page_title: Linguistic discrimination
section_title: History of linguistic imperialism
hierarchical_section_title: Linguistic discrimination / Linguistic discrimination and colonization / History of linguistic imperialism
caption_attribution_description: English: Pupils at en:Carlisle Indian Industrial School, en:Pennsylvania (c. 1900). Source: Frontier Forts
context_page_description: Linguistic discrimination is unfair treatment which is based on use of language and characteristics of speech, including first language, accent, size of vocabulary, modality, and syntax. For example, an Occitan-speaker in France will probably be treated differently from a French-speaker. Based on a difference in use of language, a person may automatically form judgments about another person's wealth, education, social status, character or other traits, which may lead to discrimination.
  In the mid-1980s, linguist Tove Skutnabb-Kangas, captured the idea of language-based discrimination as linguicism, which was defined as "ideologies and structures which are used to legitimate, effectuate, and reproduce unequal division of power and resources between groups which are defined on the basis of language". Although different names have been given to this form of discrimination, they all hold the same definition. It is also important to note that linguistic discrimination is culturally and socially determined due to preference for one use of language over others.
context_section_description: The impacts of colonization on linguistic traditions vary based on the form of colonization experienced: trader, settler or exploitation. Congolese-American linguist Salikoko Mufwene describes trader colonization as one of the earliest forms of European colonization. In regions such as the western coast of Africa as well as the Americas, trade relations between European colonizers and indigenous peoples led to the development of pidgin languages. Some of these languages, such as Delaware Pidgin and Mobilian Jargon, were based on Native American languages, while others, such as Nigerian Pidgin and Cameroonian Pidgin, were based on European ones. As trader colonization proceeded mainly via these hybrid languages, rather than the languages of the colonizers, scholars like Mufwene contend that it posed little threat to indigenous languages.
  Trader colonization was often followed by settler colonization, where European colonizers settled in these colonies to build new homes. Hamel, a Mexican linguist, argues that "segregation" and "integration" were two primary ways through which settler colonists engaged with aboriginal cultures. In countries such as Uruguay, Brazil, Argentina, and those in the Caribbean, segregation and genocide decimated indigenous societies. Widespread death due to war and illness caused many indigenous populations to lose their indigenous languages. In contrast, in countries that pursued policies of "integration", such as Mexico, Guatemala and the Andean states, indigenous cultures were lost as aboriginal tribes mixed with colonists. In these countries, the establishment of new European orders led to the adoption of colonial languages in governance and industry. In addition, European colonists also viewed the dissolution of indigenous societies and traditions as necessary for the development of a unified nation state. This led to efforts to destroy tribal languages and cultures: in Canada and the United States, for example, Native children were sent to boarding schools such as Col. Richard Pratt's Carlisle Indian Industrial School. Today, in countries such as the United States and Australia, which were once settler colonies, indigenous languages are spoken by only a small minority of the populace.
  Mufwene also makes a distinction between settler colonies and exploitation colonies. In the latter, the colonization process was focused on the extraction of raw materials needed in Europe. As a result, Europeans were less invested in their exploitation colonies, and few colonists planned to build homes in these colonies. As a result, indigenous languages were able to survive to a greater extent in these colonies compared to settler colonies. In exploitation colonies, colonial languages were often only taught to a small local elite. During the British Raj, for example, Lord Macaulay highlighted the need for “… a class who may be interpreters between us and the millions who govern… a class of persons, Indian in blood and color, but English in taste, in my opinion, in morals and in intellect” in his now-famous “Macaulay minutes”, which were written in support of the English Education Act of 1835. The linguistic differences between the local elite and other locals exacerbated class stratification, and also increased inequality in access to education, industry and civic society in postcolonial states.
caption: A photo of students at the Carlisle Indian Industrial School
exif: {}