Guest lecture delivered for the 9th International Week of Teaching and Training at the University of Economics in Bratislava.

1. Language Regimes of the European Union
Federico Gobbo
Amsterdam
F.Gobbo@uva.nl
9th Int’al Teaching and Training Week EUBA, Bratislava, 16 Oct 2019
1 of 60

2. What are language regimes?
2 of 60

3. The start of the debate
There are many ways to theorize about the interdependence
that may exist between language and politics. One way is to
consider the mutual influences of the typical language situations
and political situations that people try to bring into being. At
any time, there are only a few types of situations that many
people have names for and work for or against. We can call
these salient types of situations “regimes.”
Johnatan Pool (1990)
3 of 60

4. Pool’s questions
Is a particular language regime a necessary and sufficient condition
for the achievement of a particular political regime?
4 of 60

5. Pool’s questions
Is a particular language regime a necessary and sufficient condition
for the achievement of a particular political regime?
Vice versa, is a particular political regime a necessary and sufficient
condition for the achievement of a particular language regime?
4 of 60

6. Pool’s questions
Is a particular language regime a necessary and sufficient condition
for the achievement of a particular political regime?
Vice versa, is a particular political regime a necessary and sufficient
condition for the achievement of a particular language regime?
Or are linguistic and political regimes really independent, with each
being equally likely or equally easy to effectuate regardless of the
other?
4 of 60

7. The general situation before 1990
Sociolinguistics
pro discourse analysis of ideologies represented in societies
limit scarse account of institutional contexts
Political science
pro institutional context as a reflection of a particular national model
limit na¨ıve monolingualism as societal norm, language diversity as
deviation
5 of 60

8. The general situation before 1990
Sociolinguistics
pro discourse analysis of ideologies represented in societies
limit scarse account of institutional contexts
Political science
pro institutional context as a reflection of a particular national model
limit na¨ıve monolingualism as societal norm, language diversity as
deviation
After 20 years later: what we have achieved so far?
5 of 60

9. Language regimes as constraints on political regimes
There is no zero-option: fully a-linguistic state policies simply do
not exist (De Schutter 2007)
6 of 60

10. Language regimes as constraints on political regimes
There is no zero-option: fully a-linguistic state policies simply do
not exist (De Schutter 2007)
Language regimes generally understood as a prerequisite of
nationhood and statehood (in the sense of ‘imagined’
communities, Anderson 1983)
6 of 60

11. Language regimes as constraints on political regimes
There is no zero-option: fully a-linguistic state policies simply do
not exist (De Schutter 2007)
Language regimes generally understood as a prerequisite of
nationhood and statehood (in the sense of ‘imagined’
communities, Anderson 1983)
Language regimes can strengthen cultural bonds and social trust,
or they may exacerbate cultural differences and power imbalances
6 of 60

12. Language regimes as constraints on political regimes
There is no zero-option: fully a-linguistic state policies simply do
not exist (De Schutter 2007)
Language regimes generally understood as a prerequisite of
nationhood and statehood (in the sense of ‘imagined’
communities, Anderson 1983)
Language regimes can strengthen cultural bonds and social trust,
or they may exacerbate cultural differences and power imbalances
Language regimes are not defined once and for all, but rather they
develop over time along societal, political and economic change
6 of 60

13. Language regimes as constraints on political regimes
There is no zero-option: fully a-linguistic state policies simply do
not exist (De Schutter 2007)
Language regimes generally understood as a prerequisite of
nationhood and statehood (in the sense of ‘imagined’
communities, Anderson 1983)
Language regimes can strengthen cultural bonds and social trust,
or they may exacerbate cultural differences and power imbalances
Language regimes are not defined once and for all, but rather they
develop over time along societal, political and economic change
Research on language regimes needs interdisciplinarity
6 of 60

14. Standardizing diversity in Asia (Amy H. Liu 2015)
Fact: among 104 countries become independent between 1945 and
2000, approx. half of them recognized a ‘lingua franca’ in their
language regimes;
7 of 60

15. Standardizing diversity in Asia (Amy H. Liu 2015)
Fact: among 104 countries become independent between 1945 and
2000, approx. half of them recognized a ‘lingua franca’ in their
language regimes;
Dataset of language-in-education policies in 54 Asian countries
from 1945 to 2005
7 of 60

16. Standardizing diversity in Asia (Amy H. Liu 2015)
Fact: among 104 countries become independent between 1945 and
2000, approx. half of them recognized a ‘lingua franca’ in their
language regimes;
Dataset of language-in-education policies in 54 Asian countries
from 1945 to 2005
Case study 1: Malaysia: after independence from the Dutch in
1949, Indonesia planned Bahasa Indonesa (mainly from Malay, a
language of a minority) as its official language;
7 of 60

17. Standardizing diversity in Asia (Amy H. Liu 2015)
Fact: among 104 countries become independent between 1945 and
2000, approx. half of them recognized a ‘lingua franca’ in their
language regimes;
Dataset of language-in-education policies in 54 Asian countries
from 1945 to 2005
Case study 1: Malaysia: after independence from the Dutch in
1949, Indonesia planned Bahasa Indonesa (mainly from Malay, a
language of a minority) as its official language;
Case study 2: Singapore: bi(tri)lingualism: self-perception of a
post-colonial country, it has English as the common colonial
language plus one ‘mother tongue’, fostering Mandarin (over
Chinese dialects) and/or Malay or Tamil;
7 of 60

18. Standardizing diversity in Asia (Amy H. Liu 2015)
Fact: among 104 countries become independent between 1945 and
2000, approx. half of them recognized a ‘lingua franca’ in their
language regimes;
Dataset of language-in-education policies in 54 Asian countries
from 1945 to 2005
Case study 1: Malaysia: after independence from the Dutch in
1949, Indonesia planned Bahasa Indonesa (mainly from Malay, a
language of a minority) as its official language;
Case study 2: Singapore: bi(tri)lingualism: self-perception of a
post-colonial country, it has English as the common colonial
language plus one ‘mother tongue’, fostering Mandarin (over
Chinese dialects) and/or Malay or Tamil;
Main thesis: a high degree of linguistic heterogenity is not
necessarily detrimental to economic growth, if a ‘lingua franca’ is
adopted as (one of) the official languages.
7 of 60

19. Four prototypes of language
regimes
8 of 60

20. Standardizing diversity in Asia (Amy H. Liu 2015)
Fact: among 104 countries become independent between 1945 and
2000, approx. half of them recognized a ‘lingua franca’ in their
language regimes;
9 of 60

21. Standardizing diversity in Asia (Amy H. Liu 2015)
Fact: among 104 countries become independent between 1945 and
2000, approx. half of them recognized a ‘lingua franca’ in their
language regimes;
Dataset of language-in-education policies in 54 Asian countries
from 1945 to 2005
9 of 60

22. Standardizing diversity in Asia (Amy H. Liu 2015)
Fact: among 104 countries become independent between 1945 and
2000, approx. half of them recognized a ‘lingua franca’ in their
language regimes;
Dataset of language-in-education policies in 54 Asian countries
from 1945 to 2005
Case study 1: Malaysia: after independence from the Dutch in
1949, Indonesia planned Bahasa Indonesa (mainly from Malay, a
language of a minority) as its official language;
9 of 60

23. Standardizing diversity in Asia (Amy H. Liu 2015)
Fact: among 104 countries become independent between 1945 and
2000, approx. half of them recognized a ‘lingua franca’ in their
language regimes;
Dataset of language-in-education policies in 54 Asian countries
from 1945 to 2005
Case study 1: Malaysia: after independence from the Dutch in
1949, Indonesia planned Bahasa Indonesa (mainly from Malay, a
language of a minority) as its official language;
Case study 2: Singapore: bi(tri)lingualism: self-perception of a
post-colonial country, it has English as the common colonial
language plus one ‘mother tongue’, fostering Mandarin (over
Chinese dialects) and/or Malay or Tamil;
9 of 60

24. Standardizing diversity in Asia (Amy H. Liu 2015)
Fact: among 104 countries become independent between 1945 and
2000, approx. half of them recognized a ‘lingua franca’ in their
language regimes;
Dataset of language-in-education policies in 54 Asian countries
from 1945 to 2005
Case study 1: Malaysia: after independence from the Dutch in
1949, Indonesia planned Bahasa Indonesa (mainly from Malay, a
language of a minority) as its official language;
Case study 2: Singapore: bi(tri)lingualism: self-perception of a
post-colonial country, it has English as the common colonial
language plus one ‘mother tongue’, fostering Mandarin (over
Chinese dialects) and/or Malay or Tamil;
Main thesis: a high degree of linguistic heterogenity is not
necessarily detrimental to economic growth, if a ‘lingua franca’ is
adopted as (one of) the official languages.
9 of 60

25. Three mechanisms to manage linguistic heterogeneity
1. cultural egoism : the prestige of having one’s ‘mother tongue’
recognized;
2. communicative efficiency : reducing costs and errors due to
translation and interpretation (rational-choice economic principle);
3. collective equality : everybody should be on the same foot,
regardless of the respective ’mother tongues’ (linguistic justice
principle).
(Amy H. Liu 2015)
10 of 60

26. Dimension 1: number of recognized languages
Source: Amy H. Liu (2015)

27. Dimension 2: nativity of recognized languages
Source: Amy H. Liu (2015)

28. Putting together the two dimensions. . .
monolingual multilingual
‘mother tongue(s)’ power-concentrating power-sharing
‘lingua franca’ power-neutralizing neutralized-sharing hybrid
13 of 60

29. . . . we obtain 4 (proto)types of language regimes
1. power-concentrating regimes : based on cultural egoism in the
hands of ‘mother tongue’ holders (Donald Horowitz);
2. power-sharing regimes : mitigated cultural egoism by sharing
power through officialization of many ‘mother tongues’ (Arend
Lijphart);
3. power-neutralizing regimes : it fosters communicative efficiency
and collective equality through the adoption of a ‘lingua franca’
(no ethnic group privilege; Amy H. Liu);
4. neutralized-sharing hybrid : a balanced regime between
power-sharing and power-neutralizing (Amy H. Liu).
14 of 60

30. Language regimes and language
policy modification
15 of 60

31. We enter the realm of Language Policy and Planning
status planning
language policy modification
corpus planning
graphization, standardization, modernization
acquisition planning
formal, informal, non-formal

32. Remark 1: the disentanglement of ‘mother tongue’
proficiency
identity
beginner
intermediate
expert
pragmatic
aesthetic
adopted
moral
native17 of 60

33. Remark 2: is lingua franca for real a chimera?
The original lingua franca was a pidgin for trading purposes in the
Mediterrean, a domain-specific contact language between Ligurian,
Venetan, Italian, Occitan, French, with inserts from Berber,
Turkish, Greek, Arab (Schuchardt 1909). Remarks:
18 of 60

34. Remark 2: is lingua franca for real a chimera?
The original lingua franca was a pidgin for trading purposes in the
Mediterrean, a domain-specific contact language between Ligurian,
Venetan, Italian, Occitan, French, with inserts from Berber,
Turkish, Greek, Arab (Schuchardt 1909). Remarks:
not a full-fledge language; an “inferior” language;
18 of 60

35. Remark 2: is lingua franca for real a chimera?
The original lingua franca was a pidgin for trading purposes in the
Mediterrean, a domain-specific contact language between Ligurian,
Venetan, Italian, Occitan, French, with inserts from Berber,
Turkish, Greek, Arab (Schuchardt 1909). Remarks:
not a full-fledge language; an “inferior” language;
emerged in absence of language policy and planning
18 of 60

36. Remark 2: is lingua franca for real a chimera?
The original lingua franca was a pidgin for trading purposes in the
Mediterrean, a domain-specific contact language between Ligurian,
Venetan, Italian, Occitan, French, with inserts from Berber,
Turkish, Greek, Arab (Schuchardt 1909). Remarks:
not a full-fledge language; an “inferior” language;
emerged in absence of language policy and planning
It became synonymous of ethnic-free language, purely pragmatic.
Remarks:
18 of 60

37. Remark 2: is lingua franca for real a chimera?
The original lingua franca was a pidgin for trading purposes in the
Mediterrean, a domain-specific contact language between Ligurian,
Venetan, Italian, Occitan, French, with inserts from Berber,
Turkish, Greek, Arab (Schuchardt 1909). Remarks:
not a full-fledge language; an “inferior” language;
emerged in absence of language policy and planning
It became synonymous of ethnic-free language, purely pragmatic.
Remarks:
English and other colonial languages are not ethnic-free per se;
18 of 60

38. Remark 2: is lingua franca for real a chimera?
The original lingua franca was a pidgin for trading purposes in the
Mediterrean, a domain-specific contact language between Ligurian,
Venetan, Italian, Occitan, French, with inserts from Berber,
Turkish, Greek, Arab (Schuchardt 1909). Remarks:
not a full-fledge language; an “inferior” language;
emerged in absence of language policy and planning
It became synonymous of ethnic-free language, purely pragmatic.
Remarks:
English and other colonial languages are not ethnic-free per se;
‘Lingua francas’ still bring advantage to certain groups over the
others, perpetuating linguistic imperialism in some form;
18 of 60

39. Remark 2: is lingua franca for real a chimera?
The original lingua franca was a pidgin for trading purposes in the
Mediterrean, a domain-specific contact language between Ligurian,
Venetan, Italian, Occitan, French, with inserts from Berber,
Turkish, Greek, Arab (Schuchardt 1909). Remarks:
not a full-fledge language; an “inferior” language;
emerged in absence of language policy and planning
It became synonymous of ethnic-free language, purely pragmatic.
Remarks:
English and other colonial languages are not ethnic-free per se;
‘Lingua francas’ still bring advantage to certain groups over the
others, perpetuating linguistic imperialism in some form;
Even the only truly ethnic-free functioning ‘lingua franca’, Esperanto,
is accused of Eurocentrism.
18 of 60

40. Remark 2: is lingua franca for real a chimera?
The original lingua franca was a pidgin for trading purposes in the
Mediterrean, a domain-specific contact language between Ligurian,
Venetan, Italian, Occitan, French, with inserts from Berber,
Turkish, Greek, Arab (Schuchardt 1909). Remarks:
not a full-fledge language; an “inferior” language;
emerged in absence of language policy and planning
It became synonymous of ethnic-free language, purely pragmatic.
Remarks:
English and other colonial languages are not ethnic-free per se;
‘Lingua francas’ still bring advantage to certain groups over the
others, perpetuating linguistic imperialism in some form;
Even the only truly ethnic-free functioning ‘lingua franca’, Esperanto,
is accused of Eurocentrism.
Absolute neutrality is impossible.
18 of 60

41. Language regimes are at the macro- and meso- levels
level aspect relevance
macro politics of language(s) (state) traditions
meso language policy status, (public) policy mechanism(s)
micro language planning (informal) status, corpus, acquisition
19 of 60

42. State traditions come from Historical institutionalism
The past influences present-day politics through a variety of
mechanisms, ranging from concrete political institutions to
patterns of interests associations to broadly accepted definitions
of justice or even mundane ideas about the accepted way of
doing things.
Immergut, in Wimmer and K¨ossler (2005: 242)
20 of 60

43. State traditions come from Historical institutionalism
[The notion of state traditions] problematizes linguistic
homogenization as the singular, rational pathway of the
dominant nation-state model in favour of a more complex
understanding of the role of state action in governing linguistic
diversity.
Sonntag and Cardinal (2015)
Two types of observables (Bernardi 2018):
1. path dependency: every state makes decisions and creates
institutions according to various events, liked one to the other.
This chain of events forms the state tradition.
2. critical juncture: each crisis or dramatic change (decolonisation,
war. . . ) can disrupt or modify the predictable path.
21 of 60

44. Language regimes are framed by state traditions
The example of the French language.
Belgium : high-status language, language communities as possible
threats;
22 of 60

45. Language regimes are framed by state traditions
The example of the French language.
Belgium : high-status language, language communities as possible
threats;
Canada : discourse of the ‘two founding nations’, federalism;
22 of 60

46. Language regimes are framed by state traditions
The example of the French language.
Belgium : high-status language, language communities as possible
threats;
Canada : discourse of the ‘two founding nations’, federalism;
France : state born of revolution, Jacobin roots;
22 of 60

47. Language regimes are framed by state traditions
The example of the French language.
Belgium : high-status language, language communities as possible
threats;
Canada : discourse of the ‘two founding nations’, federalism;
France : state born of revolution, Jacobin roots;
Niger : most populous French-speaking country in the world (77
mil), post-colonialism, francophonie discourse;
22 of 60

48. Language regimes are framed by state traditions
The example of the French language.
Belgium : high-status language, language communities as possible
threats;
Canada : discourse of the ‘two founding nations’, federalism;
France : state born of revolution, Jacobin roots;
Niger : most populous French-speaking country in the world (77
mil), post-colonialism, francophonie discourse;
Switzerland : participatory tradition, confederationalism;
22 of 60

49. Language regimes are framed by state traditions
The example of the French language.
Belgium : high-status language, language communities as possible
threats;
Canada : discourse of the ‘two founding nations’, federalism;
France : state born of revolution, Jacobin roots;
Niger : most populous French-speaking country in the world (77
mil), post-colonialism, francophonie discourse;
Switzerland : participatory tradition, confederationalism;
. . .
22 of 60

50. Tackling multilingualism in
language regimes
23 of 60

51. Atomistic vs holistic views of multilingualism
The atomistic view regards a phenomenon as interpretable mainly
through analysis into distinct, separate and independent components.
For multilingualism, traditionally, linguistics – and psycholinguistics in
particular – focused on a specific feature on a definite level (e.g.,
phonetics, syntax, lexicon) on one language only or one language at a
time. Thus, languages are usually discrete and fixed units.
The holistic view considers a phenomenon interpretable only in
reference to the whole to whom it is interconnected. For
multilingualism, already Grosjean (1985) consider multilingual
speakers fully competent speakers-hearers with a unique profile, not a
‘sum’ of two monolinguals. The focus is multilingualism in real life,
for instance in families (with parents, siblings) or in school (with
teachers, peers).
24 of 60

52. Features of contemporary multilingualism
According to Aroinin & Singleton (2008) and Cenoz (2013):
geographical it is a global phenomenon, no more limited to close
areas or specific trade routes.
social there is no specific association with social variables such as
strata, professions, age, sex.
digital media in the 20th century, multilingual communication in
the digital media was mainly written and via email, which is slow.
After year 2000, social media tools, which enable multi-modal
forms of communication, completely changed the situation.
25 of 60

53. What does it mean ‘multilingualism’?
Multilingualism is here referred to the use of two or more languages
in a given society or social group. We will limit ourselves to
contemporary multilingualism. Beware that this umbrella term can be
used as a synonym of:
Plurilingualism is the fact that there are more than one language
in the linguistic repertoire, no matter when and how they were
acquired, no matter the confidence the individual has. Council of
Europe: the “repertoire of varieties of language which many
individuals use”.
Bilingualism is a synonym of plurilingualism, but more focused on
competence, in particular referriting to early acquisition within the
family, and everyday use. L¨udi & Py (2009): “each individual
currently practising two (or more) languages, and able, where
necessary, to switch from one language to the other without major
difficulty, is bilingual (or plurilingual)”
26 of 60

54. Bilingualism: the additive theory in a nutshell
It argues that early bilingualism – i.e., for pupils at the latest in their
primary school years – has many cognitive advantages:
children separate A and B early (8 months), even if similar (e.g.,
Catalan/Spanish): the two languages are always ‘on’ (Antonella
Sorace);
they have better language learning abilities for any other language
they have higher metalinguistic awareness;
they are more precocious readers;
they are better in task-switching, longer focused attention
Nota Bene For cognition, it doesn’t matter which languages
bilinguals learn.
27 of 60

55. Multilingualism in action is a complex phenomenon
Cognition is not the only aspect important in defining the multilingual
speaker. Other aspects are:
social and cultural: having two identities (in some cases, more)
permit to have a broader view of the world;
economic: more opportunities in job finding, travelling, and
acquiring information (e.g. reading newspapers in a language,
technical reports in another, while chatting in a third one,
effortlessly).
dynamism: multilingual competence changes in life according to
the life needs and attitudes.
translanguaging: discourse practices that imply the use of more
languages of the repertoire with specific needs (Garc´ıa 2009).
28 of 60

56. What does it mean ‘mobility’? (1)
time / space physical virtual potential
long migration
temporary mobility connection
no motility
At least three other dimensions to be added:
motivation: voluntary, ..., forced;
age: adults, ..., children;
education: high-skilled, ..., low-skilled;
29 of 60

57. How many languages in the world?
According to Ethnologue on 7,097 living languages only 3,748 have a
developed writing system, but we do not know if there are people who
are literate, actually using the language in a written form. The
remaining 3,349 languages are likely unwritten.
According to the UN, there are 193 states in the world.
Clearly, monolingualism is an exception, multilingualism being the
rule.
30 of 60

58. Is Europe relevant in the world for language diversity?
We’re learning more about the world’s living languages every day:
theyre living and dynamic, spoken by communities whose lives are
shaped by our rapidly changing world. These are fragile times: a full
third of languages are now endangered, often with less than 1,000
speakers remaining.
Nearly 2/3 of languages are in Africa and Asia. Europe has only 4%
circa of the total. By contrast, just 23 languages with at least 50
million first language speakers account for more than half the world’s
population (6.3 billions).
31 of 60

