Each country consists of its own language policy, which is specifically designed to encourage or discourage a particular language among the public. Although in ancient times, just one language was meant to be superior among the others. Now many countries use their policies to protect ethnic and regional languages as well, which are vulnerable. Jurisdiction today has linguistic minorities that act as a potential threat to internal cohesion. States put language rights in minorities as they concluded it can help the central government gain citizens' trust. The government can either run a language policy officially through legislation or by using court decisions. They must determine the use of languages as to cultivate the speech skills and meet national priorities at the same time. Language policy is basically origined from historical issues. Many principles, programs, laws, and measures run Canada's language policy throughout the country. It aims at enhancing specific languages, including French, English, and other Aboriginal languages, thereby promoting both federal and provincial levels. The Canadian language regime historically implements the language as a compromise. However, despite that, the Canadian language policy is not a positive language measure. Until 20th century, the provincial government adopted legislation to inihibit the French language along with others like German and Gaelic. These were opted to be inferior and a threat to the English language.
French and English became the official languages at the beginning of 1960. It happened due to political reasons which related Quebec situation within the federation and other historical purposes. In 1982, two countries' constitutions preserved the equality between French and English, which represented the country's language as a compromise. For instance, since 1982, the public of Canadians has the language rights by which they can possess the ability and use courts for enforcing their rights. The federal government is expected by Canadian people to provide service in French and English languages.
Canada language management shows a gradual progression of English-French equality within the Canadian language regime. Also, other non-official and aboriginal languages are included in Canada's language policy. Three primary forms of intervention are:
1. Federal level language policy
2. Provincial language policy
3. Another set of provincial policies which can promote non official and aboriginal languages.
As Canada is federal, the policies can vary from one province to another leaving no uniform approach to language policy. The provinces are diverse in their principles.
From 1890 to 1960, almost all government services used English as the main language outside Quebec. While on the other hand, French was not allowed in schools and courts. These developments were the leading cause which caused fear in French Canadian nationalists. They were scared of being assimilated into the culture of Ontario. Therefore from 1963 to 1969, the royal commission on bilingualism and biculturalism recommended the Canadian government and provinces to offer more services in the French language.
Since then, Quebec has been using prevention law and has successfully and promotes greater use of French language ahead of others. Many provinces began offering services in French and other immigrant and aboriginal languages. The amendments in 1982 in the constitution of Canada had a right of the minority language section, which modified the policy in all provinces. Quebec, however, can carry on the private businesses in French and make immigrants go to the French language schools.
The research will find possible solutions to these queries:
1. What is the importance of LPP in the development of language?
2. What are the impacts of LPP on the education system of Canada?
3. What are the factors that have led to changes in the development of language policy and planning in Canada?
4. To what extent do the top-down language policies have influenced language use in Canada?
The study is essential as it does the research, identifies the benefits and how it affects the specific audience from its findings. It deals with the policies implicit and explicit and how it influences what languages need to be spoken by whom, when, and how within the associated rights. Proper understanding of the top-down and bottom-up language development are taken into consideration.
The article suggests the contribution of language policy to cultural diversity. It showcases the importance of explicit public language planning and comprehensive means for securing a healthy future for immigrant languages and endangered indigenous ones. It is fundamentally important to develop language policies and do their research as they can assure minority population access to prestigious norms of the society. These literacies and theories support intergenerational retention in minority languages, both immigrant and indigenous. This complementary twin objectives need more expert practice in the area of language planning. The reports are meant to be nationally cohesive, socially, and economically productive. It is significant to develop language policy studies to ensure minority population access into prestigious norms of national standard languages. Intervention practices on behalf of multilingualism are summarised in specific sections devoted to the activities of language policymaking. Voice-based communication technologies include potentially support multilingualism, overcoming distance, and dispersal by promising access to information, solitary, and communication. The language role in cultural production and memory depicts Central language depending on various regions as per culture.
The fragment provides a complete outline of the thesis the outcomes.
This section includes an introduction to the study, thereby highlighting the research objectives and aim.
