LANGUAGE POLICY PLANNING AS A POLITICAL TOOL FOR SOCIAL STRATIFICATION: ANALYSING THE CASE OF PARAGUAY

Authors

  • Nykoll Pinilla- Portiño School of Languages & Cultures, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.20319/pijss.2018.33.16731682

Keywords:

Language Policy and Planning (LPP), LPP Framework, Social Stratification, Paraguay

Abstract

English has been the medium of instruction since the beginning of the 20th century in the Philippines during the arrival of the Americans. This has been incorporated holistically in the society through the educational system, communication, mass media, publications and social media. It is given therefore that Filipino learners are bilingual-- i.e., speaking both Filipino (the native tongue) and English as Second Language (ESL). After a century though, proficiency in the language is still a difficulty and an anxiety, especially from public school learners. In Taytay Senior High School (a public senior high school), Grade 11 students were observed of certain levels of difficulties in reading, writing, speaking and listening. In this study, the researchers probed deeper into the following: a.) the difficulties experienced by grade 11 students b.) the factors that led to such difficulties and c.) the articulated ways to help them overcome such difficulties in English proficiency. As a descriptive study, the researchers used pre-survey, survey, FGD and extensive literature review as methodologies. The survey results revealed problematic stages on vocabulary, training and knowledge, confidence and self-esteem and interest. Articulated in the FGD furthermore were issues of generation, practice/articulation, and system as factors that led to difficulties in reading writing, speaking and listening. On the other hand, Grade 11 students underscored power of mind, the use of native language and practice as methodical solutions to the problem. Further directions of this study could include elaboration of the FGD results that pertain to issues of generation, practice/articulation and system. The use of native language could also be expounded on future studies. 

References

Barakos, E., & W. Unger, J. (2016). Discursive Approaches to Language Policy edited by Elisabeth Barakos, Johann W. Unger. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-53134-6

Bartlett, K. A. (2017). The divide between policy and practice in EFL high school classrooms in Japan. PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences, 3(3), 198-217. https://doi.org/10.20319/pijss.2017.32.198217

Canagarajah, S. (1999). Resisting linguistic imperialism in English teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Gynan, S. N. (2001). Language Planning and Policy in Paraguay. Current Issues in Language Planning, 2(1), 53-118. https://doi.org/10.1080/14664200108668019

Hamid, M. O. (2016). The politics of language in education in a global polity. In A. G. K. Mundy, B. Lingard, & A. Verger (Ed.), The handbook of global education policy (pp. 259-274). London: Wiley Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118468005.ch14

Hamid, M. O., & Baldauf, R. B., Jr. (2014). Public-Private Domain Distinction as an Aspect of LPP Frameworks: A Case Study of Bangladesh. Language Problems and Language Planning, 38(2), 192-210. https://doi.org/10.1075/lplp.38.2.05ham

Hamid, M. O., & Nguyen, H. T. M. (2016). Globalization, English language policy, and teacher agency: Focus on Asia. International Education Journal: Comparative Perspectives, 15(1), 26-44.

Hult, F. M., & Johnson, D. C. (2015). Research Methods in Language Policy and Planning A Practical Guide. Hoboken: Wiley.

Ito, H. (2012). With Spanish, Guaraní lives: a sociolinguistic analysis of bilingual education in Paraguay. Multilingual Education, 2(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1186/2191-5059-2-6

Kaplan, R. B., & Baldauf, R. B. (1997). Language planning from practice to theory / Robert B. Kaplan, Richard B. Baldauf. Clevedon, [Eng.] Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters.

Liu, A. H., & Ricks, J. I. (2012). Coalitions and Language Politics: Policy Shifts in Southeast Asia. World Pol., 64(3), 476-506. https://doi.org/10.1017/S004388711200010X

McCarty, T. L. (2011). Ethnography and language policy. London: Springer.

Mortimer, K. S. (2013). Communicative event chains in an ethnography of Paraguayan language policy. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 2013(219), 67-99. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl-2013-0005

Porter, R. P. (1990). Forked tongue : the politics of bilingual education / Rosalie Pedalino Porter. New York: Basic Books.

Ricento, T. (2006). An introduction to language policy: theory and method / edited by Thomas Ricento. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10993-005-3200-x

Rubin, J., & Jernudd, B. H. (1971). Can language be planned? : Sociolinguistic theory and practice for developing nations / edited by Joan Rubin and Bjorn H. Jernudd. Honolulu: Honolulu : University Press of Hawaii.

Schiffman, H. (1996). Linguistic Culture and Language Policy. London: Taylor and Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203273487

Sinaga, M. (2015). Ktpuntukahok: The role of social media as a tool of social movement. PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences, 1(1), 369-374.

Tollefson, J. W. (1991). Planning language, planning inequality / James W. Tollefson. London, New York: Longman.

Downloads

Published

2018-02-20

How to Cite

Pinilla- Portiño, N. (2018). LANGUAGE POLICY PLANNING AS A POLITICAL TOOL FOR SOCIAL STRATIFICATION: ANALYSING THE CASE OF PARAGUAY. PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences, 3(3), 1673–1682. https://doi.org/10.20319/pijss.2018.33.16731682