Conferentie wenst wet voor meertaligheid, 24-11-2007 (A-LC) Conferentie wenst wet voor meertaligheid, 24-11-2007 (A-LC) LEEUWARDEN- Er moet op Europees niveau een wet komen die minderheidstalen beschermt. Er is nu wel een Europese Commissaris voor meertaligheid, maar dat is niet genoeg.
De slotconclusie op de tweedaagse conferentie over meertaligheid in Europa, gisteren in Leeuwarden , was somber. Tomasz Wicherkiewicz van de universiteit van Poznan zei teleurgesteld te zijn over de ontwikkeling die meertaligheid doormaakt.
Hij heeft het idee dat er steeds minder acties ondernomen worden. Csilla Bartha van het Hongaars onderzoeksinstituut voor talen stelde dat regels die voor heel Europa gelden amper op te stellen zijn.
Een algemeen model kan nuttig zijn, denkt Durk Gorter van de organiserende instantie Mercator. Elk land kan dat naar eigen inzicht aanpassen. De drietalige scholen in Friesland zijn ook zo tot stand gekomen.
Volgens Bartha is het zaak door te gaan met onderzoek dat de meerwaarde van meertaligheid bewijst en onderling netwerken op te bouwen.
Boarne: Leeuwarder Courant, 14-11-2007
Neiskrift FFU:
De wetjouwing moat yndied stikken better, net allinnich yn Europa, mar ek yn Nederlân. Us deputearre Jannewietske de Vries hat de ynternasjonale konferinsje fan Mercator oer ‘The future of Multilingual Language Learning Policy in Europe’ (Fryske Akademy, Ljouwert, 21-23 novimber) iepene en sei oer de ferhâlding Ljouwert-De Haach: “As I have shown you, we have negotiated many times with the National Government on issues such as the different interpretations of agreements made, which lead to deadlocks [= patstellings; ympassen]. If we keep this discussion only at national level, we will never find a solution. That is the reason why we should treat our language policy more and more in a European level.
To my opinion the Covenant [= Utfieringskonvenant Fryske Taal en Kultuer, 2005, ôfspraken tusken Ryk en Provinsje om de ambysjes út de Bestuursafspraak Friese Taal en Cultuur 2001 te konkretisearjen] has not been as affective as we had thought in advance. I am curious what would be the best way of collaboration to set up and carry out language policy in an efficient way, a manner which leads to a win-win situation within both the Provincial as the National Government.”
Josep Palomero (High Level Group on Multilingualism) spriek (23-11-2007) oer ‘Managing Multilingualism in the European Union’. Yn de gearfetting fan syn ynlieding stiet ûnder oaren:
“[9] The legal Community legal could be changed into an obstacle to regional or minority languages. The European Union had approved several directives that enforce the use of the “official and working” languages of the Union in matters that have nothing to do with its institutions. Therefore, they excluded not only the use of third-country languages, but also the autonomous and concurrent use of minority languages of the EU States. Neither it is acceptable that derived laws may have as a consequence the derogation [= oantaasting] of rights in favour of speakers of European languages which, while not official languages of the institutions of the EU, are recognized by their internal legislations. […]
[12] From the legal security and equality principles that provide the basis for the recognitions of the official status of all States’ languages, we cannot deduce anything to restrict or exclude the recognition of other languages which are official in a part of a State. The defence of European multilingualism should imply the consideration of these languages. We find an adequate status for the non-official languages in EU institutions.
[13] The recognition of an official status for regional languages will not add any complexity to the current situation of the European institutions. In fact, this complexity already exists. The paradox – logical in a way – is that the more languages are included in the EU linguistic regime, the greater the use of English. So there is no need to cover all possible languages combinations. Data show that inverse translations and translations through a third language are the order of the day.”