1. Language Policy Planning
Why. Language as an element of symbolic domination
When. Social spheres for language
How. Language loyalties and attitudes
Social and Linguistic Loyalties
Linguistic Attitudinal Groups
4. Language Attitudes and
Loyalties in the Community of Valencia
1. Language Policy Planning
policy of the Community of Valencia began, as in other Autonomous Communities, with the
approval of the Act on the Use and Teaching of Valencian in 1983, which promoted the use
of Valencian and the standardisation of the language.
intervention in language must use certain parameters and measuring tools to help evaluate
the actions carried out by public organisations in this field, and it must make use of
analyses in order to discover the best lines for policies.
focuses on this area: we search for relevant and reliable tools and instruments to improve
the effectiveness of intervention, and to indicate the lines where the scope and direction
of this action will have a bearing on the type of results.
Survey data (1) can be used as a basis for
theoretical hypotheses on languages in contact, and language loyalties and attitudes.
Thus, with the use of indicators, we can establish or deduce loyalties towards the
language of the Community of Valencia and discover how they are characterised socially.
These loyalties can then be used to establish five types of language attitude (five
groups) through the analysis of conglomerates throughout the territory, taking into
account their internal social structure.
see the two earlier studies for a more in-depth and accurate view of the results,
preparation of the data, formation of the language loyalties and groups, their social
composition, and the regression models and structural models that we created.
We will now
move on to explain Why, When, and How language policies are created, in relation to how
they take on meaning, situations prior to language policies, and in terms of the measuring
instruments that we have created, which are based on social structure.
1.1. Why. Language as an element of symbolic domination
of language policy planning lies in the idea that language is a central element of human
societies. Far from being arbitrary, this type of intervention promotes ways of
understanding the world insofar as the object of the intervention (language) becomes a
tool of cosmovision and of symbolic domination, reflecting other types of domination.
looking at language from an analytical point of view, in terms of syntax or sentence
structure, here we take it as a reference for objectivising our understanding of the
individuals cosmovision is mentally encoded and structured by the group of symbols
that is language. We use language to communicate and transmit, to understand the world, to
symbolise what surrounds us and make it our own through socialisation; through language,
we share experiences, we transform the subjective into objective, i.e. we understand it in
a specific way, and not in any another. In short, language mediates the processes of
production and reproduction of social reality. Through language, we objectify the society
that we collectively experience and construct (Berger and Luckmann, 1966).
shapes our understanding of the world, objectifying it and marking us with it as a form of
identification, of who we are, it is able to reflect changes in socio-economic hierarchy
or structure that occur in society. It does so through changes in linguistic standards
that refer to valuation, specific spheres of use and knowledge about and of language
linguistic standards are based on the hierarchization of relationships and, more
specifically, on the capacity for domination that develops. Economic domination can
crystallise into changes in linguistic standards whereby the dominator (with its
linguistic code) symbolically tries to impose its idea of the world, i.e. the adoption of
a given linguistic standard is the result of mechanisms of symbolic domination acting in
conjunction with other types of domination (e.g. economic, political).