tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-985080357558043054.post2704326317383666784..comments2024-03-27T18:54:46.951+00:00Comments on Syniadau :: The Blog: The Assembly Commission caves inSyniadauhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13876017048168055247noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-985080357558043054.post-42569242780890125322009-09-22T15:19:02.452+01:002009-09-22T15:19:02.452+01:00Good post, Syniadau. With the LCO/Measure on the ...Good post, Syniadau. With the LCO/Measure on the way I think supporters of the language should embrace a wider constructive discussion once again about bilingualism. It's unfortunate that opening up the debate always just serves to put us on the defensive and opens the floodgates to the anti-Welsh brigade. The LCO was framed very much along the lines of extending the scope of the 1993 Act (Alun Ffred stressed this in his evidence to the Commons Select Committee). I can understand the tactics behind this but there is a risk of perpetuating the flaws of the Act: <br /><br />1) creating a superficial bilingualism (some forms, some parts of a website, a Welsh path that often breaks down when you try to do more than the basic things in the language. For example, try using it in dealing with the Council here in Swansea, despite their excellent "skin deep" 1993 Act bilingualism). <br /><br />2) There are no individual rights in the Act that could be enforced in court, yet the stress is on influencing the conscious individual choice of speakers to use what is almost always an inferior service in a context where all the signals are that English is the norm (and by implication labelling those Welsh speakers who do not choose it as "underconfident" and making them the problem).<br /><br />3) No real attempt to address the shifts needed in what is the linguistic norm within institutions/contexts. That is far more important than individual choice or confidence in increasing levels of Welsh usage (I'm drawing here on the research of Morris and Williams in their 2000 book "Language Planning and Language Use").<br /><br />For me the most depressing aspect of the current trouble was that the Commission's proposals were a clear statement that English is the norm in the Assembly. The Assembly is institutionally anti-Welsh. <br /><br />Two ways to move forward the debate, and the effectiveness of policy, in terms of actual Welsh usage would be:<br /><br />A) putting a postive duty on bodies with language schemes to increase the number of "transactions" taking place in Welsh (I don't really like the "target" culture but since we are where we are, could targets be necessary, so with 10 percent of the population speaking Welsh here in Swansea, at least an initial 10 percent target could be set).<br /><br />B) more radically: moving away from the idea of translation (translation/bilingualism and formal equality can undermine a minority culture) towards a situation where it is a civic duty on all citizens to have basic functional competence in both languages rather than just in English. It might take a generation and would require the sort of teaching revolution envisaged by Ken Hopkins in his IWA pamphlet "Saving our langauge". A could place to start could have been the Assembly Record - just leaving the English in English and the Welsh in Welsh with no paper translation at all (problematic again). <br /> <br />EfrogwrAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com