Hør dog hvad de siger - Note-to-Self: Trials & Errors

It is not surprising that it is more likely for Scandinavians to ‘leave out’ or ‘forget’ the
non-Scandinavians than for the non-Scandinavians themselves. But it is remarkable how non-
Scandinavian communities like the Faroese and the Finland Swedish are the most pro-
Scandinavian in spite of the fact that they themselves live within the wider scope of inter-
Nordic, and thus are more aware of the potential problems of inter-Nordic communication in
a Scandinavian (i.e., Danish, Swedish or Norwegian) language that is a foreign language for
most inhabitants of the Faeroe Islands and Finland, respectively.
The most likely explanation is that the Faroese and the Finland Swedish respondents do
not in fact take into account the wider Nordic scope in their answers. Apparently they think of
inter-Nordic communication as a matter of communication between the Scandinavian coun-
tries – and include themselves in the linguistic community of Scandinavia to the extent that
they are competent in Scandinavian. For the Finland Swedes, inter-Nordic communication is
both a matter of communication with Swedish speakers in ‘mainland’ Sweden, that is, in a
mutual mother tongue, and communication with Norwegians and Danes. Only secondarily are
the other Nordic communities included, after prompts by the interviewer. Similarly, Finnish-
speaking Finns are not automatically included in their concept of ‘the Nordic’, unless this is
prompted by the interviewer. Finland Swedes thus align themselves with the Scandinavians,
but through the existence of a ‘mainland’ Sweden. 34
Something similar seems to be taking place in the Faroese material. The Faeroe Islands
are politically a part of Denmark, and most Faeroes are practically bilingual in Faroese and
Danish. Their contact with Denmark may thus also be said to be one based on mutual langua-
ge; indeed, the default reading of ‘inter-Nordic communication’ in the Faroese interviews is
one of communication between Faeroes and Danes.
We may here see a striking example of the core vs. periphery dichotomy, viz. that the non-
autonomous, relatively small communities in Norden look to and primarily associate themsel-
ves with larger societies that have the same language as they have. They both use the ideology
of the Nordic and the larger linguistic community to enhance their positions of self-
determination.
34 The idea of Sweden as the ‘mainland’ for Finland Swedes might not be as far-fetched as it might at first sound.
Between Finland and Sweden, to the south-west of Finland, are the semi-independent Åland Islands, whose inhabitants
– generally speaking – do not consider themselves to be ‘Finland Swedes’, and who in many respects
align themselves with Sweden rather than with Finland. The Ostrobothnians on the west coast of Finland is another
group of Swedish-speaking Finns who have always had an abundance of contacts with Sweden. Both of
these groups follow Swedish radio and TV, and typically read magazines published in Sweden. Notice that the
Finland Swedes’ contact with Sweden and Swedish is not depicted in the results of table 3 since Swedish is the
mother tongue of Finland Swedes.
155