The fragment consists of reviews and discussions on the existing studies that occurred in the past. A complete evaluation is done on the developed and developing policies, including the primary and other inferior languages running in different provinces within Canada.
This segment of research offers the plan to find solutions to the research questions. It incorporates the strategy used for the implementation of planning, by using sampling, data collection procedures, etc.
In this section, all the data is collected, and interpretation and analysis of the consequence are made. Once the study is completed, the observations and results are mentioned.
The segment summarises the research by considering the key findings of the study by emphasizing the requirements of research objectives.
This section provides a list of citation sources included in the study.
This section consists of additional sources that are not in the main body but entirely relevant for the research and may be used for additional references. It may have other figures, tables, and a questionnaire.
In the academia context, language policy and planning may be defined as a large-scale process of national planning that is typically undertaken by the governing authorities of a nation with the intent to influence, if not change, the various ways of literacy practices, as well as, speaking in the context of a society. As opined by Poon (2004), language policy and language planning are related, yet different concepts. However, some common attributes are shared by the two. As Poon (2004) stated, both of these concepts are top-down approaches that entail organized and deliberate efforts aiming to resolve issues related to language and literacy that may often have political, economic, or even social orientations. On the one hand, Bianco, Hornberger & McKay (2010), further argued that the construct of language planning may be referred to as a macro-sociological activity that takes place at the national or governmental level. On the other hand, the construct of language policy takes the form of either macro-sociological activities or micro-sociological ones that can take place at either of the aforementioned levels along with an institutional level.
The construct of language planning deals with both corpus planning and status planning whereas, the construct of language planning substitutes status planning with acquisition planning. In the absence of language planning at an institutional or government level, the operational efficiency of language policy is notable. Consequently, Johnson (2013) argued that compared to language planning, language policy can cover a wider range of contexts and situations. The construct of these two concepts, within a national framework, contributes to the vitalities of language as it addresses conscious and intentional efforts aimed to influence behaviors to influence conduct in association with the structure, function, or acquisitional allocation of the distinctive language codes of the nation. To put it simply, both language policy and planning have a spontaneous influence on the residents of a nation with the learning process of the citizens’ moth tongues, as well as, a second language and language acquisition.
The development of LPP can be rooted back to the early 1960s. The interest of language in resolving the linguistic issues in the context of the new, developing, as well as, post-colonial countries contributed to the development of the field. Haugen is believed to be the pioneer who led to the development of LPP as a field of applied linguistics in 1959. Language planning, according to Haugen, was referred to as an activity that guided speakers and writers alike in non-homogenous speech communities regarding normative dictionary, grammar, as well as, orthography Johnson (2013). The aforementioned characteristics of LPP were later classified as acquisition, corpus, and status planning. As a field of applied linguistics, LPP structures have been found by researchers from the WWII era. According to Ricento (2000), the paradigm and evolution of research on LLP can be traced back to the WWII era with the respective strategic, socio-political, and epistemological concerns. The 1950s-1960s is referred to as the era when decolonization began to arose contributing to the formation of many states. During that time, the research on LPP was conducted within a formal paradigm and was intended to resolve linguistic issues.
During the 1950s-1960s, in light of the global colonial ruling, various linguists emerged to develop resolutions for the issues that were oriented towards LPP. As stated by Hult, F. M., & Johnson (2015), as an academics interest, LPP developed in the late 1950s whereas, the 1960s was ‘problem-oriented’ to a massive scale to respond to the necessities of the states that were being newly established in that time. Early researchers in LPP were thought to be technical with regards to their approach as the tasks that were carried out by them consisted of arranging, regulating, managing or containing, as well as, standardizing the diversity in the linguistic attributes of citizens aimed to enhance the agendas for national development. In this era, linguists largely focused on developing plans to spread languages that would happen in a standardized national context along with being suitable with the requirements of modern economic development (such as doing business in other countries) (Johnson, 2015). On the other hand, according to several researchers, the current paradigm of research, as well as, critical methodologies on LPP emphasize language policies and are aimed to identify how they can become hegemonic through setting forth education concerning minority languages.
During the 70s-80s, the paradigm of LP took a technicist, non-ideological, pragmatic, and non-political shift. Overall, LP researchers, in this era, aimed to resolve linguistic issues that needed immediate attention in the context of the newly emerging post-colonial countries in the Middle East, Asia, and Africa. Additionally, as argued by Ricento (2006), the concerns associated with status language, in this era, emphasized specifically on the development of diglossic and stable language contexts under which the most dominated languages were promoted to be used in the context of wider communication as public languages. Johnson (2013) shared a contradictory view according to which, the work in conjunction with LP that took place in this era as the central point of interest could not be cohesively or precisely characterized. This contradicting view was widely accepted as the interest in LP in this era become more prominent and reached beyond the distinctions of status and corpus.
The current development and paradigm of LPP can be traced back to the 1990s. In modern times, LPP has taken a tremendous shift and emphasizes the agency of local social actors in the spaces of policy implementation. The theoretical developments in this era are contributed by varying epistemological and methodological stances (Hult & Johnson, 2015). It is argued by Hornberger et al. (2018) that the critical shift that has taken place in the context of LPP development in this era associated with sociolinguistics and linguistics, has influenced ultimately the language planning field along. Furthermore, the critical shift is also integrated overtly into the 1990s critical language policy developments. It is argued that during the earlier eras, the focus was on language planning. However, in the current framework of LPP development, the attention has been drawn away from the construct of LP being comprehended uniquely as an obligatory concept applied by the governing entities of nations to a wider emphasis on activities in various layers, as well as, contexts of LPP.
Canada's language approach incorporates a lot of standards, laws, projects, and measures to oversee dialects in the nation. The function is to improve the status of specific dialects, for example, French, English and certain Aboriginal dialects, and to advance their utilization at both the government and common levels. It ought to be recalled that the Canadian language system is truly founded on a portrayal of language as a trade-off. Be that as it may, for the sake of this trade-off, the Canadian language approach has not generally been portrayed by positive language measures (Edwards, 1994). Up to the start of the twentieth hundreds of years, enactments were embraced by most common governments to restrict the French language, yet additionally Indigenous and different dialects, for example, Gaelic and German. All were viewed as both mediocre dialects just as a risk to the English language.
Starting during the 1960s, to a great extent for political reasons identified with the extraordinary circumstance of Quebec inside the alliance and because it has, for authentic reasons, a greater part Francophone populace, French and English turned into the official dialects of the nation. In 1982, the standard of uniformity among French and English was cherished in the nation's constitution, in this way empowering the portrayal of the language in the nation to be widened as a trade-off to incorporate that of language as a right (Conrick & Donovan, 2010). For instance, since 1982, Canadians have language rights and the capacity to utilize the courts to uphold them. Canadian populace is qualified for anticipating benefits in French and English from the government.
The management of language in Canada mirrors the slow movement of the uniformity of French and English inside the Canadian language system. Canada's language strategy likewise incorporates Aboriginal dialects and non-official dialects. Along these lines, it is comprised of at any rate three conventional zones of intercession:
I. A language arrangement at the government level,
ii. Language arrangements in the regions,
iii. A lot of arrangements and activities, essentially in the regions, to advance Aboriginal and non-official dialects.
There is no uniform way to deal with a language approach in Canada. As a result of Canadian federalism, these approaches fluctuate from region to territory. All territories utilize differing standards and instruments. This segment presents the fundamental ideas and standards directing language strategy in Canada. It additionally gives instances of apparatuses that have been set up by the open experts to create dialects inside Canadian federalism.
