Mehrsprachigkeit in Europa: Plurilinguismo in Europa ... - EURAC

Language planning in Alghero (Sardinia): when standardization becomes problematic
with orthographic issues (i.e., whether to represent sounds according to either the Italian or
Catalan orthographic system) and grammars (see Armangué/Bosch 1994; 1995; Bover 1994;
Nughes 1996; 1997; Scala 2003: 9-17). Within the last twenty years, attention has been mostly
focused on questions concerning the creation of a standard and its diffusion, whereas little
effort has been put to enhance the colloquial use of the threatened variety. Three major events
have characterized the process of normalization. These are: the publication of a dictionary
of Alguerès according to the Catalan orthographic norms (Sanna 1988); the proposal for the
normativization of Alguerès in 1993 (see Armangué 2006: 85-98); the offi cial written norms of
Alguerès (see Scala 2003). In a parallel fashion, the written variety has begun to be introduced
in public, offi cial domains: educational system, periodicals, web pages, tourist promotional
slogans, place-names, pamphlets, etc.
This strategy, however meritorious it might be considered, does not seem to fulfi ll the main
aim of language normalization processes. That is, the threatened language to be widely spoken
again in a natural and spontaneous way (especially between parents a children). The main
points to be put forward here are: will speakers begin to use Alguerès again, only because it is
more present within public domains in its written form? And, most of all – to what is our concern
here – in case it will be spoken again, what variety of Catalan will be used? Will it be a ‘genuine’
Alguerès or a substantially modifi ed version of it?
In line with my previous argumentation, I strongly believe that Language planning policy
being the same, if by any chance Catalan will be widely spoken again, this will be affected by
those writing-induced changes discussed in this paper. Indeed, to be successful, standardization
ought to lean on the existence of a considerable number of speakers (both adults and young)
who still use Catalan in a spontaneous natural fashion, in informal interactions.These speakers
outside the formal domains will work as a propeller, dynamic group. In other words, they will
represent the natural extension to the formal (written) use. The existence of a propeller group
of speakers would create the right dynamics to activate new norms of language behavior and a
subsequent natural and spontaneous use of the threatened variety. As we have seen, though,
this is not the case of Alghero where a group of (young) speakers as such is not found.
Indeed, the sociolinguistic situation of Alghero can be schematically represented as follows:
on the one side, we have some older people who still speak Alguerès while, on the other side,
the rest of the population possesses little or no competence. Whenever these two groups of
speakers meet (whatever the reason behind the encounters) the interactions will be in Italian.
It goes without saying that it is precisely within this context when problems of mispronunciation
will occur. The lack of familiarity with the colloquial variety would make the new-speakers
commit those writing-induced ‘mistakes’ outlined above.
We can gain ground in support of the argument put forward by highlighting some current
linguistic tendencies that have been observed in Alghero. The following example might well be
a clue of how the linguistic structure of Alguerès may be affected in terms of writing-induced
modifi cations. The general widespread pronunciation of a slogan in Alguerès launched by the
public administration to attract tourists during Christmas time (Cap d’Any a l’Alguer ‘New
Year’s Eve in Alghero’) has become [ÈkapÈdaniala Ège]. This is not the ‘genuine’ pronunciation,
as the native-speakers would pronounce it as: [Èkade:anaRa Ège]. It follows that the language
planner should carefully consider this language behaviour and look for alternative strategies.
Multilingualism.indb 421 4-12-2006 12:29:24
421