Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Language Contact
- Cambridge Handbooks in Language and Linguistics
- The Cambridge Handbook of Language Contact
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Maps Volume II
- Figures Volume II
- Tables Volume II
- Contributors
- Preface
- Introduction
- Part One Multilingualism
- Part Two Contact, Emergence, and Language Classification
- Part Three Lingua Francas
- Part Four Language Vitality
- 17 Language Endangerment, Loss, and Reclamation Today
- 18 Contact and Shift: Colonization and Urbanization in the Arctic
- 19 The Indian Diaspora: Language Maintenance and Loss
- 20 Quechua Expansion during the Inca and Colonial Periods
- 21 Indigenous and Immigrant Languages in the US: Language Contact, Change, and Survival
- Part Five Contact and Language Structures
- Author Index
- Language Index
- Subject Index
- References
17 - Language Endangerment, Loss, and Reclamation Today
from Part Four - Language Vitality
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 June 2022
Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Language Contact
- Cambridge Handbooks in Language and Linguistics
- The Cambridge Handbook of Language Contact
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Maps Volume II
- Figures Volume II
- Tables Volume II
- Contributors
- Preface
- Introduction
- Part One Multilingualism
- Part Two Contact, Emergence, and Language Classification
- Part Three Lingua Francas
- Part Four Language Vitality
- 17 Language Endangerment, Loss, and Reclamation Today
- 18 Contact and Shift: Colonization and Urbanization in the Arctic
- 19 The Indian Diaspora: Language Maintenance and Loss
- 20 Quechua Expansion during the Inca and Colonial Periods
- 21 Indigenous and Immigrant Languages in the US: Language Contact, Change, and Survival
- Part Five Contact and Language Structures
- Author Index
- Language Index
- Subject Index
- References
Summary
Language endangerment and loss is a longstanding phenomenon affecting both non-contact languages and contact languages, but contact languages are particularly susceptible. This endangerment has greatly increased and sped up in the last century. Case studies of several languages in China and Thailand show that structural change is often more rapid during language shift. Tujia has been receding for millennia in central China; Gong may have originated during contact between speakers of a variety of Burmese and several local languages in western Thailand several hundred years ago. Several small groups in western China speak languages developed in contact between speakers of Mongolic languages, Tibetan, and Chinese in western China in garrisons set up from about 700 years ago on. The final part of this chapter discusses how communities may be assisted to react to the endangerment of their language. While linguists can document a language, it is only the speakers and the community who can decide and act to maintain it. Some of the problems leading to endangerment and the strategies to overcome them are briefly discussed.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Handbook of Language ContactVolume 2: Multilingualism in Population Structure, pp. 455 - 472Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2022
References
Bradley, David. 1983. Identity: The persistence of minority groups. In Highlanders of Thailand, ed. by Bhruksasri, Wanat & McKinnon, John, 46–55. Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bradley, David. 1989. The disappearance of the Ugong in Thailand. In Investigating obsolescence: Studies in language contraction and death, ed. by Dorian, Nancy C., 33–40. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bradley, David. 1992. Tone alternations in Ugong (Thailand). In Papers on Tai languages, linguistics and literatures: In honor of William J. Gedney on his 77th birthday, ed. by Compton, Carol J. & Hartmann, John F., 55–64. DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Center for Southeast Asian Studies. Reprinted in Cathryn Donohue, Shunichi Ishihara, & William Steed (eds.), Quantitative approaches to problems in linguistics: Studies in honour of Phil Rose (Munich: Lincom Europa, 2012), 55–62.Google Scholar
Bradley, David. 2006. Lisu orthographies and email. In Lesser-known languages of South Asia: Status and policies, case studies and applications of information technology, ed. by Saxena, Anju & Borin, Lars, 125–35. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Bradley, David. 2010. Language endangerment and resilience linguistics: Case studies of Gong and Lisu. Anthropological Linguistics 52.2.123–40.Google Scholar
Bradley, David. 2011. Resilience linguistics, orthography and the Gong. Language and Education 25.4.349–60.Google Scholar
Bradley, David & Bradley, Maya (eds.). 2002. Language endangerment and language maintenance. London: RoutedgeCurzon.Google Scholar
Bradley, David & Bradley, Maya. 2018. Language endangerment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Brassett, Cecilia, Brassett, Philip R., & Lu, Meiyan. 2006. The Tujia language. (Languages of the World/Materials 455). Munich: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
Brassett, Philip R. & Brassett, Cecilia. 2005. Diachronic and synchronic overview of the Tujia language of Central South China. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 173.75–97.Google Scholar
Dorian, Nancy C. 2010. Investigating variation: The effects of social organization and social setting. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Erbaugh, Mary S. 1986. Taking stock: The development of Chinese noun classifiers historically and in young children. In Noun classes and categorization, ed. by Craig, Collette, 399–436. Amsterdam & Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Gillon, Carrie & Rosen, Nicole, with Demontigny, Verna. 2018. Nominal contact in Michif. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Grenoble, Lenore A. & Whaley, Lindsay J.. 2006. Saving languages: An introduction to language revitalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hajek, John. 2002. Language maintenance and survival in East Timor: All change now? Winners and losers. In Bradley & Bradley 2002, 182–202.Google Scholar
Hinton, Leanne. 1994. Flutes of fire: Essays on California Indian languages. Berkeley, CA: Heyday Books.Google Scholar
Hinton, Leanne. 2001. The master-apprentice language learning program. In The green book of language revitalization in practice, ed. by Hinton & Hale 2001, 217–26.Google Scholar
Hinton, Leanne & Hale, Ken (eds.). 2001. The green book of language revitalization in practice. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hinton, Leanne, Huss, Leena, & Roche, Gerald (eds.). 2018. The Routledge handbook of language revitalization. New York & Milton Park: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, Bufan (ed.). 1992. A Tibeto-Burman lexicon. Beijing: Central Institute of Nationalities Press.Google Scholar
Kulick, Don. 1997. Language shift and social reproduction: Socialization, self and syncretism in a Papua New Guinea village. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ladstätter, Otto & Tieze, Andreas. 1994. Die Abdal (Äynu) in Xinjiang. Vienna: Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.Google Scholar
Lewis, M. Paul & Simons, Gary F.. 2015. Sustaining language use: Perspectives on community-based language development. Dallas, TX: SIL International.Google Scholar
Li, Wenjing. 2017. Research on the protection of the Tujia language: Based on the field survey in Youyang County of Chongqing. Guizhou Ethnic Studies 201.218–21. [in Chinese]Google Scholar
McConvell, Patrick & Meakins, Felicity. 2005. Gurindji Kriol: A mixed language emerges from code-switching. Australian Journal of Linguistics 25.1.9–30.Google Scholar
Matisoff, James A. 2003. Handbook of Proto-Tibeto-Burman. System and philosophy of Sino-Tibetan reconstruction (University of California Publications in Linguistics 135). Berkeley, CA, Los Angeles, CA, & London: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Matras, Yaron, Gardner, Hazel, Jones, Charlotte, & Schulman, Veronica. 2007. Angloromani: A different kind of language? Anthropological Linguistics 49.2.142–84.Google Scholar
Nettle, Daniel. 1999. Linguistic diversity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Olthuis, Maria-Liisa, Kivelå, Suvi, & Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove. 2013. Revitalizing indigenous languages: How to recreate a lost generation. Bristol, Buffalo, NY, & Toronto: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Person, Kirk R. 2005. Language preservation or dying gasp? Language preservation efforts among the Bisu of Northern Thailand. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 173.117–41.Google Scholar
Person, Kirk R. 2018. Reflections on two decades of Bisu language revitalization. In Suwilai & Hirsch 2018, 155–76. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Reich, David. 2018. Ancient DNA and the science of the human past: Who we are and how we got here. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Roche, Gerald. forthcoming. Does ideological clarification help language maintenance? Exploring the revitalization paradox through the case of Manegacha, a minority language of China’s Tibetan regions.Google Scholar
Schmidt, Annette. 1990. The loss of Australia’s Aboriginal language heritage. Canberra: Aboriginal Studies Press.Google Scholar
Suwilai, Premsrirat & Hirsch, David (eds.). 2018. Language revitalization: Insights from Thailand. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Walker, Brian & Salt, David. 2006. Resilience thinking: Sustaining ecosystems and people in a changing world. Washington, DC, Covelo, CA, & London: Island Press.Google Scholar
Walker, Brian & Salt, David. 2012. Resilience practice: Building capacity to absorb disturbance and maintain function. Washington, DC, Covelo, CA, & London: Island Press.Google Scholar
Wyman, Leisy Thornton. 2013. Youth culture, language endangerment and linguistic survivance. Bristol, Buffalo, NY, & Toronto: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar