Suchergebnisse

National minority language policy is an object of this master thesis. It aims at analyzing how minority language policy is being formed in Lithuania and Romania. Goals of the thesis are: to analyze types of language policy and models of language planning; concept of national minority in social sciences, international law and European countries – Lithuania and Romania; development and regulations of European minorities' linguistic rights as well as language policy of the European Union; to research minority language policy in Lithuania and Romania as well as reception of minority language policy in Lithuania and Romania and to compare implementation of minority language policy in these two countries. There is no single description neither for national minority nor for language policy. However, national minority is often understood as a group of people, who historically live in the territory of another country, and have unique linguistic, cultural, sometimes – religious identity. Therefore, language is a part and parcel of minority's identity. So, it is very important that language policy would ensure rights of minority language's users and help to preserve minority's linguistic identity. Language policies in Lithuania and Romania can be described as combining types of official language valuation policy and different judicial status policy. Romanian language policy also meets definition of bilingualism (territorialized personal rights), because it allows usage of minority language in local public administration and public inscriptions. In Lithuania main laws regulating minority language policy are law of national minorities (expired in 2010) and law of education. Current law of education will be replaced by new one in July, 2011. This law, which strengthens education of minorities in the State language, caused lots of discussions in the society and pretty negative evaluation of the biggest national minorities, especially Polish. Meanwhile Romania recently directed its minority language policy in different way. Here new law of education was also accepted in the beginning of 2011. It ensured teaching of all subjects in the language of national minority. The law was followed by various reactions and critics in society. However, it can be considered as a victory of national minorities. Another law, important for Romania's minorities, is law of local public administration, which grants right to regional bilingualism. Focus group research as well as content analysis in Lithuania and Romania helped to investigate reception of minority language policy in the society. It may be described as quite positive, especially in Lithuania. Even if in both countries respondents admitted that they didn't look for information about minority language policy on purpose, they were interested and sensitive towards focus groups' topics, especially regarding education and integration of national minorities. Respondents critically valued aims of biggest minorities (Polish and Hungarians) to gain more rights. However, at the moment of the research they didn't feel threat for the State language. Content analysis revealed that recently Lithuanian media allotted more attention to minority language policy than Romanian media. However, the most popular minority language policy issue in both countries' was education and new law of education. Variety of opinions and arguments (of both national majority and minorities) was presented here. At the moment main aim for Lithuanian legislators while forming minority language policy is to solve coalition between laws' regulations regarding bilingual inscriptions and approve new law of national minorities. Meanwhile Romania should approve one single law, dedicated to minorities and foreseeing their rights. Both countries should keep on improving minority language policy's legislation in order to satisfy interests and ensure rights of both state and minority languages users.

National minority language policy is an object of this master thesis. It aims at analyzing how minority language policy is being formed in Lithuania and Romania. Goals of the thesis are: to analyze types of language policy and models of language planning; concept of national minority in social sciences, international law and European countries – Lithuania and Romania; development and regulations of European minorities' linguistic rights as well as language policy of the European Union; to research minority language policy in Lithuania and Romania as well as reception of minority language policy in Lithuania and Romania and to compare implementation of minority language policy in these two countries. There is no single description neither for national minority nor for language policy. However, national minority is often understood as a group of people, who historically live in the territory of another country, and have unique linguistic, cultural, sometimes – religious identity. Therefore, language is a part and parcel of minority's identity. So, it is very important that language policy would ensure rights of minority language's users and help to preserve minority's linguistic identity. Language policies in Lithuania and Romania can be described as combining types of official language valuation policy and different judicial status policy. Romanian language policy also meets definition of bilingualism (territorialized personal rights), because it allows usage of minority language in local public administration and public inscriptions. In Lithuania main laws regulating minority language policy are law of national minorities (expired in 2010) and law of education. Current law of education will be replaced by new one in July, 2011. This law, which strengthens education of minorities in the State language, caused lots of discussions in the society and pretty negative evaluation of the biggest national minorities, especially Polish. Meanwhile Romania recently directed its minority language policy in different way. Here new law of education was also accepted in the beginning of 2011. It ensured teaching of all subjects in the language of national minority. The law was followed by various reactions and critics in society. However, it can be considered as a victory of national minorities. Another law, important for Romania's minorities, is law of local public administration, which grants right to regional bilingualism. Focus group research as well as content analysis in Lithuania and Romania helped to investigate reception of minority language policy in the society. It may be described as quite positive, especially in Lithuania. Even if in both countries respondents admitted that they didn't look for information about minority language policy on purpose, they were interested and sensitive towards focus groups' topics, especially regarding education and integration of national minorities. Respondents critically valued aims of biggest minorities (Polish and Hungarians) to gain more rights. However, at the moment of the research they didn't feel threat for the State language. Content analysis revealed that recently Lithuanian media allotted more attention to minority language policy than Romanian media. However, the most popular minority language policy issue in both countries' was education and new law of education. Variety of opinions and arguments (of both national majority and minorities) was presented here. At the moment main aim for Lithuanian legislators while forming minority language policy is to solve coalition between laws' regulations regarding bilingual inscriptions and approve new law of national minorities. Meanwhile Romania should approve one single law, dedicated to minorities and foreseeing their rights. Both countries should keep on improving minority language policy's legislation in order to satisfy interests and ensure rights of both state and minority languages users.