For sociolinguists and researchers of language arranging, the very multifaceted nature is a rich wellspring of information with which to investigate and look at scientific ideas of phonetic governmental issues including the dominant part and minority bunches that have been created in other geological and social settings. The accessible data comprises of editorials on approach, and subsequently is of a political instead of a phonetic sort. The investigation of the Chinese language approach in ethnic minority zones is, nonetheless, an achievable endeavor. The historical backdrop of this approach since 1949 and its impacts on various gatherings is the subject that has been endeavored by past researchers to draw (Bianco, 2007). It is examined how that strategy has never been settled on simply semantic grounds yet has been significantly affected by international strategy concerns, power battles among the gathering chain of importance, and other extraneous variables. The circumstance of language approach and arranging in China today is indistinct. It is impossible that such worries of the country building that were usually observed that was premier in the psyches of language organizers during the main decade of the People's Republic are the contemporary worries of Chinese whose upheaval has now developed. It is hypothesized that aside from the major phonetic minorities with their own proficient Great Tradition, the social personalities and along these lines the dialects of the minorities will step by step vanish as China presses toward its objective of modernization in the present moderately serene political atmosphere.
From the analysis of the literature review, it could be stated that currently, the amount of empirical research that focuses on the development of language policy and planning in the context of distinct nations remains limited. Previous researchers have undertaken critical methodological stances to investigate areas such as the impact of LPP on the education systems, official languages of nations among others. However, current research is constrained in terms of explaining how LPP from the top of the governing bodies of a nation influences language use in the bottom. Moreover, as of now, there are no definitions of language policy and planning that have been accepted and acknowledged universally. Therefore, current researchers must look at the paradigm of LPP and how the roles and impact of LPP influences the development of language to develop a consolidated definition of LPP. Furthermore, it has been widely argued that the paradigm of LPP has changed tremendously over the previous decades since its inception and has taken several forms or approaches over the years. However, there is currently a lack of evidence suggesting what factors or elements contributed to the occurrence of such changes. Finally, it is argued that education is a multilingual and multicultural context where the influence of LPP impacts the use of broader communication methods as public languages. However, the extent of these impacts in the Canadian education systems has not been widely researched. Therefore, overall, the focus of future researchers may be placed upon the identification of the impacts of LPP on the development of language in distinct nations, including Canada.
The essay aims to analyze the impact of language policy and planning on the development of language in Canada. The research questions include;
● 3.11 What is the importance of LPP in the development of language?
This question will look at the aspects of the historical development and implementation of language policies and plans and how it led to the development of specific languages such as English and French as official languages, along with other minority languages and aboriginal languages.
● 3.12 What are the impacts of LPP on the education system of Canada?
This question will look at the aspects of the impacts of language policy and planning and the Canadian education system. The influence of the development of language policies and planning have changed the acceptability of languages used in the educational context.
● 3.13 What are the factors that have led to changes in the development of language policy and planning in Canada?
This question will look at the aspects of the different factors and elements that have influenced changes in the development of language policy and planning in modern Canada. It will also look at how these changes influenced the development of the current policies and planning.
● 3.14 To what extent do the top-down language policies have influenced language use in Canada?
This question will look at the aspects of the different languages used in Canada in modern times and how the top-down language policies have changed the use of such languages. For instance, it will look at how English and French came to be the official languages of Canada and were accepted at the broader communication context as public languages.
From the identification of the gaps in the current literature, the researcher could develop four key research questions that would allow researchers to investigate the missing directions and develop new theories, concepts, and hypotheses that would close the gap between literature and practice. Each of the four questions is aimed to analyze the overall impact of language policy and planning on the development of language in Canada.
This question is aimed to measure both the role, as well as, the importance that LPP carries in the context of the development of language as a whole. In doing so, this essay will look at the different goals, objectives, and strategies that have been applied in Canada associated with language policies and planning. In Canada, the official languages include English and French. However, there are other minority languages as well. This research question would aim to investigate both the minority, as well as, the official language policies that have been implemented in the nation (Hornberger, 2006). The question will also look at the key programs that have been implemented in Canada as a means of supporting or endorsing the Official Languages Act along with the common elements that are central to such policies. The language policy of Canada consists of a set of programs, measures, laws, and principles. The first research question would facilitate the comprehension of how such policies enhance the status of specific languages that are widely accepted as public languages in Canada. It will look at the different areas in the political, social, governmental, as well as, educational levels where policy reforms and planning have taken place to influence the languages used as means of wider communication as public languages.
