Discussion Details
| Title: | Cultural Sensitivity & Endangered Languages: Saami |
| Submitter: | Bruce Moren |
| Description: | An issue and two questions
Background: Many people (including some linguists) do not realize that there have been two distinct cultures and two distinct language groups on the Scandinavian Peninsula since prehistoric times - the North Germanic and the Sami. A part of this lack of awareness is due to the longstanding power imbalance in Scandinavia that has left the Sami virtually invisible. The North Germanic peoples are the majority (particularly in the south) and have held control over the entire peninsula for centuries. This control was reinforced during the past 150 years by official policies aimed at assimilating the Sami into the North Germanic cultures (called Swedishisation and Norwegianisation). Similar programs for Sami assimilation were also found in Finland and Russia. The purpose and nature of these assimilation attempts are comparable to those found in other parts of the world, such as New Zealand, Australia, and Canada. Although both Sweden and Norway have now abandoned their assimilation policies and have allowed for the formation of Sami Parliaments to support Sami language and cultural issues, there are still several lingering scars that will take many years to overcome. In the words of Beate Hårstad Jensen, "If it has taken 100 years to norwegianise the Coast Samis, then it will perhaps take another 100 years to make us Samis again?" (Dagbladet 28 July 2001 - quoted in Minde 2005). It is also important to mention that the general impression given in the media, history books, travel books, etc. that the Sami are a small, primitive and exotic group of semi-nomadic reindeer herders is a lingering misrepresentation from the assimilation policy days. They are a rather large population, they come from all walks of life and have all sorts of professions, and only about 10% have been actively involved in reindeer herding in the past several centuries. Why is this relevant to linguists? There are at least three reasons. First, one of the ways in which the marginalization of the Sami is continued and reinforced today is in the use of the term "Scandinavian" to refer only to the North Germanic languages. Despite having inhabited the Scandinavian Peninsula for several thousand years, the Sami essentially disappear (almost as effectively as if the assimilation policies of the 19th and 20th centuries had been successful) when one thinks of "Scandinavian" and associates that with only North Germanic. One way that we, as linguists, can help support the Sami community is to ensure that they are not made invisible by our own language use. This means using the term "North Germanic", not "Scandinavian", when we mean the North Germanic languages of Scandinavia. The second reason why recognition and support of the Sami is relevant to linguists is the fact that the current situation for all the Sami languages is dire according to the UNESCO list of endangered languages. Most people do not realize that Sami is arguably the most endangered language family in Europe. (I call it a “family” because it is a group of usually mutually unintelligible languages that separated from its nearest relatives, the Balto-Finnic languages (e.g. Finnish and Estonian), at least 3,000 years ago.) Akkala Sami died in 2003. Three out of seven nearly extinct European languages are Sami - Ter (<10 speakers), Pite (<20) and Ume (<20). Five out of 27 seriously endangered European languages are Sami - Skolt (<400), Inari (<500), South (<500), Kildin (<650) and Lule (<1,500). One way that we, as linguists, can help support these languages is to ensure that they are not made invisible by our use of "Scandinavian" when we really mean "North Germanic". The third reason linguists should do what they can to support the Sami is the uniquely complex grammar of the Sami languages. In the words of one of the foremost researchers on these languages, "Sámi phonetics, phonology and morphophonology are amongst the most complicated in Europe if not in the whole world" (Sammallahti 1990:441). This includes what looks like a preference for simple onsets and complex codas, three linguistically significant degrees of consonant duration, quasi-harmonizing "glide vowels", laryngeal contrasts only in post-stressed medial position, an extensive and pervasive consonant gradation system, productive morphological paradigms including literally hundreds of forms, etc. Each one of these phenomena is interesting and perhaps problematic for some linguistic theories, but taken in concert, they are astoundingly complex and form a perfect testing ground for many theoretical claims. These languages are important sources of unique linguistic data, and they should not be allowed to simply vanish. One way to help them is awareness of their fragility and sensitive use of the term "Scandinavian". To summarize the issue and extend it slightly, there are at least four reasons to question the use of "Scandinavian" to refer exclusively to the North Germanic languages. First, from a geographical perspective, there are two language groups spoken on the Scandinavian Peninsula since prehistoric times - North Germanic and Sami. In fact, the traditional Sami areas of Scandinavia make up the majority of the peninsula. Thus, it is misleading and biased to refer to only the North Germanic languages as "Scandinavian". Second, the power imbalance and assimilation pressures in Scandinavia are reinforced today by the use of “Scandinavian” to refer only to North Germanic languages. Third, the Sami languages are interesting from a linguistic perspective and are extremely endangered. Therefore, they require every support they can get from linguists. Cultural and historical sensitivity regarding "Scandinavian" is needed in order not to further marginalize the Sami and render them invisible as a people or as a language group. Fourth, from a traditional language-family classification perspective, there is Germanic, North Germanic, and the East-Scandinavian and West-Scandinavian branches of North Germanic. The latter two are sometimes bundled differently as the Continental Scandinavian and Insular Scandinavian branches of North Germanic. Importantly, there is no single language or language-group called "Scandinavian". Since "North Germanic" is well established and unbiased, it should be the preferred term for referring to the North Germanic languages. "Scandinavian" is neither accurate nor neutral. Finally, I have a couple of questions that I hope will elicit some discussion among linguists on the LinguistList. 1) Other than individuals choosing not to refer to the North Germanic languages as “Scandinavian” and/or choosing to report on the socio-political problems with using the term “Scandinavian”, does anyone have suggestions for how linguists might help to bring about awareness of this important word-use issue in the non-linguist community? 2) Is there something that we can do as a group (e.g. via the LSA, MLA and other such organizations) to help reduce the continuation of historical injustices experienced by minority/indigenous groups - perhaps by adopting policies against biased labels for languages and language groups? I am sure there are many different opinions with regard to both the use of “Scandinavian” and how the linguistics community should or should not play a role in language-politics. I hope that some of these opinions make their way to the LinguistList. |
| Date Posted: | 16-Nov-2007 |
| Linguistic Field(s): | General Linguistics |
| LL Issue: | 18.3397 |
| Posted: | 16-Nov-2007 |
