warrenevans.net

Welsh Fabian Essays 

Photograph of Roger Warren Evans 




Who are the Authors?



Can I join in?



COPYRIGHT

Fabian essays are all published on the footing that the views are those of the individual authors, and not of the Fabian Society.  The Author retains the copyright, and individual consent must be obtained.  For reproduction of the version published here on this Website, however, the consent of the Fabian Society is required, and will ordinarily be given gratis on the footing that the source is fully stated and acknowledged.

Contact Managing Editor click through


     
  NB STOP PRESS A response to this Essay
has been submitted by Fabian Chris Castle of Cardiff,
and is published on this page, following the Essay

You can also click through to find this essay in Welsh.


A Language
Policy for Wales

by Roger Warren Evans, Fabian, Gower CLP

"The language issue" has long figured prominently in the politics of Wales.  The issue is conventionally conceived in terms of the assertion of Welsh usage "against" English usage. Use of the Welsh language has become one of the hallmarks of Welsh nationalism, of the assertion of a Welsh, Celtic cultural identity to contrast with the conventions of an Anglo-Saxon "English" culture. It is true that the history of Wales has been scarred by the oppression of the Welsh language, and of Welsh speakers, by dominant English speakers.  Similar linguistic polarities have scarred other European societies, in Belgium, Brittany, and the Basque provinces. Against that background, it is understandable that those opposing rule from London should have rallied around the traditional language of Wales. It is no accident that one of the most radical Welsh political groups should have been called Cymdeithas Yr Iaith, or The Welsh Language Society.

A future language policy for Wales should, however, be conceived in much broader terms: it should not be constrained by the narrow conflicts of Welsh and English speakers.  Indeed, there is a parallel need for a UK-wide language policy to govern the use of multiple languages by the modern State and its agencies.  As a modern multicultural society, the need is to adapt to the requirements of multilingualism, and move away from the conventions of a monoglot, or even bi-lingual, society. In a modern society like Wales, the need is for a new systematic treatment of the overall process of communication by language.

Language policy has two quite distinct dimensions, namely the personal and the communal. 

I   PERSONAL

The first principle, already formulated at UK law for the purposes of criminal court proceedings, is that any person, when faced with the prospect of condemnation and punishment, is entitled to be heard and to make his defence in his mother tongue.  It is for the Court, as part of the conduct of a fair trial, to ensure that satisfactory translation/interpretation facilities are available for that purpose.  

That principle should be developed, as the primary arm of any language policy, for it constitutes a universal human right, going far beyond rules regulating the use of Welsh or similar traditional languages. It applies with equal force to the foreign visitor accused of shoplifting in London's Oxford Street.  Wherever any person is engaged with the modern State, for the purpose of either securing a benefit or avoiding a penalty, the mother-tongue principle should be assiduously upheld.

This "mother-tongue" principle is already well established, as a matter of Common Law and Court practice.  It should be explicitly extended, however, to all situations in which the individual either faces potential adverse consequences (e.g. including Customs or immigration investigations) or stands to gain or lose a valuable public benefit, according to the outcome of the proceedings. 

II  COMMUNAL

The second group of principles is communal, or collective, in character.  For each society, the functional need is for a three-way classification of languages, as deployed by the State within the boundaries of its territory.

  • First: Every State needs, as a prerequisite of a settled civic order, an official language.  This is the official language of State, the language of official pronouncements, the language of statutory legislation, the language of official public announcements and orders, of the creation of new obligations and punishments and benefits. Experience suggests that there should preferably be a single official language.  Where states have two or more official languages (Ireland, Canada) it is easy for differences of interpretation to generate unnecessary complication, if not conflict. Under the Government of Wales Act, it was initially intended to constitute both English and Welsh as having joint official language status, but that plan was abandoned at an early stage.

  • Second: Social convention and history may support the identification of a traditional language, a language of culture, learning and social intercourse, which may be habitually spoken by a large number of citizens but which is not the official language.  Welsh is a good example of such a traditional language, as is Gaelic in Ireland, and Breton in Brittany.  In this respect, a single State may accommodate within its borders a range of different languages, at provincial or regional level and it should be possible to accommodate such differentiation within a provincial frame (Catalan in Catalunya, Breton in Brittany, Cornish in Cornwall).

  • Third: All societies must now, given the increased ethic and cultural diversity within each society, deploy a range of communal languages, being languages other than the indigenous traditional language, but which are spoken by significant numbers of migrants within their own communities, and which may still be the mother-tongue of newly-arrived migrants or elderly residents who have never been able to learn English satisfactorily.

Each State should spell out, by law, the scope of these different categories of language, and their administrative and political implications.  In the UK, the need is for primary legislation, preferably without imitation to Wales.  This essay sets out the principles upon which such legislation should be prepared.

Official Language

The UK should designate a single official language, binding upon all its territories.  All official statements and requirements, instructions given, benefits conferred should as a matter of constitutional law be required to be stated in the official language, and clearly expressed. This principle has been developed as a matter of Common Law, and is embodied in the principles of construction ("interpretation") applied by the Courts in deciding the meaning of statutes and statutory instruments (i.e. primary and secondary legislation).  And in this sense, whether with express statutory provision or not, the official language of Wales is English.

This principle extends to public requirements issued under legislation, made by any arm of government, national, provincial or local: in a highly mobile society, the most common of these takes the form of highway signage, but the principle also applies to the conduct of all legal proceedings, both criminal and civil.  A further vital feature of contemporary society is the informational leaflet, particularly in the welfare sector, and this may shade into binding or procedural or advisory administrative directives, affecting a citizen's position.  All such "official" statements should be made in the official Language. The same should hold true of official public records of public proceedings, including parliamentary and Civil Service records; where any statement was made, in such proceedings, in any language other than the Official Language, the record should always carry an official translation.  And in all cases, the official language alone should generate legal effect.

Traditional Language

For most parts of the UK, there is no language capable of contending for designation as a traditional language, other than English itself.  But in Wales, the Welsh language is the traditional language, occupying a very distinctive position, historically, culturally and politically.  This status has already been recognised by the Welsh language legislation, the provision of S4C television, and the work of the Welsh Language Board.  Indeed, in some respects, this legislation has already conferred on the Welsh language greater currency than a traditional language should necessarily, as a matter of general principle, enjoy. 

But the concept of a traditional language should be developed further, by way of new statutory entitlement.

  • Place names should be designated in either the official or the traditional language, but no other.  Every place should be accorded one name and one name only, whichever the language of choice. The choice of language should be a matter for decision by the most relevant local authority: Cardiff City Council should decide on the naming of Cardiff (either Cardiff or Caerdydd, but not both).  For Dinas Powis, the relevant Authority would be the Dinas Powis Community Council. 
  • Public facilities could, at the discretion of the relevant authority, also be designated in either language - cemetery or mynwent, school or ysgol, church or eglwys, museum or amgueddfa.
  • Public Documents: In the case of specific public documents (whether bearing coercive force or merely advisory) the State should always, if properly requested by a citizen to do so, make them available in the traditional language, as well as the official language.  There should be no requirement that all public documentation should be made available in the traditional language (unless of course the mother-tongue principle were engaged).  And the State should have the residual power to determine a request to be vexatious or otherwise without proper foundation.
  • Active support should be given by the State for the cultivation of the traditional language, both within the educational system and otherwise. In Wales, education authorities should make many more facilities available for residents seeking to learn Welsh.

The relevant authority should always retain a jurisdiction to avoid dual-language deployment where other overriding considerations apply.  For example, it is a dangerous and destructive feature of Welsh highway signage that operational instructions are conveyed in both English and Welsh, thus running the risk of confused perceptions in an environment where highway safety should be the prime concern.

Communal Languages 

The status of communal languages will increase in importance, as the incidence of international migration increases, and new ethnic and cultural groupings become established within the territory of each State.  Procedures should be put in place for the official designation of a language, within any territorial unit of governance, as a communal language

For those speaking minority foreign languages, the two most important factors are bound to be (a) learning the official language, and (b) benefitting from the mother-tongue principle.  But if a community became firmly established within any locality (which is the common experience of migrating groups) their settlement should be recognised in other ways.  For example, cultural grant facilities should be accessible for the cultivation of communal languages and cultures, and individuals should have the right to call for public advisory documentation to be made available in the communal language (e.g. as many educational authorities provide foreign-language translations of material relevant to children's education).

The Welsh Assembly is well suited to the development of a new statutory framework, pointing the way ahead, internationally, for this dimension of UK public life.  Within the UK, it is only in Wales that the relevance of these issues is widely perceived and understood.  There should be no question of any crude stand-off between the protagonists of English and the devotees of Welsh.  The issue is a much more profound one, going to the dignity and human rights of each individual within modern society.

Wales should take the international lead, with the promotion of a new UK Language Act, embodying the above principles.


A Language Policy for Wales

Response to Roger Warren Evans by Fabian Chris Castle
Cji-castle@cymru.new.labour.org.uk

RWE has offered us a reasonable attempt to reconcile Welsh people’s commonly-held assumptions, misapprehensions, prejudices and ignorance with his obvious goodwill towards non-English languages. However, assumptions misapprehensions, prejudices and ignorance are features of his essay.

I will argue that these negative attitudes lead to a confusion of language and ethnicity. A confusion, which is the most disgraceful aspect of the “language issue”.

However, I wish to begin with two more obvious examples of linguistic prejudice.

(1) In an otherwise liberal-minded article on languages and their value (You are what you speak New Scientist 30 November 02) a subtle “pro-English” linguistic chauvinism became evident. The linguist Slobin has done research into the way that a group of languages (including English) have “colourful” verbs which express movement in terms that are “dynamic, full of energy”. Other languages (including Romance languages) are described has having “prosaic verbs” and “lacking colourful verbs”. All these terms are value laden. Would it not be better to consider why English/Russian etc are so “subjective” in comparisons with “objective” Romance languages? Are French/Spanish etc really “lacking”? In this context I ask readers to note RWE’s use of the words “devotee”, “protagonists”, “unnecessary complication”, and “[the] dangerous and destructive [bilingual] highway signage.”

(2) My second example is Paul Starling’s Welsh Mirror. Readers of Planet magazine will be aware of Patrick McGuiness’s close readings of the Daily Mirror’s Welsh edition. Patrick has shown that by carefully selective translation and omission the Mirror is conflating all Welsh Language activists and Welsh speakers with the most violent forms of nationalism, xenophobia, and nazi-ism. The Mirror is careful to separate “decent Welsh-speakers” from this, but in Mirror terms these can only be those who are prepared to stay silent in the face of linguistic bigotry from any English speakers with negative attitudes towards Welsh. The true horror is that Labour HQ at Transport House Cardiff, and some Labour representatives, are implicated in this black propaganda.

Dimensions of Language Policy, as proposed by RWE, which need to be reconsidered

“Personal rights”

The “mother-tongue principle” could lead to unintentional but institutional racism. “Mother tongue” denotes ones language of ethnic origin. Many Sikhs may have Punjabi as their mother-tongue, yet English may be their language of choice, they may be more comfortable speaking English away from the home. Using their mother-tongue in dealings with the State, however, may be an important way for them to express their ethnic identity. A right to use Punjabi in relations with the State, if it is provided for one group, must be available for all who speak Punjabi – including Sikh converts who may be non-Aryan. Punjabi in this case becomes a communal language, not an ethnic language. A close reading of RWE’s essay will reveal that “ethnic language” is a better description what he outlines.

English is my mother tongue, but Welsh is my chosen communal language in dealings with the State (form filling, advice lines etc). This, for me, is an important signifier that I have reinstated the “Cymreictod” (Welshness) of my father’s family who were bullied and cajoled into raising their children as monoglot English speakers.

Welsh is likely to be my language of choice in Court if I ever feel it necessary to engage in civil disobedience. Speaking Welsh is a major component of my sense of identity but the language does not define my ethnicity in any way shape or form. I have argued long and hard in the welsh language media against arguments for "Cymreictod Ethnig" (Ethnic Welshness).

“Communal/Collective rights” >

Whilst RWE’s assertion, that two official and equal languages can cause problems in interpretation of legal documents, is correct, that is not sufficient to argue against making Welsh an Official Language. I fail to see any logical reason or even argument against the creation of a subordinate Official Languagestatus for Welsh. English then would become theprimary Official Language, and it alone would generate legal effect. I also see no reason why other languages with a British or any other origin could not one day become subordinate Official Languages within British towns, counties or regions.

Turning to road safety, if problems exist due to linguistic problems with road signs, we need to seriously consider confiscating the cars and lorries of non-English-speaking drivers the second they reach Dover. I accept that there is a problem with the design of bilingual road signage – the confusion is usually caused by alternating monoglot English and Welsh signage, or by changing the relative position of the two languages, sometimes with Welsh on top, sometimes English. But the only way to “promote” Welsh is to make it visible, and accepted as normal. Bilingual road signs and official documents are amongst the best ways to do this. RWE’s idea of a “traditional language” seems designed to make Welsh disappear from any areas that are not ethnically Welsh-speaking i.e. where the majority are Welsh-speakers born and bred.

More Welsh Assembly work must first be carried out in Welsh. More work must be done to assimilate non-Welsh speakers into their naturally Welsh-speaking communities. Most importantly, we must tackle the economic and social problems which are “linguistically cleansing” the traditional heartlands of the Welsh language. These processes exist in many parts of Britain. Language difference however makes the effect more obvious in Welsh-speaking areas.

As a party, Labour must take a long, hard look at the provision of Social Housing. We must find ways of funding real council housing and consider modifying the right to buy. We must be prepared to acknowledge that in some cases property rights militate against the welfare of stable communities.

Language shift in Wales is an indicator of social processes which Labour is failing even to acknowledge - let alone deal with. We are not, at present, protecting working-class young people throughout Britain - from Cornwall to Bournmouth to Oxford to Abersoch - anywhere, in fact, where the right to buy a pretty view, an executive development or a luxury apartment is more important than the welfare of a community.

Chris Castle
CAERDYDD/CARDIFF
Cji-castle@cymru.new.labour.org.uk

 

End 

 


You are reading the Welsh Fabian Essays