59. The 23 most spoken languages in the world (1)
1. Chinese [zho],
2. Spanish [spa],
3. English [eng],
4. Arabic [ara],
5. Hindi [hin],
6. Bengali [ben],
7. Portuguese [por],
8. Russian [rus],
9. Japanese [jpn],
10. Lahnda [lah],
11. Javanese [jav],
12. Turkish [tur],
32 of 60

60. The 23 most spoken languages in the world (2)
13. Korean [kor],
14. French [fra],
15. German [deu],
16. Telugu [tel],
17. Marathi [mar],
18. Urdu [urd],
19. Vietnamese [vie],
20. Tamil [tam],
21. Italian [ita],
22. Persian [fas],
23. Malay [msa].
33 of 60

61. Most popular languages being learned around the
world
(source: Ethnologue)
34 of 60

62. The case study of language
regime(s) in the EU
35 of 60

63. What is ‘Europe’? Is this map accurate?

64. If the moon were nationalism...
c : Photo by Dean Hayton in Unsplash, with modifications

65. Three Catholics, three social-democrats
The founding fathers of EU are:
1. Robert Schuman, French
2. Konrad Adenauer, German
3. Alcide De Gasperi, Italian (Austro-Hungarian origins)
4. Altiero Spinelli, Italian
5. Ernesto Rossi, Italian
6. Eugenio Colorni, Italian
United from the realisation, that war comes from nationalism.
38 of 60

66. The meaning of the Peace of Westphalia (1648)
Source: Wikipedia

67. Founder’s project: go beyond the Westphalian regime
According to the Westphalian regime:
states do not say a word on the affairs internal to each state;
external affairs are managed on gentleman agreements between
governments.
How to go beyond that? According to the founders, the solution is
only one: a Pan-European Federation.
40 of 60

68. A European Federation? Yes, but how?
Where is sovereignty? Two different answers:
for the Catholic founders, in people’s will, which should be
educated to the values founding Europe;
for the social-democratic founders, on social justice, subtained by
transparent and wise Law.
41 of 60

69. Two souls: catholic, social-democratic
Catholics social-democrats
Principle of Subsidiarity Principle of Welfare
state action in solidarity state directly takes care
with social groupings of citizens’ well being
peace based on peace based on
just public behaviour respect of human rights
we should proceed we should have an assembly
step by step write together a Constitution

70. What happened? The Catholic way won
1951 Treaty of Paris establishing the European Coal and Steel
Community,
1957 Treaty of Rome establishing the European Economic Community
(EEC),
1993 The Maastricht Treaty (European Union, EU)
2005 Stop: referenda on the European Constitution
43 of 60

71. Adds: language regimes and EU
1951 Treaty of Paris establishing the European Coal and Steel
Community,
1953 Discussion over an English-French (with Esperanto used to make
this option fail) (Sokolovska 2006)
1957 Treaty of Rome establishing the European Economic Community
(EEC),
1958 Article 1 states the official and working languages
1992 The European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages(CETS
148)
1993 The Maastricht Treaty (European Union, EU)
2005 Stop: referenda on the European Constitution
2019 The European Ombudsman launches a survey on multilingualism in
the EU institutions
44 of 60

72. Esperanto in the discussion in 1953
Source: Sokolovska (2016: 14)

73. The 24 official languages of the EU
Bulgarian, Croatian, Czech, Danish, Dutch, English, Estonian,
Finnish, French, German, Greek, Hungarian, Irish, Italian, Latvian,
Lithuanian, Maltese, Polish, Portuguese, Romanian, Slovak,
Slovenian, Spanish, Swedish. (source: europa.eu)
Remark. Luxembourgish is not an official language of the European
Union even if Luxembourg is one of the 6 countries that signed in
1951 the Treaty of Paris (alongwith Belgium, France, West Germany,
Italy, and the Netherlands).
46 of 60

74. Regional and Minority languages of the EU after 1992
The EU is home to over 60 indigenous regional or minority languages,
spoken by some 40 million people. They include Basque, Catalan,
Frisian, Saami, Welsh and Yiddish.
While it is national governments that determine these languages’ legal
status and the extent to which they receive support, the European
Commission maintains an open dialogue, encouraging linguistic
diversity to the extent possible. (source: europa.eu)
47 of 60

75. The language regime of the EU
The European Union basically recognizes two levels of officiality:
1. official languages
2. regional and minority languages (RMLs)
The 2012 Eurobarometer survey on Europeans and their languages
revealed very positive attitudes to multilingualism:
98% say mastering foreign languages will benefit their children.
88% think that knowing languages other than their mother tongue
is very useful.
72% agree with the EU goal of at least 2 foreign languages for
everyone.
77% say improving language skills should be a policy priority.
(source: europa.eu)
48 of 60

