"evropuli qartia saqarTvelo "European Charter for Regional or ...

In view of T. Wicherkiewicz and his co-authors, Part II of the
ECRML must also cover the unwritten Kartvelian languages: Megrelian-Laz
and Svan (pp. 36, 39); namely, in "Recommendations" ("Language
Policy in Georgia"), dated December 5, 2008, presented to the
Georgian government they state: "Zan and Svan are sociolinguistically
characterized as unwritten languages" (p. 37).
As we noted above, in the opinion of a part of modern linguists
and ethnologists the Megrelian-Laz-Svan represent domestic idioms of
the Georgians; they are local varieties of Georgian – the historical native
language of the Georgians rather than independent languages of
other ethnic groups.
Cf.:Paragraphs 31 and 32 of the explanatory part of the Charter:
"the Charter covers only historical languages" 400 ; these languages must
clearly differ from the other language or languages spoken by the remainder
of the population of the state. The charter does not concern local
variants or different dialects of one and the same language" 401
.
If the Charter principles are followed nothing is debatable: the
"European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages" is stipulated to
protect a language of residents of the state in question who belong to
non-principle population (ethnic minority); protection of a local variety
of a national language is not the aim of this international convention. A
state indeed has to ensure development of a language and local variants
(dialects, idioms) of the country’s principle population.
Cf.:The European Charter on languages of historical minorities
protects of non-principle population’s languages and cultures that are
threatened due to social and political reasons.
Despite the presented clear provisions the issue of the sociolinguistic
status of Megrelian-Laz and Svan is still a debated issue both in
governmental and scientific circles.
400 The charter covers only historical languages, that is to say languages which have
been spoken over a long period in the state in question (paragraph 31).
401 The English version of paragraph 32: These languages must clearly differ from the
other language or languages spoken by the remainder of the population of the state. The
charter does not concern local variants or different dialects of one and the same
language. Cf.: in this context Jonathan Wheatley discusses only dialects (p. 9) and, by
some reason, omits the term: local variants (local variants of a state language).
325