Language Policy Studies and Ethnography 54

This chapter draws on recent research that uses ethnographic approaches as a means of understanding the nature and implications of language policy, focusing on the meaning of the two pieces of municipal legislation that have created the ‘co-official’ Indigenous languages of São Gabriel. Following McCarty (2011:3), I treat policy as “a practice of power that operates at multiple, intersecting levels”, and use this analysis in order to trace “power networks to expose the historical contingency and inventiveness of language policies as they are realized in practice”. Language policy is best understood as a complex and sometimes contradictory set of social practices. Spolsky (2012:5) divides the types of practices analyzed by researchers in the multidisciplinary field of language policy studies into three parts:

14

The most prominent example of these during my fieldwork were the mayor and deputy mayor (prefeito and vice-prefeito), Pedro Garcia (Tariana) and André Fernando (Baniwa), both of whom are Indigenous men who began their political careers in FOIRN and were elected to office with the strong support of the Indigenous movement. Their status as the first Indigenous governors of the municipality led to a lot of excitement following their victory, but by the time of my fieldwork (towards the end of their

administration), that excitement had turned into a powerful and almost universal sense of disappointment and betrayal among the Indigenous people of the region. The reasons for this shift in perspective are complex and beyond the scope of this chapter, but it must be noted that not only did the pair run separately against each other in the 2012 election, they were both defeated by a wide margin, and a non-Indigenous mayor (with an Indigenous deputy) took power in 2013.

[First] the actual language practices of the members of the speech community – what variety do they use for each of the communicative functions they recognize, what variants do they use with various interlocutors, what rules do they agree for speech and silence [sic], for dealing with common topics, for expressing or concealing identity. This is what actually happens, the “real” language policy of the community… [second], the values assigned by members of a speech

community to each variety and variant and their beliefs about the importance of these values…. [and third] efforts by some members of a speech community who have or believe they have authority over other members to modify their language practice, such as by forcing or encouraging them to use a different variety or even a different variant.

The third category, which Spolsky classifies as “language management”, is the one that includes such legal endeavours as the establishment of official languages, though he also points out that “just as speed limits do not guarantee that all cars abide by them, so a language law does not guarantee observance” (5). Studying language policy therefore depends upon examining both legislation and its implementation, and on considering the specific ways in which the law is being variously enacted, advocated, or ignored in different contexts. Discussion of language policy in and of itself remains surprisingly rare throughout related disciplines, including linguistics, political science, and anthropology, despite the increased interest in and reference to language in discussions about the politics of multiculturalism (Patten 2001:691-692). Further, as McCarty (2011) observes, ethnography is a rich, but remarkably underused, strategy for the study of language policy in terms of the actions of various members within a given society. This chapter is intended to contribute to the expansion of these fields of study, and to use the tools that they present in order to consider the next steps for revitalizationist language planning efforts in the city of São Gabriel.

The establishment of a policy officially recognizing these Indigenous languages in São Gabriel is a product of both local and global political economic and ideological processes. The offhand conversation that ultimately led to this legal change emerged as a direct result of the types of constitutional reforms taking place elsewhere in Latin

America, in which raising the status of Indigenous languages was an important and effective way of supporting Indigenous rights (Van Cott 2007). Further, as discussed in Chapter 1, the Upper Rio Negro region is characterized by a strong association between language and ethnic identity, and this relationship has been central to the preservation of the high degree of linguistic diversity still found there (Sorensen 1967), but more

recently, many of the region’s languages have become endangered as the pressures against them have continued and strengthened (Stenzel 2005). The emergence of language revitalization in relation to global Indigenous rights discourses and activist efforts, and in particular, the assertion of its connection to the affirmation of Indigenous identity (McCarty 2003), has therefore had a particular salience in the multilingual milieu of São Gabriel.

The centrality of ethnic identity to language policy (broadly defined) is difficult to overestimate, especially as it relates to language planning efforts designed to encourage the maintenance of minority languages. Garcia (2012:81) draws attention to the

conceptualization of identity in language policy studies and macro-level sociolinguistics more generally, summarizing the position of Joshua Fishman as saying that “language is more than a symbol of ethnic identity; language becomes the prime ethnic identity feature or practice in and of itself”. The postmodern context, however, has led to a reanalysis of this relationship in terms of performativity, removing the sense of determinism from the

understanding of how a language-identity relationship is formed. As Garcia describes it, then, “people do not use language based on their identity but, instead, perform their identity using language” (81). Studying language management and planning strategies as a component of revitalization attempts reveals complex interrelationships among

ideologies about language and identity, especially as conflicts emerge between traditional Indigenous understandings of these associations and the beliefs of powerful actors – Indigenous and otherwise – about the value of minority language maintenance in the context of their larger political goals.

The dual purposes which led to the establishment of the official language policy in São Gabriel provide a preliminary insight into the conflicting understandings of its meaning and importance. On the one hand, the goal was to ensure that non-Portuguese speakers would have equal access to services, while on the other, the law serves, in and of itself, as a semiotic act of “valorization” that works to counteract the negative effects of discriminatory colonial policies. These two goals, however, are not necessarily reached along the same path, even though they are both based in the overall need to support the Indigenous languages and peoples of the Upper Rio Negro. With respect to individuals who are uncomfortable operating in the dominant language, several scholars of language policy and language rights have pointed out that there are two possible solutions to the challenges they face – the first is to improve the availability of services in their own languages, and the second is to improve their capacity in the dominant language

(Kymlicka and Patten 2003; May 2003; Réaume and Pinto 2012). The latter solution is, in many ways, much easier – and much cheaper – to implement, to the detriment of the Indigenous and minority languages themselves; this point is one of the basic premises of

language revitalization activism (Hinton 2003). Because São Gabriel’s official language policy was developed in a context in which such revitalization plays a significant role, the latter purpose of ‘valorization’ is brought to special attention in justifying this particular line of language planning. As the discussion below demonstrates, however, the former understanding of the role that the policy should play in serving the needs of an extremely marginalized community of non-speakers remains present and may contradict the goals of language maintenance activists.

In considering the implications of the official language legislation in São Gabriel, I examine both the “on paper” and the “in practice” elements of language policy. This research acknowledges that, as Collins (2011:128) observes, “there is typically a gap, if not a chasm, between program and outcome, or between language ‘policy and practice’”. This consideration of the ideological debates, symbolic significance, and linguistic practices that have emerged around this legislation reveals a nuanced understanding of the importance of Indigenous languages in the city, and further, of the opportunities and challenges facing revitalization activists. By studying discourses and practices

surrounding São Gabriel’s official language policy, I make two basic arguments about the relationship between the legal linguistic regime and the state of language revitalization in the city. First, by analyzing the language ideologies at work in both the establishment of the law and engagement with it since its formal adoption, I observe contradictions, debates, and disagreements that are hindering its implementation, over and above the role played by general political disinterest. Second, I argue that despite the lack of clear ‘top- down’ implementation, the official language policy has had a significant impact on Indigenous language use in the city and has provided the framework within which

grassroots language advocates have been able to carve out space for revitalization work, especially in the urban area, where other such support is lacking. This latter argument reveals a blurring between such ‘top-down’ and ‘bottom-up’ actions, as the macro-level policy is a component that has been taken up by and transformed in the hands of

individual actors, even more so than it is a framework within which government power functions.