Politica linguistica, democrazia e plurilinguismo: quali prospettive?

P. Biondi
{"title":"Politica linguistica, democrazia e plurilinguismo: quali prospettive?","authors":"P. Biondi","doi":"10.1285/I22390359V41P81","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"From the point of view of political philosophy, the relationship between literacy and democracy appears quite problematic, if the issue of linguistic diversity is set aside. The debate between equalitarian liberals and multiculturalists emerging with the rise of multiculturalism as a theoretical paradigm has highlighted that the historical affirmation of the Western nation-state has been built upon the negation of internal linguistic diversity, favoring some languages over others, a trend which has not lost its strength with the advent of democracy. However, one of the main results of such debate, largely indebted to the Rawlsian conception of justice, has been seemingly the idea that the extended promotion of plurilingualism (that is, a kind of promotion which does not aim to support second or third language acquisition only for the benefit of the so called ‘minority’ or ‘disadvantaged’ groups and languages) could not be a viable alternative for contemporary democratic theory to ameliorate its performance. Drawing upon the field of language policy, this article envisages showing that such a result is tied to a certain number of theoretical assumptions concerning language, which are controversial both in political philosophy and in linguistic theory. In the final section, the article tries to provide some suggestions to develop a reflection more open towards the extended promotion of plurilingualism and to acknowledge the human ability to learn more than one linguistic code.","PeriodicalId":30935,"journal":{"name":"Lingue e Linguaggi","volume":" 25","pages":"81-99"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lingue e Linguaggi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1285/I22390359V41P81","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

From the point of view of political philosophy, the relationship between literacy and democracy appears quite problematic, if the issue of linguistic diversity is set aside. The debate between equalitarian liberals and multiculturalists emerging with the rise of multiculturalism as a theoretical paradigm has highlighted that the historical affirmation of the Western nation-state has been built upon the negation of internal linguistic diversity, favoring some languages over others, a trend which has not lost its strength with the advent of democracy. However, one of the main results of such debate, largely indebted to the Rawlsian conception of justice, has been seemingly the idea that the extended promotion of plurilingualism (that is, a kind of promotion which does not aim to support second or third language acquisition only for the benefit of the so called ‘minority’ or ‘disadvantaged’ groups and languages) could not be a viable alternative for contemporary democratic theory to ameliorate its performance. Drawing upon the field of language policy, this article envisages showing that such a result is tied to a certain number of theoretical assumptions concerning language, which are controversial both in political philosophy and in linguistic theory. In the final section, the article tries to provide some suggestions to develop a reflection more open towards the extended promotion of plurilingualism and to acknowledge the human ability to learn more than one linguistic code.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
语言政策、民主和多种语言:前景如何?
从政治哲学的角度来看,如果不考虑语言多样性的问题,读写能力与民主之间的关系似乎很有问题。随着多元文化主义作为一种理论范式的兴起,平等主义自由主义者与多元文化主义者之间的争论突显出,对西方民族国家的历史肯定是建立在对内部语言多样性的否定之上的,偏袒某些语言而不是其他语言,这一趋势并没有随着民主的到来而失去力量。然而,这种争论的主要结果之一,很大程度上归功于罗尔斯的正义概念,似乎是这样一种观点,即广泛推广多语制(即,一种不以支持第二或第三语言习得为目的的推广,只是为了所谓的“少数”或“弱势”群体和语言的利益)不能成为当代民主理论改善其表现的可行选择。借鉴语言政策领域,本文设想表明这样的结果与一定数量的语言理论假设有关,这些假设在政治哲学和语言理论中都是有争议的。在文章的最后一部分,本文试图提出一些建议,以发展一个更开放的反思,以扩大促进多语使用,并承认人类学习多种语言代码的能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
Quali analogie tra scrittura e video in lingua dei segni? Esperienze di traduzione nell’accessibilità museale dell’Istituto Statale per Sordi Tradurre la comunità sorda, non solo una questione linguistica Rappresentatività e variazione linguistica nella traduzione audiovisiva L’interprete di lingua dei segni italiana. Una figura professionale in evoluzione CINEDEAF SCUOLE. Laboratorio permanente di diffusione della conoscenza sulla sordità
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1