The investigation of the impacts of the language planning and policy constructs on the Canadian education system would allow researchers in terms of establishing links in a direct form between language policies, as well as, the assessment of how LPP has been applied in multilingual contexts in the field of education (Gibb, 2008). The question will emphasize the context of the transitioning perceptions regarding the utilization of language in the context of the Canadian education system. Canada is a nation that is known for its well-diverse, multilingual, and multicultural backgrounds of the citizens. This specific research question is aimed to discover how language policy and planning development have influenced or changed the education system of Canada.
From the 1960s, there have been many changes and shifts in the field of language policy and planning that have changed the development of these constructs in the context of post-colonial nations. However, the empirical amount of evidence concerning what factors have led to such changes in the context of Canada is lacking. Therefore, this research question would allow the researchers in terms of identifying such factors .
Use in Canada Various languages are used in Canada as broader communication methods as public languages. English and French are the official languages whereas, there are other minority languages, as well as, aboriginal languages. This research question would allow the researchers in terms of investigating how the policies employed by the governing authorities of the nation have impacted the language used in the bottom or by the citizens and how the development of LPP has influenced the development of English and French as official languages.
Bianco, J. L., Hornberger, N. H., & McKay, S. L. (2010). Language policy and planning. Sociolinguistics and language education, 18, 143.
Bianco, J. L. (2007). Emergent China and Chinese: language planning categories. Language Policy, 6(1), 3-26.
Conrick, M., & Donovan, P. (2010). Immigration and language policy and planning in Quebec and Canada: Language learning and integration. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 31(4), 331-345.
Edwards, J. (1994). Language policy and planning in Canada. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 14, 126-136.
Gibb, T. L. (2008). Bridging Canadian adult second language education and essential skills policies: Approach with caution. Adult Education Quarterly, 58(4), 318-334.
Hornberger, N. H., Tapia, A. A., Hanks, D. H., Dueñas, F. K., & Lee, S. (2018). Ethnography of language planning and policy. Language Teaching, 51(2), 152-186.
Hornberger, N. H. (2006). Frameworks and models in language policy and planning. An introduction to language policy: Theory and method, 24-41.
Hult, F. M., & Johnson, D. C. (2015). Research methods in language policy and planning: A practical guide (Vol. 7). John Wiley & Sons.
Johnson, D. C. (2013). Introduction: Ethnography of language policy.
Poon, A. Y. (2004). Language policy of Hong Kong: Its impact on language education and language use in post-handover Hong Kong. Journal of Taiwan Normal University: Humanities & Social Sciences, 49(1), 53-74.
Ricento, T. (2000). Historical and theoretical perspectives in language policy and planning. Journal of sociolinguistics, 4(2), 196-213.
Ricento, T. (2006). Language policy: Theory and practice–An introduction. An introduction to language policy: Theory and method, 10-23.
Planning management system assignment help, Planning management and decision making writing help, Business planning management assignment help, Project management plan assignment help, Marketing planning assignment help, Sales planning assignment help USA, Strategic planning homework help, Human resource planning coursework help, Project management and UK planning assignment help
Holding a PhD degree in Finance, Dr. John Adams is experienced in assisting students who are in dire need...
55 - Completed Orders
Canada, Toronto I have acquired my degree from Campion College at the University of Regina Occuption/Desi...
52 - Completed Orders
Even since I was a student in Italy I had a passion for languages, in fact I love teaching Italian, and I...
102 - Completed Orders
To work with an organization where I can optimally utilize my knowledge and skills for meeting challenges...
109 - Completed Orders
JOB OBJECTIVE Seeking entry level assignments in Marketing & Business Development with an organization...
202 - Completed Orders
Current work profile Project manager- The Researchers Hub (2nd Jan 2016 to presently working) Researc...
20 - Completed Orders
Sales Assistant, Mito Marina Assigned to the Stationery dept – assisted in merchandising, stock taking...
100 - Completed Orders