Diglossia
"In addition to the community's everyday or vernacular language variety (labeled "L" or "low" variety), a second, highly codified variety (labeled "H" or "high") is used in certain situations such as literature, formal education, or other specific settings, but not used for ordinary conversation." — http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diglossia
These quotes come from articles discussing the correlation between diglossia and illiteracy in the Arab world. In them, I have simply replaced "Arab/Arabic," and related terms, with "Tibetan;" there seems to be some cross-context import in what they are getting at... (Illiteracy in Tibet is 45.5% according to the most recent U.N. reports).
"There is a growing awareness among some Tibetan education specialists that the low levels of educational achievement and high illiteracy and low literacy rates in [Tibet and the diaspora] are directly related to the complexities of the standard Tibetan language used in formal schooling and non-formal education. The complexities mostly relate to the diglossic situation of the language, which is making reading in Tibetan an overly arduous process. There are serious negative educational and social consequences related to these reading difficulties, including feelings of linguistic insecurity by large numbers of youth and young adults when it comes to common acts of social communication and personal expression.
If Tibetan-speaking societies want to face the challenges of the 21st century, it is asserted that there needs to be a concerted effort to bring about higher levels of linguistic self-confidence and desirable social change. The Tibetan language needs urgent language planning strategies to standardize it and make it more accessible to its many speakers." — http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED456669.pdf
"There is a marked differentiation between two related varieties of Tibetan: on the one hand, literary Tibetan, which is mostly used for [literature and religious functions], and on the other, a number of Tibetan dialects, usually used for...home and family discourse, or trade and market conversations within and across diversified Tibetan societies. This situation, which is known as diglossia, gives literary Tibetan special prestige valuation, as the language of written [Buddhist] tradition, literary heritage, and literacy and education.
It also creates a significant linguistic distance between the language of orality and the language of literacy. The gap between literary Tibetan, the Tibetan language of formal education and adult literacy, and the Tibetan dialect or vernacular spoken at home and most everywhere outside of school walls, seems to be a major cause of...low adult literacy levels everywhere in the Tibeto-Himalayan region. The mixture of language patterns in the classrooms is a cause of serious pedagogical problems, sometimes leading to lack of adequate language competence.
Literary Tibetan... is difficult to learn and use because it is nobody’s native language. The learning difficulties that relate to the common language of all Tibetans, stem from its lack of immediate relevancy to the learning process and to the environment of the child and adult learners. The above compartmentalization of the two major Tibetan language varieties places literary Tibetan, the sole language of first literacy acquisition and educational learning, outside the immediate daily activities of the learners, children or adults.
There is an important linguistic distance which separates literary Tibetan from the learners’ personal experience, familiar topics, and concrete real world materials. It is thus disconnected from the reality of expressive functions, and its relevance and motivation for learners are significantly reduced which leads to serious educational and social consequences. The experience of learners with Tibetan literacy is that of an abstract and decontextualized language learning situation, which brings with it “linguistic insecurity” and often results in learner distress at error or failure to recall correct structures and patterns.
Literary Tibetan is somewhat disconnected from the everyday reality of adult learners’ needs and some literacy specialists are beginning to feel that it has now become somewhat urgent to look for new pedagogical approaches to literacy work. Children come to the formal school setting with a great deal of knowledge about their oral language and two to five thousand words which they comprehend aurally and can use grammatically to communicate. This is the foundation on which reading is usually built in other linguistic situations.
Because they are rarely in contact with literary Tibetan in normal discourse situations with parents or friends, in real-life activities within their home and out in the play environment, Tibetan children’s experience with their oral language does not serve as a satisfactory vehicle for drawing their attention to the features and conventions of Tibetan reading..." — http://papers.ldc.upenn.edu/EALL/ArabicLiteracy.pdf
Quotes above have all had "Arab/Arabic" replaced by "Tibetan."
These quotes come from articles discussing the correlation between diglossia and illiteracy in the Arab world. In them, I have simply replaced "Arab/Arabic," and related terms, with "Tibetan;" there seems to be some cross-context import in what they are getting at... (Illiteracy in Tibet is 45.5% according to the most recent U.N. reports).
"There is a growing awareness among some Tibetan education specialists that the low levels of educational achievement and high illiteracy and low literacy rates in [Tibet and the diaspora] are directly related to the complexities of the standard Tibetan language used in formal schooling and non-formal education. The complexities mostly relate to the diglossic situation of the language, which is making reading in Tibetan an overly arduous process. There are serious negative educational and social consequences related to these reading difficulties, including feelings of linguistic insecurity by large numbers of youth and young adults when it comes to common acts of social communication and personal expression.
If Tibetan-speaking societies want to face the challenges of the 21st century, it is asserted that there needs to be a concerted effort to bring about higher levels of linguistic self-confidence and desirable social change. The Tibetan language needs urgent language planning strategies to standardize it and make it more accessible to its many speakers." — http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED456669.pdf
"There is a marked differentiation between two related varieties of Tibetan: on the one hand, literary Tibetan, which is mostly used for [literature and religious functions], and on the other, a number of Tibetan dialects, usually used for...home and family discourse, or trade and market conversations within and across diversified Tibetan societies. This situation, which is known as diglossia, gives literary Tibetan special prestige valuation, as the language of written [Buddhist] tradition, literary heritage, and literacy and education.
It also creates a significant linguistic distance between the language of orality and the language of literacy. The gap between literary Tibetan, the Tibetan language of formal education and adult literacy, and the Tibetan dialect or vernacular spoken at home and most everywhere outside of school walls, seems to be a major cause of...low adult literacy levels everywhere in the Tibeto-Himalayan region. The mixture of language patterns in the classrooms is a cause of serious pedagogical problems, sometimes leading to lack of adequate language competence.
Literary Tibetan... is difficult to learn and use because it is nobody’s native language. The learning difficulties that relate to the common language of all Tibetans, stem from its lack of immediate relevancy to the learning process and to the environment of the child and adult learners. The above compartmentalization of the two major Tibetan language varieties places literary Tibetan, the sole language of first literacy acquisition and educational learning, outside the immediate daily activities of the learners, children or adults.
There is an important linguistic distance which separates literary Tibetan from the learners’ personal experience, familiar topics, and concrete real world materials. It is thus disconnected from the reality of expressive functions, and its relevance and motivation for learners are significantly reduced which leads to serious educational and social consequences. The experience of learners with Tibetan literacy is that of an abstract and decontextualized language learning situation, which brings with it “linguistic insecurity” and often results in learner distress at error or failure to recall correct structures and patterns.
Literary Tibetan is somewhat disconnected from the everyday reality of adult learners’ needs and some literacy specialists are beginning to feel that it has now become somewhat urgent to look for new pedagogical approaches to literacy work. Children come to the formal school setting with a great deal of knowledge about their oral language and two to five thousand words which they comprehend aurally and can use grammatically to communicate. This is the foundation on which reading is usually built in other linguistic situations.
Because they are rarely in contact with literary Tibetan in normal discourse situations with parents or friends, in real-life activities within their home and out in the play environment, Tibetan children’s experience with their oral language does not serve as a satisfactory vehicle for drawing their attention to the features and conventions of Tibetan reading..." — http://papers.ldc.upenn.edu/EALL/ArabicLiteracy.pdf
Quotes above have all had "Arab/Arabic" replaced by "Tibetan."
Comments