kulturgileak gizarte mugimenduetan - Euskara

ez (Fishman, 1991: 30). 197 Nolanahi ere, denbora igaro ahala,
nazionalismoari lotutako mugimenduak dibertsifikatu eta instituzionalizatu
egin dira. Horrela, mugimendu etnonazionalistek ezarritako erreferentzi-
marko orokorrean kokaturik egonda ere, alde batetik, hizkuntzak
berreskuratzeko mugimenduek autonomia irabazi dute mugimendu
politikoetatik eta esparru bereizia eraiki dute mugimendu kultural gisa.
Bestetik, barne bereizketa baten ondorioz, gizarte eremu bat baino
gehiagotan jardutea lortu dute.
Kulturaren eremuan jarduteak, halaz ere, ez die esanahi politikorik
kendu mugimendu horiei. Bada, orain arte ikusi dugunez, hizkuntza/kultura
gatazkak talde gatazkak dira; areago, mendekotasun harremanak hartzen
dituzte tartean. Hartara, hizkuntza aldarrikapenen azken helburua gizartean
iraultza sinbolikoa burutzea izaten da eta gizarte taldeen arteko indar
harremana aldaraztea.
Las reivindicaciones lingüísticas, que son siempre como hemos dicho conflictos
grupales, tienen por objeto dar la vuelta a las relaciones de dominación
simbólica y a la jerarquía de valores asociada a las lenguas en concurrencia.
“Una tal revolución simbólica no es posible más que al precio de una profunda
transformación de todo el campo de producción y de circulación de los bienes
197 Some nationalist movements involve RLS-[Reversing Language Shift]-efforts too, but
the overlap between the two is not nearly as great nor as important as the differences
between them. Most RLS movements, particularly those that have been most active since
World War II, are not as basically motivated by political aspirations such as political
separatism or even political autonomy. They generally seek not so much an impact on
the general body politic, as, rather, a focus on “those of their own kind” and on their
internal cultural order. Indeed, an RLS movement that has a surrounding nationalist
movement to fall back upon already has an advanced organizational and ideological
thrust, a clientele and a definition of its desired future. However, even such movements
often find that independence is not enough to guarantee ethnocultural and
ethnolinguistic distinctiveness and find it necessary, therefore, to institute “cultural
policies” and “language policies” (viz. policies on behalf of French in Quebec, Flemish
in Belgium, Irish in Ireland, even after the attainment of cultural autonomy or even
political independence) calculated to provide the ethnolinguistic breathing space that
small cultures always require for their coexistence in a world dominated by
ethnolinguistic behemoths (Fishman, 1991: 27-28).
446