Luykx, A. (2004) .The Future of Quechua and The Quechua of The Future

146
U. v. G
leich
The future of Quechua and t he Quechua of the future: language
ideologies and
language planning in Bolivia
AUROLYN LUYKX
Abstr act
Okech, Anthony et al. (1999). Report of evaluation of the functional adult literacy pro
gramme in Uganda 1999, M inistry of Gender Labour and Social Development in collab oration
with World Bank Mission in Uganda, Kampala, September 1999. Plaza Martinez, Pedro
(1998). Language, education and power in Bolivia. Bilingual edu
cation classroom practices. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Liverpool, Great
Britain. Panes, Peter; von Gleich, Utta; and Grebe, Ronald (eds.) (2001). Democratizar la
palabra,
Goethe Institut, La Paz, Universität Hamburg SFB 53, Universidad Católica de Bolivia. Prinsloo,
Mastin; and Breier, Mignonne (eds.) (1996). The Social Uses of Literacy. Theor y
and P ractice in Contemporary South Africa. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Reh, Mechthild ( 1981).
Problems o fL inguistic C ommunication in Africa. African Linguistic
Bibliography 1. Hamburg: Buske. -(1982). Sprachpolitik in Afrika. Hamburg: Buske. -(1984).
Grammaticalization and Reanalysis in African L anguages . Hamburg: Buske.
Ruwayninchikmanta Quillgana (2000). Serie, Chaski Aru 6, Yachayninchikmanta Quill
qana, Chaski Aru 7, Sarnagawisata quillgañani, Serie Chaski Aru 3, Siminchilmanta
Qillgana, Chaski Aru 8, 2000. PINSEIB. La Paz: Reforma Educativa, GTZ. Schweizer,
Thomas (ed.) (1989). Netzwerkanalyse: e th
nologische Perspektive n. Berlin:
Reimer. Street, Brian (1985). Literacy in T heory a
nd Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge
University
Press. -(ed.) (1993). Cross Cultural A
pproaches to L
iteracy. Cambridge: Cambridge
University
Press. Tannen, Deborah (1987). The o
rality of literature and the literacy of conversation. In
Language, Literacy and Culture, J. Langer (ed.), 67–88. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
UNESCO-Linguapax (2000). Informe sobre las lenguas del mundo. Bilbao, Spain. Wagner,
Daniel A. (1993). Literacy, C
ulture, and D
evelopment. B
ecoming Literate in Mo
rocco. C
ambridge: Cambridge University Press. World Bank (1997). World Bank Indicators.
Washington, DC: World Bank. Wölck, W
olfgang (1975). Community profiles. An alternative to
linguistic informant selec
tion. International Journal of the S ociology of Language 9, 43–57.
Current l anguage policies i n Bolivia a
re b
ased on ideological a ssumptions that r eflect
the language practice of Sp anish s pea
kers, r
ath
er t han socio linguistic evidence.
These assumptions include: t h at standardization is key to Quechua language
mpowerment; t hat ety mological criteria a
revitalization and political e re t he b
e
st
guide for elaborating a standard ; and that l iteracy- and s chool-based functions are
the m o s t crucial to Q
uechua's future. Inasmuch as these assumptions conflict with
the language ideologies o fQ
uechua c ommunities, pol icies' c ha
nces f or suc ce
ss
are d im inished. R ather t han foc
u sing e xclusively o nd omains where Spanish i s
dominant, l anguage planners s hould address language shift in those
domains t hat c on s titute Q
ue
chua's stronghold: the home and the
community.
1.
Introduction
Hornberger and Coronel-Molina provide a useful overview of a demo graphic and
sociolinguistic terrain as varied as the Quechua language family itself. T he picture
they present leaves little doubt that purposeful planning is crucial to ensure
Quechua's long-term future. The question n ow is, what kind o
f planning? Recent
language policies in the Andes, while based on better information about
Quechua (and about language generally) than those of the past, continue
to be guided by assumptions that are not always well supported by
sociolinguistic data. Making these a
ssumptions explicit, and finding ways to
test their validity, can lead us toward a more analytical perspective on the policy
process itself.
Noting the importance of language ideologies in the language-planning process,
the authors analyze how the i deologies and attitudes of e veryday Quechua and
Spanish speakers advance or hinder language planners' agenda for Quechua
maintenance/revitalization. Here, and in the socio
Int'l . J . Soc. Lang. 167 (2004) , p
p. 147- 158
4/0
0165-2516/0 167-0147 © Walter d
e Gruyter
Language p lanning in B
olivia
149
148
A. Luykx
linguistic literature around Quechua generally, there is an apparent reluc tance to
subject language planners' own ideologies to the same scrutiny. Inasmuch as my own
recent research in Bolivia examines this topic,1 I will try to elucidate some of the
ideological assumptions underlying cur rent language policies in the Andes. Obviously,
when these assumptions diverge greatly from sociolinguistic realities, popular
language ideologies, or both, language policy's chances for success are slim.
Kathryn Woolard notes that:
Movements to save minority languages ironically are often structured ... around the
same received notions of language that have led to their oppression and/or suppression
... imposing standards, elevating literate forms and uses, and nega t ively sanctioning
variability in order to demonstrate the reality, validity and in tegrity of their languages.
(1998: 17)
Though I would hesitate to generalize to the entire Andean region, this description fits
my observations in Bolivia quite well. Among the "re ceived notions” that language
planners and scholars have tended to adopt uncritically as sociolinguistic facts are
the following: (1) standardization is key to Quechua language revitalization, and will
promote the political empowerment and social prestige of Quechua s peakers; (2)
etymological criteria are the most valid guide for elaborating a standard, in the face o f
extensive dialectal variation; and (3) literacy- and school-based func tions are
crucial to Quechua's future vitality. All of these ideas have been stubbornly resisted by
significant numbers of Quechua communities. Un fortunately, language planners have
tended to view popular language ideologies mainly as obstacles to the current policy
agenda, rather than as sociohistorical c onstructions arising from speakers' lived
experience, observations, prejudices, and perceptions - comparable in this
regard to planners' own beliefs.
Given the lack of evidence as to whether standardization effectively promotes language
revitalization (especially for historically "oral" lan guages like Quechua), we might
wonder why it is such a prevalent strat egy. Even if a speech community decides
that writing its language is im portant, writing does not necessarily imply
standardization. Many early experiences with Quechua literacy successfully used texts
written in differ ent regional varieties. Furthermore, when Quechua was at its social and
political zenith, as the administrative language of the I nka empire, it was not
written or standardized (cf. Mannheim 1991: 2). Standardization is no prerequisite to a
language being highly elaborated and used in a wide variety of contexts, both formal
and informal. The supposition that it is the key to language revitalization is based more
on the model of domi nant language practice than on any direct relationship between
standard ization and language health.
A common argument in favor of standardization is that it facilitates nonlocal (written)
communication between speakers of different dialects. While this may be a worthy aim,
it ignores the fact that almost all Que chua language interactions are oral and
face-to-face. The overwhelming dominance of Spanish in the written realm is not due
simply to the lack of a written Quechua s tandard, and is not likely to change with
the introduction of such a standard. In order to support the use of Quechua w here it
actually happens, and where t he implications of language shift are greatest,
fforts would do well to prioritize local c ommunication.
language-planning e
A central aim of standardization is to increase Quechua's prestige by putting it on
a par with other “official” languages. But increasing a lan guage's prestige does not
necessarily increase the prestige of its speakers. Since the creation of a Quechua
standard automatically defines other varieties as nonstandard, these varieties (which
account for virtually all Quechua speakers in Bolivia, since the standard is not based on
any one dialect) become doubly stigmatized. Given the number of Spanish speaking
Andeans who already consider Quechua to be an "undeveloped” language (or
"dialect”) with no real grammar, popular l anguage ideolo gies may soon hold that
"Quechua has a grammar since the government gave it one, but t he campesinos still
speak it all wrong." To date there has been little discussion of the possible
consequences of introducing such hierarchies into indigenous languages, and of
whether the risks of stan dardization are balanced by its benefits (themselves open to
question).
Bourdieu (1975) has noted the importance of standards of linguistic correctness to the
establishment of social hierarchies. Of course, current standardization plans do not
represent a totally unprecedented introduc tion of sociolinguistic stratification into
Quechua. Given its history as a
2. Standardization as a language-revitalization strategy
Underlying the standardization process are important questions of group identity,
prescriptive power over others' language use, the language's role in everyday life, and
how to resolve social issues in the absence of social consensus. Nevertheless, among
key players in the implementation of Bo livia's current education and language policies,
debates around standard ization regularly devolve into technical explanations of the fine
points of
correct” usage; arguments over the "why" (or why not) of standardiza tion are largely
excluded from debate.
:. 32
Language planning in Bolivia

151
150
A. Luykx
ment personnel, and is fast becoming recognized as a speech marker iden
tifying one as an employee of the Ministry of Education.
Clearly, the link between linguistic standardization and empowerment of Quechua
speakers is problematic at best. Given the current language ideologies of the
region, standardization may just as easily contribute to their further
disempowerment and discrimination. The assumption seems to be that, since the
world's dominant languages are all written and stan dardized, writing and
standardizing subordinated languages will somehow automatically confer power
and prestige on them and their speakers — as if a language's political capital
were the result of standardization and widespread diffusion of its written form,
instead of the other way around. Rather than some sort of natural law that should
orient language policy, the link between standardization and prestige is part of the
language ide ology that has naturalized the political dominance of some
languages and dialects over others.
3. Etymological criteria as the basis for standardization
language family spoken over a broad region, from which one geographi cal
dialect (that of Cuzco) became the language of imperial administra tion, we can
assume that regional variations of Quechua were associated with variations of
prestige and power even before the Spanish invasion. Later, the latifundio
sy stem and the political exigencies of the church and colonial administrators
gave rise to non-native varieties of Quechua, im plicated in the relations of
domination and subordination that defined colonial society3 Even today, popular
language ideologies of nobility and purity surrounding Cuzco Quechua reflect this
history, while more recent p rocesses of mestizaje and social mobility have given rise
to other social dialects, tinged with the prestige of the modem urban centers and
the emergent social sectors that move within and through them.
In short, linguistic stratification can and does arise as a result of nat ural" social
processes, in the absence of explicit or purposeful language planning; indeed, it
appears to be an inevitable accompaniment to social stratification. Nevertheless, this
differs substantially from current official initiatives to institutionalize a particular linguistic
hierarchy, via the im position of a standard whose logic is not shared by most
speakers. The creation and diffusion of an official standard creates social
pressure to. s hift language use in the direction of the standard, and thus contributes to
the establishment of an officially sanctioned hierarchy of dialects and speakers. In
Ecuador, for exampie, pronunciation shifts that mirror offi cial orthography have
been observed in some southern dialects that (un like the Quichua unificado)
distinguish aspirated from nonaspirated con sonants. In children educated with the
standardized Quichua materials, it seems that this distinction is disappearing (King
1999; see also Fauchois 1988).
Some Bolivian speakers have expressed the concern that standardiza tion will do
away with local speech varieties. The usual response of lan guage planners is that
the standard applies to written c ommunication and is not meant to regiment
speech. But in practice this distinction is lost on many rural schoolteachers, who end
up struggling to pronounce Quechua school texts "as written," and teaching their
students to do likewise. It also seems to be lost on the very people espousing it. In a
recent course for educational personnel on the use of standardized Quechua, when
trainers were asked, "What about respecting local dialects?" they replied that the
ronounce
standard is only meant to apply to writing -- but then added that if children do p
the language as written, so much the better. So, while the official position is that
regional pronunciation need not conform to the written norm, the pressure to do so,
and the notion that the written norm is somehow superior to local speech, is already
evident. "Stan dardized” pronunciation already appears in the speech of some
gover
..
Hi!
Standardization is never a purely scientific enterprise; it is enmeshed in "frameworks of

value” (Shieffelin and Doucet 1998: 285), from the deci sion to standardize at all to
the minutest of orthographic decisions. With out entering into arcane debates about
particular corpus-planning deci sions, it is worth examining some of the beliefs
that have guided those decisions. In Bolivia, Quechua corpus pianning has followed
historical/ etymological criteria that are opaque to most speakers, with little public
consideration of other possible criteria. Contemporary varieties serve as source
material for the reconstruction of earlier forms (which are then held up as
"superior to modern ones), but not as models for stand ardized usage.
Correspondingly, many Quechua speakers complain that the standard does not
reflect the way they speak; its nonintuitive spellings, unfamiliar words and awkward
morphological constructions make it "sound strange” when read aloud. Language
planners respond that no standard variety is identical to vernacular speech, that 10
language is written just as it sounds, that speakers will become more accustomed to it
with time, etc. All this may be quite true; yet it does not dispel speakers' rejection
of a standard whose logic only linguists understand.
If we recall that bilingual education became official policy in Bolivia because
schooling indigenous children in an unfamiliar language (Span ish) was such a failure, it
is ironic that the Quechua language materials have provoked similar complaints. As one
rural schoolteacher remarked, “What's the difference between students having to learn
the normalized
...!!!!!!!!!
WV
.. WWW.
-XWwwwwvw2129*
KS
.
.
TwWwwWwwW
WMWWWWWXXX
L
A
:
:
::::

153
152 A. Luykx
.:.: .:
.:.:.
in
:
ere..
.....
.. .
speakers' concern that standardization will do away with local dialects, and
their complaints about the top-down nature of the policy process, reiect a
concern for local identities, and for local control over cultural resources.
Charles Hockett once wrote: “that salt m eans salt is not a property of either
the word or the substance; it is a property of users of English” (1987: 107).
Similarly, that newly standardized forms constitute "correct” Quechua is a
property, not of the forms themselves, but of the political relationship
between a small group of language planners and the mass of
Quechua speakers. Inasmuch as the fundamental goal of any
language revitalization project is to inspire native speakers to take it up as
their own, the criterion of acceptability to the target population must be first
and foremost in language-planning decisions. Subordinating the target
population's judgment to policy-makers' own ideologies of purism,
histor i cal fetishism, or linguistic "correctness" does not bode well for
the success of language-planning efforts.
.......
::::::......
....:
""
4. Overemphasis on school- and literacy-based initiatives

Quechua in order to read and write, or having to learn Spanish?" (Siles
2001: 103; my translation). Given the many social pressures already work
ing against Quechua language maintenance, it would seem ill-advised to
make the orthography any more difficult than necessary. And while there
are numerous theoretical arguments to explain why this should not be an
obstacle to Quechua literacy, numerous Quechua speakers nonetheless
feel that it is.
The authors cite Cerrón-Palomino to the effect that "attention to stan
dardization must not come at the cost of use." Certainly all would agree on
that point; and yet, in the flurry of corpus-planning activity, no effec tive
steps have been taken to guard against that outcome. King's work on
Ecuadorian Quichua indicates that the establishinent of a standard may
provoke linguistic insecurity, leading some speakers to avoid using the
language for fear of committing newly defined "errors" (2001: 93–97). In
Bolivia, I have heard government personnel refer to the dangers" of
unsopbisticated users trying to write correctly, the misguided efforts at
normalization by speakers ignorant of historical linguistics, and
how be i ng too ''flexible” in accepting speakers' attempts to write correctly
could be a "blank check" for orthographic anarchy. While this attitude
seems to be giving way to a grudging recognition of the need for
orthographic tolerance, the beginnings of a new sociolinguistic elitism
around Quechua usage are already evident.
The great irony is that there is such enormous effort to salvage
archaic words and suffixes, while there is virtually no official concern for
pre serving traditional Quechua language forms above the level of the
phrase. The language practices and genres currently being promoted are
com pletely modern and rooted in western urban society, in line with the em
phasis on written and academic usage. The near-exclusive focus on the
school as the site of language revitalization is geared toward Quechua's
expansion into the standard set of western academic genres, rather than
toward the maintenance and development of culturally distinct
discourse practices. In short, the policies being implemented in the name
of Que chua revitalization, despite their ideological appeals to historical
virtue, are aimed at producing unprecedented patterns of Quechua usage that
are in fact modeled on Spanish discourse patterns. If language planning is
"about 'imagining the past and the future of a community” (Shiefielin and
Doucet 1998: 285), it would seem that the future imagined by Boliv ian
language planners is one in which Quechua is used in ways that are more
and more like Spanish.
As recent work on language ideologies has shown (cf. Schieffelin et al.
1998), and as the vehemence of orthography debates confirms, con
tested orthographies are also sites of contested identity. Correspondingly,
.
i
:
To be successful, RLS4 efforts must be not only well-intentioned but well
aimed. In the Andes, school- and literacy-based programs have become
the default RLS strategy, though how this will contribute to Quechua
language maintenance outside of school is not clear. Quechua's future
vitality depends not only (or even primarily) on its expansion into new,
high-prestige domains, but rather on its continued use in the domains
that have traditionally been its strongholds: the home and community.
Muñoz notes that "despite the growth in the functional normalization of
Indo-American languages, the acquisition and use of Spanish continue to
increase in all communicative domains ... in both formal and informal
functions within indigenous communities" (1999: 171; my translation).
Elsewhere I have argued that a stable bilingualism is best achieved by the
separation o f domains and functions for the two languages (Luykx 1999;
see also Fishman 1991: 86, 2001: 9–12). While some indigenous com
munities seem to share this view (cf. Aikman 1999), separation of domains
001:
is often confounded by the introduction of bilingual education. Fishman (2
11) notes that threatened languages tend to become compartmen talized
(i.e. functionally fixed), whereas dominant languages tend to break
compartmental boundaries and spread into functions previously fulfilled by
the threatened language. Endangered languages must therefore guard
their functional boundaries vigilantiy, if they are to remain viable. This is
one more reason why language-maintenance efforts must be pursued in
.......
.
..
:::::::
13 XULXX2VX:.
....4:12. www12
.
Y !!! WWW
.
..
Y
A
LLL...
RCOCOW
wwwww
C..
L
.
N
154
A. Luykx
155
......
omains,
contexts other than the school and why calls for the use of Quechua in all d
while rhetorically stirring, are neither realistic nor well advised.
The idea that the school is the answer to minority-language loss is not particularly well
supported by research (see Fishman 1991, 1996), but that has not dimmed its
popularity. While bilingual education is important from a pedagogical as well as a
humanistic perspective, its effectiveness as a strategy for minority-language
maintenance is highly questionable, es pecially in the absence of policies
addressing language shift in other do mains. Extending Quechua into mass
media and literary production will no doubt have some effect on its status, but does
not directly address the continuing decline of Quechua in the home and community. As
long as language shift in these essential domains is not addressed, expanding Que
chua into new domains is, to use Fishman's metaphor, like blowing air into a
punctured tire.
..
.
5. The future of Quechua: maintenance, or simply a gentier transition?