76. “Recent” migration languages
No legal status. No general official surveys. Relevant examples:
Arabic (lot of variation across communities)
Chinese (not only Mandarin, also Chinese ‘dialects’)
Russian (especially in the Baltic states)
Swahili
Turkish (some variation across communities)
. . .
49 of 60

77. Sign languages
Some recognition, if any, at the state level. Specificities:
Deafhood (culture) vs deaf-as-handicap
Independent typology (e.g. VGT (Flemish) and NGT (Dutch) are
very different, while VGT and LSFB (French Belgian) are closely
related)
multi-modal communication, new ICT challenges
50 of 60

78. Let’s apply Liu’s (2015) model to the EU
How can we define the EU language regime?
51 of 60

79. Let’s apply Liu’s (2015) model to the EU
How can we define the EU language regime?
1. Member states based essentially on cultural egoism;
51 of 60

80. Let’s apply Liu’s (2015) model to the EU
How can we define the EU language regime?
1. Member states based essentially on cultural egoism;
2. Official languages should cover each member state language rights;
51 of 60

81. Let’s apply Liu’s (2015) model to the EU
How can we define the EU language regime?
1. Member states based essentially on cultural egoism;
2. Official languages should cover each member state language rights;
3. Multilingualism on three levels: official, RMLs, others;
51 of 60

82. Let’s apply Liu’s (2015) model to the EU
How can we define the EU language regime?
1. Member states based essentially on cultural egoism;
2. Official languages should cover each member state language rights;
3. Multilingualism on three levels: official, RMLs, others;
4. No de jure lingua franca;
51 of 60

83. Let’s apply Liu’s (2015) model to the EU
How can we define the EU language regime?
1. Member states based essentially on cultural egoism;
2. Official languages should cover each member state language rights;
3. Multilingualism on three levels: official, RMLs, others;
4. No de jure lingua franca;
5. on the EU level, it’s power-sharing; on the member state level, it’s
power-concentrating;
51 of 60

84. Let’s apply Liu’s (2015) model to the EU
How can we define the EU language regime?
1. Member states based essentially on cultural egoism;
2. Official languages should cover each member state language rights;
3. Multilingualism on three levels: official, RMLs, others;
4. No de jure lingua franca;
5. on the EU level, it’s power-sharing; on the member state level, it’s
power-concentrating;
6. therefore, we can say that it is concentrating-sharing hybrid
51 of 60

85. The gap between de jure and de facto
Are all 24 official languages de facto on the same footing?
52 of 60

86. The gap between de jure and de facto
Are all 24 official languages de facto on the same footing?
Fact: agencies use only a subset of the 24 languages, e.g.:
52 of 60

87. The gap between de jure and de facto
Are all 24 official languages de facto on the same footing?
Fact: agencies use only a subset of the 24 languages, e.g.:
the European Patent Office (EPO) in M¨unchen uses English, French,
German;
52 of 60

88. The gap between de jure and de facto
Are all 24 official languages de facto on the same footing?
Fact: agencies use only a subset of the 24 languages, e.g.:
the European Patent Office (EPO) in M¨unchen uses English, French,
German;
the European Food Safety authority (EFSA) in Parma uses English,
French, German and Italian.
52 of 60

89. The gap between de jure and de facto
Are all 24 official languages de facto on the same footing?
Fact: agencies use only a subset of the 24 languages, e.g.:
the European Patent Office (EPO) in M¨unchen uses English, French,
German;
the European Food Safety authority (EFSA) in Parma uses English,
French, German and Italian.
documents to apply to the European Universities Initiative (since
2017) “to bring together a new generation of creative Europeans able
to cooperate across languages, borders and disciplines” are only in
English!
52 of 60

90. The gap between de jure and de facto
Are all 24 official languages de facto on the same footing?
Fact: agencies use only a subset of the 24 languages, e.g.:
the European Patent Office (EPO) in M¨unchen uses English, French,
German;
the European Food Safety authority (EFSA) in Parma uses English,
French, German and Italian.
documents to apply to the European Universities Initiative (since
2017) “to bring together a new generation of creative Europeans able
to cooperate across languages, borders and disciplines” are only in
English!
Fact: no official EU web site is written in all 24 languages in every
part – don’t stop on the home page;
52 of 60

91. The gap between de jure and de facto
Are all 24 official languages de facto on the same footing?
Fact: agencies use only a subset of the 24 languages, e.g.:
the European Patent Office (EPO) in M¨unchen uses English, French,
German;
the European Food Safety authority (EFSA) in Parma uses English,
French, German and Italian.
documents to apply to the European Universities Initiative (since
2017) “to bring together a new generation of creative Europeans able
to cooperate across languages, borders and disciplines” are only in
English!
Fact: no official EU web site is written in all 24 languages in every
part – don’t stop on the home page;
Let’s see the most recent public survey on the matter.
52 of 60

92. The survey on Multilingualism by the Ombudsman
Source: https://europa.eu/!FR38cb

93. Extracts (1)
The consultation seeks to promote discussion on the matter, bearing
in mind the need to reconcile respect and support for linguistic
diversity with administrative and budgetary constraints. It covered
four main issues:
[ Zmerom konzultcie je podpori diskusiu na tto tmu s ohadom na to,
e treba zosladi repektovanie a podporovanie jazykovej rozmanitosti so
sprvnymi a s rozpotovmi obmedzeniami. Konzultcia sa tkala tyroch
hlavnch tm: ]

94. Extracts (2)
I. Rules and practices;
II. Language use on websites;
III. Language use in public consultations; and
IV. Need for new legislation, translation costs and the potential of
machine translations.
[ I. pravidl a postupy,
II. pouvanie jazykov na webovch lokalitch,
III. pouvanie jazykov vo verejnch konzultcich a
IV. potreba novch prvnych predpisov, nklady na preklad a monos
strojovho prekladu.

95. Extracts (3)
The Ombudsman received 286 responses.Some respondents dealt
with just some of the questions raised.
Three responses were submitted by Member States, two by EU
agencies, one by a regional authority, 33 by non-governmental
organisations or associations and 247 by individuals (see Annex).
[ Ombudsmanka dostala 286 odpoved. Niektor respondenti sa
vyjadrili len k niekokm poloenm otzkam.
Tri odpovede predloili lensk tty, dve odpovede boli od agentr E, jedna
od regionlneho orgnu, 33 odpoved pochdzalo od mimovldnych
organizci alebo zdruen a 247 ich bolo od jednotlivcov (pozri prlohu). ]

96. Extracts (4)
The Ombudsman received replies in 19 EU official languages,
namely in French (95), English (57), Italian (32), Spanish (25),
German (21), Dutch (18), Slovakian (14), Hungarian (3), Polish (3),
Portuguese (3), Irish (2), Swedish (2), Czech (2), Bulgarian (1),
Croatian (1), Danish (1), Finnish (1), Greek (1) and Romanian (1).
One reply was submitted in Latin, one in Esperanto and one in
Catalan.
[ Ombudsmanka dostala odpovede v 19 radnch jazykoch E,
konkrtne vo francztine (95), v anglitine (57), talianine (32), panieline
(25), nemine (21), holandine (18), slovenine (14), maarine (3), potine
(3), portugaline (3), rine (2), vo vdine (2), v etine (2), bulharine (1),
chorvtine (1), dnine (1), vo fnine (1), v grtine (1) a rumunine (1).
Jedna odpove bola predloen v latinine, jedna v esperante a jedna v
katalnine. ]

97. Extracts (5)
3. Towards a Lingua Franca
Forty-six respondents call for a common language spoken by all EU
citizens. There are two approaches: four respondents consider one of
the current working languages (English) as the ideal choice. Forty-one
respondents strongly advocate the use of a common but neutral
language, such as Esperanto.
[ 3. Smerom k Lingua Franca (spolonmu jazyku)
46 respondentov poaduje spolon jazyk, ktorm by hovorili vetci obania
E. Vznikli tu dva prstupy. tyria respondenti sa domnievaj, e idelnou
vobou by bol jeden z aktulnych pracovnch jazykov (anglitina). 41
respondentov drazne obhajuje pouvanie spolonho, ale neutrlneho
jazyka, ako je naprklad esperanto. ]

98. What happens with Brexit? Sorry, I am no wizard. . .
c : J K Rowling, with modifications

99. Thanks for your kind attention and participation!
Your turn: any EU case study?
If not now, send afterwards to:
F.Gobbo@uva.nl
More info about me (also in Dutch, Esperanto, Italian):
https:/federicogobbo.name/
60 of 60