Language as an Identity Marker

Language as an identity marker has now become a clear fact and a generally shared assumption. Linguistic policies should then seek the development of all communities by empowering their respective languages to get them play a pivotal role in development strategies. In Senegal, from independance to present day, a number of twenty one languages have been promoted to the status of national language. This was acheived in two phases: the first concerned the former six national languages promoted between 1972 and 1975 and the latter concerned a larger set of smaller languages promoted from 2000 onwards. So for about 30 years, the number of national langues remained unchanged but in 15 years, it shot up drastically. This paper questions the reasons for such a fact and tries to demonstrate that identity was a deep concern in this process. The paper provides an overview of linguistic rights, and then revisits Senegal's linguistic policies. It also assess the role played by ethnic associations in codification processes to explain the sthrength and flows of such an approach.

Language as an identity marker has now become a clear fact and a generally shared assumption. Linguistic policies should then seek the development of all communities by empowering their respective languages to get them play a pivotal role in development strategies. In Senegal, from independance to present day, a number of twenty one languages have been promoted to the status of national language. This was acheived in two phases: the first concerned the former six national languages promoted between 1972 and 1975 and the latter concerned a larger set of smaller languages promoted from 2000 onwards. So for about 30 years, the number of national langues remained unchanged but in 15 years, it shot up drastically. This paper questions the reasons for such a fact and tries to demonstrate that identity was a deep concern in this process. The paper provides an overview of linguistic rights, and then revisits Senegal's linguistic policies. It also assess the role played by ethnic associations in codification processes to explain the sthrength and flows of such an approach. The language issue is much like that of human beings. From one source language, thousands others sprang. Some developed faster than others because history favored their speakers. The latter early understood that they were dreadful weapons that could help in the quest for power and directed them against others to impose a utopian homogenous view of the world. Then, several theories developed to legitimize this hyerarchical approach – diglossia. Languages were soon made to carry the identity of their speakers in many different ways: as people are differentiated by the data on their ID cards, languages are differentiated on the duality criteria as local vs international, national vs foreign, first vs second vs mother tongue. Sometimes they behave like us ; they make war in times of conflict when they are driven by imperialistic aims. Some will come out of the war unharmed while others will be endangered and some others will simply die. After the war they become partners in time of peace. Thus they can mutually borrow items, unite in blended codes and so on and so forth. This humanistic approach to the life of languages is a pretext to introduce the issue of the linguistic right of speakers which somehow guarantees a peaceful environment. As it is stated in the preamble of the Universal Declaration of Linguistic Rights, the purpose is to make sure every language is given importance. This will assure a fair linguistic peace in the world which is the bedrock of peaceful social coexistence.2 Clearly, when the regulation of the use of languages through language policies is detrimental to the blossom of some communities, this opens the way to frustration, especially when we know that recognition of a community's linguistic rights gives them

The term imperialism coined to denote the cultural, economic, and military domination of some political entities over others or a collective or individual will for expansion and domination 2 is also frequently used in sociolinguistics when it comes to qualify the expansion of some languages (the so called important languages) especially if it is detrimental to other coexisting languages supposed to be less important encroaching upon domains previously reserved to the latter. Wolofisation falls into that trend all the more as it is defined as the " invasion " of Wolof, which manifests itself through a " pilfering " of speakers from other local languages and results in its hegemony in the sociolinguistic environment of Senegal. This paper provides a critical approach to this state of fact which is well on its way to becoming a generally accepted theory that rallies more and more researchers. It addresses crucial issues as deconstructing old stereotypes, picturing language interaction in the Senegalese environment and critically analyzing the concept of Wolofisation. Résumé Terme inventé pour désigner la domination culturelle, économique et militaire de certaines entités politiques sur d'autres ou une volonté collective ou individuelle d'expansion et de domination, l'impérialisme est également fréquemment utilisée en sociolinguistique lorsqu'il s'agit de qualifier l'expansion de certaines langues (que l'on appelle langues de haut prestige), surtout si elle est préjudiciable à d'autres langues voisines censées être moins importantes en envahissant des domaines auparavant réservés à ces dernières. La Wolofisation entre dans cette tendance, d'autant plus qu'elle a été définie comme «l'invasion» du wolof, qui se manifeste par un "maraudage" des locuteurs natifs des autres langues locales, résultant à son hégémonie dans l'environnement sociolinguistique du Sénégal. Ce document présent une approche critique de cet état de fait qui est en bonne voie pour devenir une théorie généralement admise et qui rallie de plus en plus de chercheurs. Il aborde des questions aussi cruciales que la déconstruction de vieux stéréotypes, la description des partenariats linguistiques dans le paysage sénégalais et l'analyse critique de la notion de Wolofisation.

Papiamentu (the language of Aruba, Bonaire, and Curaçao – The ABC Islands) has often times been looked at through either solely linguistic or sociolinguistic lenses, however,  there is a shortage of scholarly work addressing the polyfunctionality of the language. In this paper, I examine the resilience of Papiamentu and the roles its speakers have assigned it throughout history. Speakers of Papiamentu thus, utilize the language to demarcate social communities and to challenge and/or renegotiate their respective identities. From a marginalized language in its beginnings to a Language of Instruction (LOI) in its current status, I explore which factors contributed to which shifts and how speakers of Papiamentu have used, and continue to use, this language as an identity marker. RESUMEN Papiamentu, e lenga dje Islanan ABC (Aruba, Bonairu, Kòrsou) mashà bia tabata ta opservá solamente ku un lèns lingwístiko òf sosiolingwístiko, sin embargo, no tin hopi trabou eskolar ku ta trata e polifunshonalidat di e lenga. Aki, mi ta eksaminá e resistensia di Papiamentu i e papelnan diverso asigná pa su papiadónan através di e historia. Papiadónan di Papiamentu, asina, ta utilisá e lenga pa marka grèns entre komunidatnan sosial i pa reta i/o renegoshá su identidatnan respektivo. Di un lenga marginalisá na su kuminsamentu te un Lenga di Instrukshon (LDI) na su státus koriente, mi ta eksplorá kua faktornan a kontribuí pa kua kambionan i kon e papiadónan di Papiamentu a huza, i ta sigui huza, e lenga aki komo markadó di identidat.