In its unfamiliar role of minority language, Quebec English (QcE) is subject to discourse that characterises it as threatened and distinctive, purportedly due to intense contact and convergence with French. The popular and academic basis for these claims comes almost entirely from catalogues of ‘gallicisms’: incorporations from French held to be incomprehensible outside of the province. Based on variationist analysis of spontaneous speech, this chapter offers an empirical assessment of the impact of French on QcE, as instantiated in borrowing, code-switching and convergence. It shows not only that French-origin lexis is vanishingly rare in spoken usage, but that the morphosyntax likewise fails to bolster claims of influence from French at the grammatical level. These results suggest that the features qualified as peculiar to QcE are no different in nature from the regionalisms present in all varieties of English, and highlight the gulf between language ideology, sociolinguistic stereotypes and language use.

The right to education is a human right recognised by a number of international legal instruments and the civilised world. Agreement about the language used as the medium of instruction, however, is not so easily achieved – should it be available only in the official language or should it also be provided in minority languages? Is there a right or even a duty to learn the official language? There have been recent developments in international law clarifying this issue, and problems were also identified during the COVID-19 pandemic. There is abundant research that the COVID-19 pandemic had more negative effects on ethnic and national minorities than on the majority population, including in the field of education. Facilitation of access to education was ensured mostly in the official language, while students studying in minority languages were left behind.

The fragility of heritage languages (HL) and the challenges immigrant minority learners had in maintaining their home linguistic and cultural assets have been long detected in existing research, calling for more attention toward immigrants’ HL maintenance and education in non-HL-speaking societies. To respond to the call and better understand the status quo of HL preservation, the chapter provides an overview of research developments, pedagogical innovations, and persistent issues salient to heritage language education for K-12 students from diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds in both mainstream school settings and out-of-school contexts during the previous decade (2012–2022). The chapter highlights several critical factors that contribute to the prevalent heritage language loss including the ‘officially unilingual’ ideology, the absence of heritage/home languages and cultures in the mainstream curriculum, and the lack of collaboration between mainstream and HL schools and families. The chapter concludes with future directions for researchers, policymakers, and practitioners devoted to HL education and preservation.

This chapter focuses on the development of trilingual education in the Basque Country where Basque, a minority language, is used along with other languages. Nowadays, Basque is the main language of instruction in pre-primary, primary, and secondary school. Education through the medium of Basque has had an enormous effect on increasing the number of Basque speakers among young people. The increasing importance of English and the diversity of home languages in a multilingual society create the need for changes in language policy and teaching approaches. In this chapter, recent trends to integrate language subjects in the curriculum, the integration of language and content and pedagogical translanguaging are alsodiscussed.

In an increasingly integrated Europe, state language regimes are not the only ones that matter. It is also essential to understand how they interact with supranational language regimes. As Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries worked towards and then gained European Union membership after 2000, to what extent did their state language regimes become “Europeanized”? This question is examined through the case of Romani in Slovakia. The chapter has two aims: first, to demonstrate that the concept of a language regime can be fruitfully applied to supranational entities, and second, to examine the impact of such regimes at the state level. The Council of Europe’s language regime led it to advocate for increased support of Romani, as well as increased minority language rights in member states more generally. This work became bound up in the wider dynamics of Europeanization and European pressure on CEE states. At the level of the Slovak state, official policies towards Romani were changed in response to such pressure. Implementation of such commitments was limited, however. An analysis of state treatment of Romani language in Slovakia from approximately 1998 to 2018 thus illustrates a process through which a state language regime was altered but not transformed.

This chapter focuses on changes in language policy in Wales between the 1960s and the present. The discussion illustrates how drawing on the concept of state tradition can help to explain why it has been possible for a general policy trajectory that has been increasingly supportive of the Welsh language to emerge during this period. However, the chapter argues that the concept of state tradition seems somewhat constrained in explaining more specific and detailed episodes in the development of language policy in Wales over recent decades. In particular, it is less able to explain why specific policies were adopted at particular junctures. Building on this, the chapter contributes to the volume by demonstrating how the insights of the state traditions and language regimes framework could be deepened if supplemented with a more explicit focus on how institutional factors across multiple levels of government can shape language policy choices, particularly in relation to regional or minority languages such as Welsh.

This chapter begins by outlining the history and development of Yiddish, the traditional vernacular of Ashkenazi Jews, and it discusses how Yiddish went from being a vibrant language spoken by millions to being an endangered minority language with only a fraction of its original speaker population – primarily as a result of the Holocaust. The chapter explains how Yiddish came to be spoken in Britain from the 1880s onwards, when large numbers of Ashkenazim fled there to escape poverty and pogroms, and it details the initial tensions and subsequent cooperation between different waves and generations of Yiddish-speaking newcomers (which entailed shifting attitudes towards the Yiddish language). The chapter then provides an overview of the past and current geographical distribution of Yiddish-speaking communities in Britain, with a focus on the main urban centres, and it explores especially London’s thriving Yiddish culture between the two World Wars. This is followed by a discussion of the linguistic consequences of contact between Yiddish and English speakers, and particularly borrowings from each language into the other. Throughout, differences are explained regarding the language use and intergenerational transmission patterns of Yiddish among Haredi as compared to secular communities.

This chapter explains that linguistic uniformity is rarely characteristic of nation-states. In Europe, official national languages brought powerful and ongoing consequences for ‘minority’ languages and their speakers. Nineteenth-century nation- and empire-building affected regional speakers of national languages, such as Flemish or Austrian German, or Afrikaans among other postcolonial varieties of European languages. Imposing European languages in settler nations has irrevocably endangered or eliminated Indigenous languages and cultures. The debates about European orthographic authorities surveyed in this chapter expose conflicting cultural allegiances and pedagogical needs. Vernaculars inherited diverse writing practices from different scholarly discourse communities, whether government chanceries or literary scriptoria or national language academies. Representative conflicts include tensions between scholarly traditions and simplified spellings for mass state education. Existing traditions can be difficult to displace, especially in democracies. Educators’ engagement with the state reminds us that pedagogy is often a matter of politics. Journalists can support or undermine proposed norms, whether using or reporting them. Successful reforms sometimes reflect intersections of low literacy and/or authoritarian states. Many debates that raged in the nineteenth century have continued into modern times. With the rise of social media, individuals can not only internalize but also influence and drive discourses of group identity.

Building on the notions of markedness (which accounts for the special value attached to particular choices in language display) and affordances (which indicate what languages can be used for what purposes in specific contexts) in the Linguistic Landscape (LL), this chapter develops a social indexicality model to account for the role of language choices in pointing to communities of language users. These communities range from the local (such as graffiti crews or friendship groups) through various configurations of territory and community to the truly global. Language choices may make existential claims for marginalised social groups, and they allow for the status enhancement of local communities by enregisterment. Two case studies focus on territory and community. One presents a ‘village model’ in comparing the predominantly Protestant town of Kilkeel with the predominantly Catholic town of Warrenpoint in Northern Ireland, while the other examines ‘urban diversity’ with regard to displays of Greekness in Astoria (New York) and Greektown in Chicago. The chapter further examines the role of transient visitors and remote multinational organisations in shaping the LL.

This chapter examines the significance of attitudinal research in understanding the dynamics of language contact situations in multilingual societies from a cross-disciplinary perspective. This chapter provides practical guidance for the study of language attitudes and ideologies in multilingual communities by discussing issues relating to research planning and design (e.g. identifying which languages are to be explored, whose language attitudes are to be examined in the community), as well as data analysis and interpretation (e.g. quantitative data collected through questionnaires or matched-guise techniques, or qualitative data through interviews or ethnographies). Other important considerations for attitudinal research in multilingual communities are also covered (e.g. the mismatch between positive attitudes towards a language or languages and language use, or links between language policies and language attitudes in language revitalisation projects). The main points made in the chapter are illustrated by means of two case studies. The first relates to language attitudes in multilingual classrooms and the second focuses on language attitudes and ideologies amongst new speakers of minority languages with a focus on Galician in the Autonomous Community of Galicia in north-western Spain.

In Belgium, Piet Van Avermaet and Sven Sierens offer a joint biography where "Dutch" and local dialects were their norm. Both of them grew up in a multilingual environment with migrant classmates. As researchers, they turned to a critical sociolinguistic perspective to propose functional multilingual learning to give multilingual students a chance to use their linguistic repertoires.

This chapter considers language standardization from a minority language perspective. Processes and underlying principles of evaluative frameworks in minoritized languages are described from a historical and contemporary perspective. Trends in the standardization of minority languages are outlined, focusing on the case of the Irish language. It is contended that models of language excellence in many minority situations are being restructured. This is due to the opportunities for engagement with, and evaluation of, new forms of variation that have resulted from generations of language shift and revitalization. It is also due to the changing relationship between self and society in the context of Late Modernity, where social actors are increasingly agentive in deciding what is right and wrong for themselves. Using Irish as an illustrative example, it is shown that models of legitimate, authoritative and authentic language usage are constantly available for renegotiation, and perhaps especially in minority contexts. Results are described from two attitudinal projects with users of Irish, one with teenagers from the Irish-speaking communities of the Gaeltacht and the other with prospective ‘New Speaker’ teachers of Irish. Ultimately, the chapter speaks to shifting language evaluative dynamics in minority languages as communities adapt to their minoritized status within the fluid sociolinguistic arrangements that characterize Late Modernity.

This chapter centers on the sociolinguistic situation of Germanic languages spoken in minority communities around the world. Following a descriptive typology formulated by a geographer (White 1987) and a social psychologist (Edwards 1992, 2004), 21 Germanic minority languages are analyzed with an eye to understanding which external factors promote their maintenance or lead to a shift to a majority language. Special attention is paid to the most successful cases of minority language maintenance, which are found in highly traditional Anabaptist Christian and orthodox Jewish communities. The Germanic heritage languages of these groups are not only surviving, they are growing at rates not matched by any other language, large or small, in the world.