Moderator: Forum Administrators
vijayjohn wrote:My understanding of the term "indigenous languages" is essentially the oldest languages known to be spoken within a particular geographical area. In a lot of cases, we know those languages no longer have any native speakers and have little to no records of them
IpseDixit wrote:Even if this language has been completely dead for millenia?
I would find it a bit weird to say that Etruscan is the indigenous language of Tuscany.
voron wrote:What are the indigenous languages of Belarus?
vijayjohn wrote:I would find it a bit weird to say that Etruscan is the indigenous language of Tuscany.
IpseDixit wrote:vijayjohn wrote:I would find it a bit weird to say that Etruscan is the indigenous language of Tuscany.
Because Latin and then Italian have been the two languages spoken here for millenia. I don't see why they should be somehow considered less indigenous than Etruscan.
United Nations-system body has never adopted a definition of the concept of “indigenous peoples”. The prevailing view today is that no formal universal definition of the term is necessary, given that a single definition will inevitably be either over- or under-inclusive, making sense in some societies but not in others. For practical purposes, the commonly accepted understanding of the term is that provided in the Jose R. Martinez Cobo’s Study on the Problem of Discrimination against Indigenous Populations. The working definition reads as follows:
Indigenous communities, peoples and nations are those which, having a historical continuity with pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies that developed on their territories, consider themselves distinct from other sectors of the societies now prevailing on those territories, or parts of them. They form at present non-dominant sectors of society and are determined to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral territories, and their ethnic identity, as the basis of their continued existence as peoples, in accordance with their own cultural patterns, social institutions and legal system. Full quote here
Article 33 of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to determine their own identity or membership in accordance with their customs and traditions.
voron wrote:I'd say that this term doesn't apply well to Europe.
md0 wrote:voron wrote:I'd say that this term doesn't apply well to Europe.
I more or less agree with you.
The term makes such more sense in the rest of the world which was colonised by Europe, and especially in settler colonies where there were/are systematic culture eradication programmes in place.
md0 wrote:I was thinking to what extend it can be applied to France and its linguistic oppression.
IpseDixit wrote:md0 wrote:I was thinking to what extend it can be applied to France and its linguistic oppression.
I think pretty much any major European nation state was at some point in time involved in some kind of linguistic oppression. That's an inevitable consequence when you decide that your nation is going to have just one national language.
md0 wrote:I guess that's the main difference: in Europe, you oppressed the linguistic diversity within the group you believed is your own. In the colonies, they never believed those people where part of their group, or they didn't even believe that those people were people.
Antea wrote:After reflecting about it, I think that the term “indigenous “ is possibly a little bit racist. Because maybe they’re referring to languages spoken by “Indians”, I mean not from India, but as the autochthonous population living in the territories object of conquest. But why is the autochthonous populations are called “Indians” with “Indigenous languages” and not the other way round? Maybe because of racism...
IpseDixit wrote:I'm not sure I understand what you mean but the word "indigenous" has nothing to do with the word "Indian". "Indigenous" comes from Latin and it means "generated from within".
IpseDixit wrote:"Indigenous" comes from Latin and it means "generated from within".
Antea wrote:But still, I don’t understand very well the difference between indigenous and non indigenous languages
IpseDixit wrote:none of this is really mentioned explicitely in the aforementioned definition so I kind of feel we're making up this distinction just because we feel there should be such distinction.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest