In:Advances in Interdisciplinary Language Policy
Edited by François Grin, László Marácz and Nike K. Pokorn
[Studies in World Language Problems 9] 2022
► pp. 45–66
Chapter 3Cross-jurisdictional linguistic cooperation in multilingual federations
Proposals for Europe
Published online: 21 January 2022
https://doi.org/10.1075/wlp.9.03von
https://doi.org/10.1075/wlp.9.03von
Abstract
Political federations or quasi-federations characterised by linguistic diversity have developed various strategies to strike a balance between mobility and inclusion of (internal and external) migrants. This chapter first looks at the comparative performance of linguistic management and coordination between the central state and federal entities, mainly comparing Canada and the US, while exploring possible comparisons with India, in order to provide the EU with examples of language policies in large economic and political unions. We show that the experimental potential of sub-state entities, the cooperation between the public and the private sector, and reciprocity among sub-units are key to achieving linguistic non domination (Section 1). It then suggests mobility and inclusion equilibria via linguistic subsidiarity and reciprocity for the EU (Section 2). It concludes by introducing a new tool, a ‘language passport’ we have called Linguapass (Section 3). The expected benefits of Linguapass on an individual level are to recognise and document the linguistic skills of migrants in official and non-official languages and hence to facilitate their mobility and inclusion; on a collective level, commitment to equal and reciprocal accreditation and funding of Linguapass by the EU as a whole, as well as by European regions and some large existing language clusters, is a novel form of equitable and feasible language cooperation and coordination.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Comparing mobility and inclusion in federal entities: Canada, the US and India
- 2.1Canada
- 2.2United States
- 2.3India
- 3.Towards optimal mobility and inclusion equilibria – linguistic subsidiarity, reciprocity and a new tool: Linguapass
- 3.1Lessons drawn from comparisons: The EU and extra-European federations
- 3.2Multi-level governance, subsidiarity and reciprocity
- 3.3Linguapass
- 4.Conclusion
Acknowledgements Notes References Online resources
References (30)
Chiswick, Barry R. & Miller, Paul W. (2004). Where Immigrants Settle in the United States, Discussion Paper No. 1231. Bonn: IZA Institute for the study of labor.
Directive 2004/38/EC, Official Journal of the European Union, L 158/78.
European Commission, Directorate-General for Education and Culture. (2006). Promoting Language Learning and Linguistic Diversity: An Action Plan 2004–2006. Retrieved from: [URL].
‘Explanatory Report to the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages’, reprinted in Grin, François. (2003). Language Policy Evaluation and the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Follesdal, Andreas & Muñis-Fraticelli, Victor M. (2015). The Principle of Subsidiarity as a Constitutional Principle in the EU and Canada, Les ateliers de l’éthique/The Ethics Forum 10(2), 89–106. Retrieved from: [URL]
Goldberg Shohamy, Elana. (2006). Language Policy: Hidden Agendas and New Approaches. Psychology Press. .
Jeong, Gyung-Ho. (2013). Congressional Politics of U.S. Immigration Reforms: Legislative Outcomes Under Multidimensional Negotiations, Political Research Quarterly 66, 600–614. .
Knoll, Benjamin R. (2009). “And Who Is My Neighbor?” Religion and Immigration Policy Attitudes, Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 48(2), 313–331. .
Montaut, Annie. (2004). L’anglais en Inde et la place de l'élite dans le projet national. Hérodote 115 / 4.
Newman, Benjamin J., Johnston, Christopher D., Strickland, April A. & Citrin, Jack. (2012). Immigration Crackdown in the American Workplace: Explaining Variation in E-Verify Policy Adoption Across the U.S. States, State Politics and Policy Quarterly 12(2), 160–182. .
Ryan, Camille. (2013). Language Use in the United States: 2011 (ACS-22). Retrieved from: [URL]
Vaillancourt, François & Grin, François. (2002). ‘Minority Self-Governance in Economic Perspective’, in K. Gál (Dir.), Minority Governance in Europe (pp. 73–86). LGI/ECMI Series on Ethnopolitics and Minority Issues. Budapest: LGI Books.
Van Oers, Ricky, Ersbøll, Eva & Kostakopoulou, Dora. (2010). A re-definition of belonging? Language and Integration Tests in Europe. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff. .
Vilanova, Pere. (2015). ‘Centralization – Decentralization Debate Revisited: the case of Spain’, in K. Göymen & O. Sazak (Eds.), Centralization Decentralization Debate Revisited (pp. 119–140), Istanbul: Istanbul Policy Center.
Vitores, Fernandez. (2011). Subsidiarity breeds contempt. How decentralization of policy decision-making favours a monolingual Europe. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. .
Canada, 2011 census, available on the official website of Statistics Canada. Retrieved from: [URL].
Canada, 2016 census, available on the official website of Statistics Canada. Retrieved from: [URL].
Congress: English Language Unity Act of 2017 (H.R. 997 – 115th). Retrieved from: [URL].
Council of Europe Language Policy Portal, Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR). Retrieved from: [URL].
Eurobarometer 437. Retrieved from: [URL].
Gouvernement du Québec. (1977 [2015]). Charte de la Langue Française. Retrieved from: [URL].
LIAM (Linguistic Integration of Adult Migrants). Retrieved from: [URL]
Limited English Proficiency (US Federal Interagency website). Retrieved from: [URL].
Migration Policy Institute. Retrieved from: [URL]
Pompa, Delia. (2015). New Education Legislation Includes Important Policies for English Learners, Potential Pitfalls for their Advocates. Migration Policy Institute. Retrieved from: [URL].
United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). Retrieved from: [URL].
US Department of Education. ESSA (Every Student Succeeds Act). Retrieved from: [URL].
