultural pluralism rather than in narrowly political terms’ (p. 235), reflects the growing global governmental acceptance of the importance of linguistic policy as a symbol of attitudes towards matters of principle like human rights and equality of opportunity. France and the UK exemplify how far dissimilar (top-down versus bottom-up) policies have produced similar results in nearly destroying regional languages (RLs): those concerned here are Britain’s six as officially accepted in the Council of Europe’s European Charter for Regional and Minority Languages (ECRML): Welsh, Gaelic, Irish, Scots, Ulster Scots and Cornish; and, for France, which has not ratified the ECRML (although in 2008, eventually, it intends to accept them in the Constitution), four ‘official elsewhere’: Alsatian, Basque, Catalan and Flemish; and five ‘not official elsewhere’: Breton, Corsican, Franco-Provençal, Occitan and the Langues d’Oïl. Each language is treated separately, but in the context of overall state linguistic policy. French policy is traced in Chapter 1, leading to a gradual ‘valorization’ of RLs since 1970s. Contemporary policy is still concerned mainly with the state language: establishing its primacy, fighting illiteracy, maintaining it internationally. ‘Plurilingualism’, the fourth aspect, helps French in the battle against English in Europe but also allows a chink for the RLs in France. Just a chink: French linguistic policy is still bedevilled by the fear of ‘balkanization’. With such a history, it is surprising that any RL has survived, and Judge surveys the (fairly desperate) position language by language in Chapters 3 and 4, with Chapter 5 examining the ‘revitalization’ of French RLs, and a short conclusion with some all too brief comparative comments between the two countries. On the negative side, Judge’s account remains a story: more on economic and power struggles could sometimes have clarified things. The odd drop of cynicism to explode some of the myths governments, and their opponents, are prone to, would not have come amiss: the author is remarkably amiable in a field where controversy, ideological fixation and hatred of the other has long raged up to the point of terrorism, here beautified into ‘a touch of madness’ (p. 235), while centralization of the state has massively favoured capital regions to the point of oppression. To be fair, RLs disappear quickly where militants are few, as Judge clearly shows in discussing Franco-Provençal (pp. 105–7), and survive best with ‘intense political activity—including violence’ (p. 119, on Corsican). Although systematic comparison between Britain and France is lacking, illuminating comments are scattered throughout (France—royal, institutional methods, top-down codification of French; Britain—popular, social processes, the world-wide role of English). Judge’s sympathy for the RLs is not uncritical, and her knowledge of the literature is outstanding. She often clarifies what could otherwise be a very complex picture, as with Breton. Chapter 5, on revitalizing the RLs, is an excellent account. The story is well told, interesting to read and up-to-date. This is a good straightforward account of the situation for each country and RL and to be recommended.