Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-wxvwp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T05:33:55.404Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Language vitality: Theorizing language loss, shift, and reclamation (Response to Mufwene)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2026

Claire Bowern*
Affiliation:
Yale University and Endangered Language Fund
*
Department of Linguistics, Dow Hall, 370 Temple St., New Haven, CT 06511 [claire.bowern@yale.edu]

Abstract

Salikoko Mufwene's (2017) ‘Language vitality’ ranges across many topics related to language endangerment and loss (LEL). In this response, I agree that linguists do need a theory of the reasons LEL occurs, if we are to be effective in aiding communities with language maintenance and revitalization. I argue that there IS an existing, important literature on language loss and language revitalization and reclamation. Finally, I argue that there is good reason to believe that indigenous minority language endangerment is worth considering as a distinct category of LEL.

Information

Type
Perspectives
Copyright
Copyright © 2019 Linguistic Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable