Ruiz (1984) defines orientations in language planning as, “a complex of dispositions toward….languages and their role in society. These dispositions may be largely unconscious…” (16). In the same article Ruiz outlines three types of language planning orientations: “language-as-problem”, “language-as-right”, and “language-as-resource”. It is the third planning orientation that is of interest to this paper. Within the United States, Ruiz writes that, “a fuller development of a resources-oriented approach to language planning could help reshape attitudes about language and language groups” (1984: 27), including a “more direct concern with resource conservation” (1984: 26, emphasis in the original). For Ruiz, this fuller approach includes “trans-national considerations” (27), such as in national security, diplomacy, and business/globalization, all of which have become even more important in the context of post 9-11 United States.
More recently, Ricento (2005) has examined problems that occur as a result of the ‘language-as-resource” discourse that is currently found within the United States, particularly the way in which the resource (the language) is being separated from its owners (the speakers), due to its economic value. He writes that:
The resource to be ‘cultivated, ‘captured’, ‘enhanced’ and ‘increased’, that is, languages important to U.S global military and economic interests, represents the values, goals and aspirations of dominant interests since those of ‘groups’ (e.g. ethnolinguistic minorities) have not been linked to national identity the way that those of the English–speaking majority have (2005: 263).
The lack of recognition of the interest of the ethnolinguisitic minority creates a schism between the language planning policy and the best interests of the community.
This paper proposes that a new language policy orientation, that of language-as-cultural-resource” will allow for ethnolinguistic minorities to have greater control over their language, while at the same time contributing to environmental bio-diversity and sustainable management of resources that can help the minority group to develop fuller control over their economic stability and cultural identity. The Taku River Tlingit First Nation serves as an example community that is using this language orientation. As native community within the nation of Canada, the Taku River Tlingit First Nation is in the process of negotiating a comprehensive land claim for their traditional territory which would give them control over their lands and resources. During negotiations, the Lands and Resources department of the Taku River Tlingit First Nation have written a Vision and Management Document for their lands and resources. This document entitled, “Hà t_tátgi Hà khustìyxh sìti - Our Land is Our Future” states, “Land use planning and management shall be grounded in Tlingit concepts, values, and understandings, and should be infused with Tlingit language” (p. 16). As a result of this focus on Tlingit language as essential to the development of economic resource sustainability, the Taku River Tlingit First Nation has begun to develop language programs that will help to revitalize their language and culture.
|