academic use of Quechua can be no more than a complementary support to its
fortification in the functions that have kept it alive over the last five centuries.
Correspondingly, increasing Quechua's status among Spanish speakers is
of secondary importance, relative to strengthening language ioyalty among
Quechua speakers themselves.
The authors' assertion that "the first priority must be on extending and developing
written Quechua in every domain of use" fails to take into account the impossibility of
prioritizing every domain, the limited re sources available for RLS efforts, and the
dangers of neglecting oral do mains in favor of written ones. By and large,
Quechua speakers do not value their language for its literary, academic, or
transnational possibil ities, but for its powerful emotional significance in
domestic and commu nity life. This is the strength that language policies
should aim to develop, rather than focusing exclusively on those areas
where the barriers to Que chua usage are greatest. Convincing speakers of
Quechua's utility in edu cation, literature, and international communication is an
uphill battle, when their social reality tells them otherwise. On the other
hand, evoking Quechua's importance to community solidarity, local identity, and
conti nuity with ancestral traditions is more likely to resonate with speakers own
language ideologies, and to lead them to adopt the cause of linguistic Tevitaliation as their
own. If language planners are unable to meaningfully engage speakers' concerns,
or if they continue to limit themselves to the conceptions, priorities and ideologies of
academia, they will most likely continue to be disconcerted by Quechua
communities' failure to fall into line with their agenda.
The last few decades have made abundantly clear that language plan ning
is not an exact science. Policies aimed at eradicating minority lan guages
or dialects have often provoked their resurgence, while policies meant to
strengthen minority languages may well contribute to their de mise. Given the volatile
and experimental nature of the field, it behooves us to (1) tread carefully when
the future of other people's languages is at stake; (2 ) seek constant feedback as
to policy's results on the ground”; and (3) use that information to analyze whether
policies are fulfilling their goals and how they might be adjusted.
In this regard, it is disturbing to note the official posture of denial with regard to the
very real difficulties that Andean language planners face. P olicies are not made
successful by insisting that speakers shouldn't be confused, or dismissing
their objections as unfounded, or maintaining that problems will disappear in
time, or denying that the problems exist. Planners should especially guard
against an academic concern with sys tematic regularity (that leads to a neglect of
linguistic practice, its his torical situation, and its sociocultural implications" (Collins
1998: 262).
Despite the significant policy changes outlined by Hornberger and
Coronel-Molina, there is little evidence that the model of transitional bilingualism in the
Andes has been transcended by a deeper concern for indigenous language
maintenance. Bilingual education is still limited to the primary grades, and is more
concerned with molding indigenous languages to Spanish genres than with
preserving indigenous forms of discourse, Government initiatives have focused
almost exclusively on the school, in response to the intractability of the language barrier
as an ob stacle to indigenous students' integration into “national life” — but there is still
no coherent language policy promoting Quechua in other domains crucial to its survival:
the workplace, public administration, or (most importantly) home and community life.
Spanish is still the key to social mobility in the Andes, making linguistic assimilation the
most common means to economic survival. The sad irony is that assimilation is often
achieved, while economic security is not
· Thus far, state support for Quechua has been not only limited (Hornberger and
King 2001: 173), but also very selective in terms of the d omains and functions it
chooses to promote. Language policies have focused the lion's share of energy and
resources on those domains where Quechua's presence is miniscule in relation to
Spanish, and likely to remain so. The fate of Quechua will not be decided in the growth
of its literary output, much less on the Internet, domains that are far removed from the
lives of most Quechua speakers. The increased symbolic and
1
!!
:;:
.
S VOIXAW3VVU wwwwwwx
':VUILLES:42:
22
RATYWY ::
WWW
W WWUWS
.
.DOWYDOWAX4
www
E
w
wwpcoach
SOKORA
::
156
A. Luykx
157
:: :::::::
::.:
.:.: .:.:.:. :...
must be primarily in the hands of the speakers. If Quechua

language ad vocates redirect their gaze to the sources of language loss,
and not just its manifestations, they stand a better chance of finding
what they're looking for.
.......
ol of Education Research,

Scho
University of Miami
Notes
...:::":................................
..iiiiiiiii
1. The issues summarized here are analyzed in greater detail in Luycx (0.d.). 2.
Cited in Schieffelin and Doucet (1998: 308). 3. This phenomenon has been
described in relation to Aymara by Lucy Briggs (1993). 4. “Reversing
language shift," after Fishman (1991).
....
.....
References
...
In Bolivia, dissenting voices in language policy debates are

marginalized, while Quechua communities' resistance to official policy is
treated as in significant, a product of ignorance and internalized
discrimination, or a necessary transitional phase. Language planners'
contradictory discourse, which fetishizes the language itself (rather than the
social dislocation of Quechua communities) as the object of political
struggle, and extols Que chua's structural elegance and illustrious past
while neglecting speakers' own language practices and beliefs, does not
inspire much confidence that this way lies greater empowerment for the
Quechua-speaking masses.
Language policy cannot be approached in isolation from other social
questions. Linguistic decline reflects a more general cultural decline and/ or
political subjugation; a language begins to die when the speech
com m unity cannot maintain its coherence and continuity under present
con ditions. Quechua survives in Quechua speech communities, and it is
hard to imagine Quechua recovering lost sociolinguistic ground while the
fun damental social, economic, and political demands of those communities
are not effectively addressed. In this sense, language functions as
the " canary in the coal mine” with regard to the democratic atmosphere in
general; rather than try to flog the canary back to life, we might turn our
attention to the air quality within the mine. As the authors note, "revers ing
language shift cannot be a goal in and of itself, but rather (is) part of a
larger ethnocultural goal” of reversing the social and cultural dislocations
that originally caused the shift. This is really the heart of the matter; and
yet many Quechua language activists and planners seem to lose sight of
the forest while examining ever more closely their particular trees. An
inordinate amount of energy has been spent on esoteric
ecisions and symbolic gestures with few lasting effects,
corpus-planning d
and too little on eradicating the root causes of language loss.
There's an old joke about a man who comes upon another man search ing
desperately under a streetlight at night. Upon discovering that the
second fellow has lost his wallet, the first joins in the search, only to even
tually ask "Are you sure you lost it here?" The other responds, "No, I lost it
a block back, but the light's better here."
Thus far, Quechua language-planning efforts have been focused mainly
where the light is good. Standardization and literacy development have
taken up most of our energy because we can most easily intervene in those
areas — not because they are most essential to Quechua's future. Inter
vention in the domains that have historically been most crucial to Que
chua's survival — the home and the community — is more difficult pre
cisely because they are under the control of everyday Quechua speakers,
not language planners or government agencies. Addressing language loss
in those areas would force us to take seriously the idea that RLS efforts
Aikman, Sheila (1999). Intercultural Education and L
iteracy: An Ethnographic
Study of
Indigenous Knowledge and Learning in the Peruvian Amazon. P hiladelphia:
Benjamins. Bourdieu, Pierre (1975). Le fétichisme de la langue. Acte s de la

cher
Re ch ee n Sciences
Sociales 4: 2–32. Briggs, Lucy T. (1993). El i diom
a aymara . Variantes sociales y
a Paz: ILCA. Collins, James (1998). Our ideologies and theirs. In
regionales. L
Lan guage Ideologi es: Practice a nd
Theo
ry, B. Schieffelin, K, Woolard, and P. Kroskrity (eds.), 256–270. New York:
Oxford
rr ano fre
Anne (1988). El Quichua Se
University Press. Fauchois, nte a la
uito:
Comunicación Moderna. Q
991). Reversing Language Shift. Clevedon:
Abya-Yala Fishman, Joshua A. (1
Multilingual Matters. -(1996). Maintaining languages: what works and what doesn't.
In Stabilizing Indigenous
Languages, Gina Cantoni (ed.), 186–198. Flagstaff: Northern Arizona University.
-(2001). Why is it so hard to save a threatened language? I n Can Threatened
Languages Be
Saved?, J . A. Fishmaan (ed.), 1-22. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Hockett, Charles
(1987). Refurbishing Our Foundations: Elementary Linguistics fr
om an
Advanced Point of Vie w, Philadelphia: Benjamins. Homberger, Nancy H.; and King,
Kendall A. (2001). Reversing Quechua language shift in
South America. In Can Threatened Languages Be Saved?, 1. A . Fishman (ed.),
166–194.
999). Inspecting the unexpected:
Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. King, Kendall A. (1
language status and corpus shifts as
aspects of Quichua language revitalization in Saraguro, Ecuador.
Language Problems and
Language Planning 23(2 ), 109--32. ----(2001). Lang
ua
g
eR
evitalization Processes and
Prospects: Quichua in the Ecuador ian An
des. Cl evedor: Multilingual Matters. Luykx, Aurolyn (1999). La diferencia funcional de
códigos y el futuro de las lenguas mi
doritarias. In Sobre las Huellas de la Voz: Sociolingüística de la oralidad y la escritura
en su relación con la educación, L. E. López and I. Jung (eds.), 192-212. Madrid:
Ediciones Morata.

:.
: : ..
....
:::
. XXX.1016MMWWWWWWWWWWitry-YY-
wwwwwxrowwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww.X238.
6iX
4416
LXXXIX.X
wwwwwwwwwwwwww.XASWORKE:
2
WKOXCALYXXX
AWOWOUTATDOOhW
.W
w wwwww
WWWWWWNWwwwwwwww
158
A. Luykx
:::
Book reviews
..
WLIIVITYWhhyvi 1
Veure
.
..
---(n.d.). Bad medicine: power, prestige, and the standardization of indigenous

languages in
Bolivia. Mannheim, Bruce (1991). The Language o
f the Inko since the European
stid:
Invasion. Au
University of Texas Press. Muñoz, Hector (1999). Cambio social y practices comunicativas
indoamericanas, In Sobre
s Huellas de la Voz: Sociolingüística de la oralidad y la escritura en su relación con la
la
educación, L. E. López and I. Jung (eds.), 157–191. Madrid: Ediciones Morata,
Schieffelin, Bambi B.; and Doucet, Rachelle C. (1998). The "real" Haitian Creole:
ideology, metalinguistics, and orthographic choice. In Language Ideologies: Practi ce
and
Theory, B. Schieffelin, K. Woolard, and P. Kroskrity (eds.), 285–316. New York:
Oxford University Press. -; Woolard, Kathryn; and Kroskrity, Paul V. (eds.) (1998).
Language Ideologies: Practice
and Theor y. New York: Oxford University Press. Siles V., Olga (2001). Uso de l
o
s
u
Módulos Q echuas en las Unidades Educativas de Pie de
Gallo y Candelaria (Colomi - Cochabamba). U npublished MA thesis, Programa de For mación
en Educación Intercultural Bilingüe para los Paises Andinos (PROEIB Andes),
Universidad Mayor de San Simón, Cochabamba. Woolard, Kathryn (1998).
Introduction: Language ideology as a field of inquiry. In Lan.
guage Ideologies: Practice and Theor y, B. Schieffelin, K. Woolard, and P. Kroslarity
(eds.), 3-47. New York: Oxford University Press.
Joshua A. Fishman, editor: Can Threatened Languages be S aved? Rever s
ing Language Shift, Revisited: A 21st Century Perspective. Clevedon: Mul
tilingual Matters, 2001. xvi + 503 pp. US$ 89.95. ISBN:
1-85359-493-8. USS 39.95. ISBN: 1-85359-492-X.
'
!...
.
.
. . .
This book is the eagerly awaited follow-up to Joshua Fishman's

(1991) Reversing
Lang
uage
Shi ft. I
ts appearance is timely, given the
greater awareness of the threat to the world's linguistic diversity and the grow
ing interest in endangered languages during the interval between the two
volumes. In this new book Fishman returns to many of the same threat
ened languages, whose prospects for survival he considered in the earlier
volume. This time, however, he does so as volume editor of a set of eigh teen studies
from around the world rather than as sole author.
Divided into geographical sections, the studies include the follow ing: the
Americas (Navajo by T. Lee and D. McLaughlin; Puerto Rican Spanish in
New York City by O. García, J. L. Morin and K. Rivera; Yiddish in New York
City by J. Fishman; French in Quebec by R. H. Bourhis; Otomi in Mexico by Y.
Lastra; and Quechua in South Amer ica by N. H. Hornberger and K. A.
King), Europe (Irish by P. Ó R ia gáin; Frisian by D. Gorter; Basque by M.-J.
Azurmendi, E. Bachoc and F. Zabaleta; and Catalan by Strubell), Africa
and Asia (Oko by E. Adegbija; Andamanese by E. Annamali and V.
Gnanasundaram; Ainu by J. C. Maher, and Hebrew by B. Spolsky and
E. Shohamy), and the Pacific immigrant languages in Australia by M. Clyne;
indigenous lan guages in Australia by J. Lo Bianco and M. L. Rhydwen;
and Maori by R. and N. Benton). New to the roster in this volume are
Quechua, Oko, Otomi, Andamanese, and Ainu. In addition to his
chapter on Yid dish in New York City, Fishman provides a preface,
"Reversing lan guage shift: the best of times, the worst of times," an
overview in chap ter 1 entitled “Why is it so hard to save a threatened
language? (a perspective
on the cases that follow)," and a
concluding chapter, "From
.
.
::...
...:
11.11:
--:--:-.
....
0165-2516/04/0
167-0159 © Walter de Gruyter
g. 167 (2004), pp. 159–168
Int'l. J. Soc. Lan
XXX:X-YYY
-YUASAWWIIVVVV
!WURVA
S
cc.
cxx.
.....MXXXXX9:wwwwwwwww.
x
w
Wwwwwwwwwww........
.Annoxwaxexxx.
WwwwwwwwwwwwwwU2301M
WXMAYI
x.:
w
VivXMKOA
w
.pood
***
.

Luykx, A. (2004) .The Future of Quechua and The Quechua of The Future

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Luykx, A. (2004) .The Future of Quechua and The Quechua of The Future

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

146

Language planning in Bolivia

Standardization is never a purely scientific enterprise; it is enmeshed in "frameworks of

Language planning in Bolivia

4. Overemphasis on school- and literacy-based initiatives

5. The future of Quechua: maintenance, or simply a gentier transition?

must be primarily in the hands of the speakers. If Quechua

ol of Education Research,

In Bolivia, dissenting voices in language policy debates are

---(n.d.). Bad medicine: power, prestige, and the standardization of indigenous

This book is the eagerly awaited follow-up to Joshua Fishman's

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi

Luykx, A. (2004) .The Future of Quechua and The Quechua of The Future

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Luykx, A. (2004) .The Future of Quechua and The Quechua of The Future

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

14​6

Language planning in Bolivia

Standardization is never a purely scientific enterprise; it is enmeshed in ​"frameworks of

Language planning in Bolivia

4. Overemphasis on school- and literacy-based initiatives

5​. The future of Quec​hua: maintenance, or simply a gentier transition?

must be primarily in the hands of the speakers. If Quechua

​ ​ol of Education Research,

In Bolivia, dissenting voices in language policy debates are

---(n.d.). Bad medicine: power, prestige, and the standardization of indigenous

This book is the eagerly awaited follow-up to Joshua Fishman's

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi

146

Standardization is never a purely scientific enterprise; it is enmeshed in "frameworks of

5. The future of Quechua: maintenance, or simply a gentier transition?

ol of Education Research,