ABSTRACT
So far in this book we have traced the close relationship between language and identity, and particularly national identity. We have seen how the realisation of the significance of this relationship has led governments and politicians to formulate overt policies which either seek to deny linguistic rights or to recognise and promote them. We have also noted how in the Spanish-speaking world, nation-building has been at state level a conscious, planned project in which language has played a prominent role. As for Language Planning in particular, so for nation-building in general, the education system is one of the (if not the) most central agencies available to the state. Through the curriculum, values of citizenship are underlined, patriotism is legitimised through particular views of the nation’s history, and binding all this is the particular language or languages in which the curriculum is offered. A basic premise underlying education in the Western world is that teaching, learning, communication and preparation to participate in society as a whole rely on a competence in and access to literacy, which, in turn, will be principally (if not exclusively) in the majority language of the state. Education, then, both directs the population in an interpretation of national values, national symbols, and national space, and also effectively controls who can participate and have access to this national imagined community. Once again we are reminded of Anderson’s assertion that it is printlanguage that allows the nation to imagine its geographical limits and its shared markers (see Chapter 1). Access to this print-language, and also to which printlanguage, is decided by the state through the education system. Clearly not all education is state-administered, but even when it is in the hands of other bodies, these are usually themselves other representatives of the national establishment, such as the Church or army, and, therefore, have similar hegemonic agendas. As we will see in later case studies, it is very difficult for non-governmental groups to have much success in promoting alternative, and sometimes anti-government, educational programmes and curricula.
