Attitudes towards regional/minority Languages among
young Speakers.
A Comparison between Mirandese (Portugal) and
Asturian (Spain)
Miranda Trincheri
S2803690
MA in Multilingualism
Faculty of Liberal Arts
University of Groningen
Supervisors:
Dr. Charlotte Gooskens
2
Table of contents
0 Abstract 4
1 Introduction 5
2 Ibero Romance languages 8
2.1 From Latin to Ibero Romance languages 8
2.2 Continuum Portuguese-Mirandese-Asturian-Spanish 13 2.3 Mirandese – Asturian as regional/minority languages 16
3 Language attitudes 20
3.1 Previous definitions 20
3.2 Previous studies in the Iberian Peninsula 24
3.3 Previous studies in Mirandese and Asturian 26
3.4 Statement of purpose 28 4 Methods 32 4.1 Subjects 33 4.2 Materials 34 4.3 Procedure 38 4.4 Analysis 39 5 Results 40
5.1 Language use: Speakers 40
5.1.1 Miranda de l Douro 40
5.1.2 Xixón 41
5.1.3 Comparison between both groups 42
5.2 Language use: Media and Information Technology 43
5.2.1 Miranda de l Douro 43
5.2.2 Xixón 44
5.2.3 Comparison between both groups 45
5.3 Language proficiency 46
5.3.1 Regional/minority language 46
5.3.2 State language 1 47
5.3.3 State language 2 48
5.3.4 Overview results language proficiency 49
5.4 Language likes 50
5.4.1 Regional/minority language 51
5.4.2 State language 1 52
5.4.3 State language 2 53
5.4.4 Overview results language likes 54
5.5 Attitudes towards language teaching and learning 56
5.5.1 Regional/minority language 56
5.5.2 State language 1 57
5.5.3 State language 2 57
5.5.4 All three languages 58
5.5.5 Overview results language teaching and learning 58 5.6 Attitudes towards language spoken by future children 59
3
5.6.2 State language 1 60
5.6.3 State language 2 61
5.6.4 All three languages 61
5.6.5 Overview results language spoken by future children 62
5.7 Attitudes towards multilingualism 63
5.8 Attitudes towards the future of the R/ML 64
5.8.1 Regional/minority language spoken in future 64
5.8.2 Regional/minority language endangerment 64
5.8.3 Regional/minority language protection 65
5.8.4 Overview results future of the Regional/minority language 66
5.9 Summary of the results 66
6 Discussion 68
7 Conclusion 71
References 72
4
0-ABSTRACT
In the last decades, there has been a growing interest on language use and language attitudes in regional/minority languages settings. On the one hand, studies show decrease of domains for the regional/minority languages, as well as endangered intergenerational transmission. On the other hand, many of these regional/minority languages are on appraisal due to standardization, schooling and official recognition. This is the case of two members of the Astur-Leones family: Mirandese and Asturian. Given this paradoxical situation, it is of particular interest to focus on secondary school students. They belong to the first generation that is ceasing to have the regional/minority languages as a first language, but at the same time they are the first to be educated with the regional/minority language as a school subject during the twelve years of compulsory education in both Portugal and Spain.
5
1-INTRODUCTION
In the last decades, there has been a growing interest on language use and language attitudes in regional/minority languages (R/ML) settings. On the one hand, studies show decrease of domains for the regional/minority languages, as well as endangered intergenerational transmission. On the other hand, many of these regional/minority languages are on appraisal due to standardization, schooling and official recognition.
In this study we understand regional/minority language as defined by the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages (ECRML): “languages traditionally used within a given territory of a State by nationals of that State who form a group numerically smaller than the rest of the State’s population; and they are different from the official language(s) of that State” (Part 1, Article 1). This is the situation of Mirandese and Asturian, both members of the Astur-Leones family.
Figure 1 shows a map of Europe with the Astur-Leonese area in red. Next to it, there is a detail of this area in green. The extreme south of the area coloured in green is Miranda, in Portugal, where Mirandese is spoken. Asturian is spoken in the Principality of Asturias, in the Northern extreme of the green area. The major concentration of Asturian speakers is in the big cities next to the cost, such as Xixón.
Figure 1: Map of the Astur-Leonese group: Europe (left), detail (right). (Source: Gil, 2009.)
Given the simultaneity of both endangerment and appraisal (Merlán, 2009; Llera Ramo & Antuña, 2003) it is of particular interest to focus on secondary school students.
Miranda
6
They belong to the first generation that is ceasing to have the regional/minority languages as a first language, but at the same time they are the first to be educated with the regional/minority languages as a school subject during the twelve years of compulsory education in both Portugal and Spain. Moreover, previous studies on Mirandese (Martins, 1997; Merlán, 2009) and Asturian (D’Andrés, 2002; Llera Ramo & Antuña, 2003), coincide on reporting contradictory attitudes among young speakers of these languages. Typically, young speakers have positive values towards the regional/minority language, but they still prefer to use the majority language. These contradictions were found also in other languages such as Galician (Loureiro-Rodriguez, Boggess, & Goldsmith, 2013).
Even though our study does not have a specific focus on schools, the groups studied involve secondary school students. This implies that the school, as part of their habitual environment, can have an effect on their attitudes (section 3.1) and, therefore, on our results. Accordingly, it is necessary to define this environment.
Multilingualism, defined by Lasagabaster (2005) as “the presence of more than two languages in the school system” (p.27) is an expanding phenomenon in most European curriculums, and entails both regionalism and internationalisation (Lasagabaster, 2005, p.27). For example, in the University of the Basque Country there is regionalism because the Regional/minority language, Basque in this case, is not only spoken by students and lecturers but is also a part of the curriculum. On the other hand, there is also internationalisation because the university is growing in international students and lecturers. According to this author, this multilingual situation should be considered while studying attitudes towards languages (Lasagabaster, 2005, p.28).
Secondary school students in both Miranda and Xixón attend to multilingual schools where regionalism is present not only through the regional/minority language but also through the regional culture. The degree of internationalisation that each of the environments has is yet to be determined, but at least we can affirm that international languages are taught in these schools. Because of this, our study will focus on language attitudes and language use from a complementary point of view including both regionalism and internationalisation.
7
groups. These two languages share the status of regional/minority languages, and certain features usually associated to it, such as rusticity or traditionalism, among others. They are as well both under the domain of a majority language (Spanish and Portuguese in each case). On the other hand, these two groups differ in location, and more specifically in country. This difference, which can be explained as political, cultural, and geographical, must play a role in people´s attitudes and therefore needs to be studied. Finally, in both regions contradictory attitudes among young speakers of regional/minority have been found. Therefore, applying the same questionnaire in two different regions, could contribute to the further understanding of this phenomenon. Our main research question is:
Are there any significant differences between groups regarding language use, language proficiency and language attitudes towards the regional/minority language, Spanish and Portuguese?
8
2- IBERO ROMANCE LANGUAGES
The following chapter is a brief account of the origin, evolution and current situation of the two languages compared in this study: Mirandese and Asturian. The first section describes the process of Romanization in the Iberian Peninsula, and points out some common features of the Ibero Romance languages. The second section pertains to the differentiation process within the Ibero-Romance languages with a focus on the Astur-Leonese group. Finally, the third section describes the current situation of both Mirandese and Asturian. The different stages described should not be considered strictly detached one from the other, but rather a continuum as figure 2 shows.
Figure 2: Linguistic continuum from Latin to modern Mirandese and Asturian. 2.1 From Latin to Ibero-Romance languages
Unless especially mentioned, the following paragraphs are based on Lloris (2004), Renzi (1982), Väänänen (1968), and Várvaro (1991). Strictly speaking, the history of Ibero-Romance languages goes back to the end of the 3rd century B.C., when the Romans entered the Peninsula fighting against Cartago in order to take over that region. The oldest Latin inscription in Iberian territory dates back from 218 B.C., and it was written by a Roman soldier (Lloris, 2004, p.85). According to Väänänen (1968, p.36-39), the Romans of the 3rd century B.C spoke Archaic Latin. This has given the Ibero-Romance languages certain features that distinguish them from the rest of the Romance languages.
Archaic Latin (c. III B.C.) Late Latin (c. VI A.D.)
comedĕre manducāre
Spanish comer mangiare Italian
Portuguese comer manger French
Mirandese comer a mânca Romanian
Asturian comer menjar Catalan
Table 1: The verb "to eat” in two different stages of Latin and its Modern Romance versions.
9
derives from the Late Latin manducāre (Väänänen, 2004, p.55). This verb originally meant ‘to chew’, ‘to bite’ but its widespread use on a daily basis changed its meaning towards ‘to eat’. By the time this meaning had developed, the Iberian Peninsula was mainly dominated by Germanic groups and there was not so frequent contact with the rest of the Romance speaking regions.
There are four different periods in the history of Romanization in the Iberian Peninsula that can be distinguished (Lloris, 2004). Table 2 offers an overview of these periods. During the first period, Latin lived together with Phoenician, Greek, Basque and Celtic, among other languages, even though each of these languages was spoken in different domains and regions. Gradually, the pre-Roman languages started losing domains to the expense of Latin. This change is visible during the second period, when Latin became the hegemonic and official language of the administration, religion and education. By the third period, almost all the population had Latin as a mother tongue, with the exception of the Basque region. The fourth and last period of Latin in the Iberian Peninsula, was dominated by a process of dialectalization which led to the origin of the Romance languages.
Time frame Main charachteristic
1 III BC - I BC Linguistic diversity: Latin and pre-Roman languages.
2 I BC - III AD Latin hegemonic and official language of administration, religion and education. 3 III AD - V AD Latin as L1 in every region, except for Basque.
4 V AD - VIII AD Dialectalization, origin of the Romance languages. Table 2: Four stages in the spread of Latin in the Iberian Peninsula according to Lloris (2004)
10
Celtic Germanic
cerevisĭa ?
Spanish cerveza birra Italian
Portuguese cerveija bière French
Catalan cervesa beare Romanian
Table 3: The noun "beer" with Celtic or Germanic root and its Modern Romance versions.
According to Väänänen (1968, p.39), the last stage of Latin, Late Latin, started by the end of the 2nd century A,D., together with the gradual decay of the Empire. By the same time, different German peoples started invading the Peninsula and managed to settle strong kingdoms. The Roman domination was converted into a Germanic one, and the unifying norm whose use was assured by the existence of an ‘elastic dome’ during the Roman Empire (Várvaro, 1991), started losing its coercive power. In this process, with a lack of a centralized authority that could unify a linguistic standard, varieties changed drastically from one region to the other. By the end of the 8th c.AD, after the Arabs had conquered the territory, there were already at least six new Romance languages: Galician-Portuguese, Astur-Leonese, Castilian (Spanish), Mozarabic, Catalan, and Aragonese. Both natural and political factors contributed to the rise and fall of the new language varieties in the Peninsula.
Unless especially mentioned, the following paragraphs are based on Cano Aguilar (1988), Gifford (1967), Lapesa (1980), and Menéndez Pidal (1968). Figure 3 shows a map of the Iberian Peninsula with the different languages spoken around the 10th century. Mozarabic occupies more than half of the territory starting from the Southern extreme of the Peninsula. This is explained by the hegemonic power of the Arabs in the southern part of Peninsula around the 10th century. The rest of the languages are located in the North. From East to West these are: Catalan, Basque (North), Navarro-Aragonese (South), Castilian1, Astur-Leonese, and Galician-Portuguese. At this stage, both Galician-Portuguese and Astur-Leonese occupy a bigger surface than Castilian. During the middle Ages, Asturian has a privileged position since it is the first language in the area to be used as a
1
11
state language (Kabatek, 2006, p.143). The kingdom of Asturias (718-924) was the first to be officially settled, and the first to organize the reconquest of the Peninsula against the Arabs.
Figure 3: Map of the languages in the Iberian Peninsula around 10th century. (Source: Natureduca, 2015)
12
Figure 4: Map of the languages in the Iberian Peninsula around 14th century. (Source: Natureduca, 2015)
Despite the gradual decrease of the Arab domination in the Peninsula, the modern Ibero-Romance languages show many traces of the Arab influence in their languages. Table 4 shows two examples. The first one is very significant because it shows how in these languages the connotation associated with the word ‘German’ changed from indicating a nationality to denote the idea of ‘brother’. This change occurred during the Arab domain, when the German people were seen as allies rather than invaders.
Portuguese Mirandese Asturian Spanish Latin Catalan Italian French Romanian ‘brother’ irmão armano hermanu hermano frater germà fratello frère frate
‘oil’ azeite azeite aceite aceite oleum oli olio huile ulei Table 4: Examples of Arab inlfuence in Ibero Romance languages.
13
Figure 5: Map of the languages in the Iberian Peninsula spoken nowadays. (Source: Natureduca, 2015)
2.2 Continuum Portuguese-Mirandese-Asturian-Spanish
14
Portuguese Mirandese
Muitas línguas têm orgulho dos seus
pergaminhos antigos, da literatura escrita há centenas de anos e de escritores muito famosos, hoje bandeiras dessas línguas. Mas há outras que não podem ter orgulho de nada disso, como é o caso da língua mirandesa.
Muitas lhénguas ténen proua de ls sous pergaminos antigos, de la lhiteratura screbida hai cientos d'anhos i de scritores hai muito afamados, hoije bandeiras dessas lhénguas. Mas outras hai que nun puoden tener proua de nada desso, cumo ye l causo de la lhéngua mirandesa.
Asturian Spanish
Munches llingües tienen arguyu de los sos pergaminos antiguos, de la lliteratura escrita hai cientos d'años y d'escritores enforma famosos, güei banderes d'eses llingües. Pero hai otres que nun pueden tener arguyu de nada d'eso, como ye'l casu de la llingua mirandesa.
Muchas lenguas tienen orgullo de sus
pergaminos antiguos, de la literatura escrita hace cientos de años y de escritores muy famosos, hoy banderas de esas lenguas. Pero hay otras que no pueden tener orgullo de nada de eso, como es el caso de la lengua mirandesa.
Figure 6: Fragment of a text originally written in Mirandese, and lately translated to Portuguese, Spanish, and Asturian. It says: “Many languages are proud of their old scrolls, and the literature written hundreds of years ago by very famous writers. But there are other languages that cannot be proud of that, as it is in the case of the Mirandese language.”
The structural similarity between all four versions of the text presented is recognizable at a first sight. Nevertheless, there are differences in the way these four languages have developed from Latin, which contribute to view these Romance languages as differentiated one from the other.
Table 5 shows a group of phonetic changes from Latin to the modern languages were Portuguese can be detached from the rest three languages. Examples 1 and 2 show the evolution of the short stressed vowels /ɔ/ and /ɛ/ in Latin. In Portuguese, these vowels remained unchanged, while in Mirandese, Asturian and Spanish, they evolved into diphthongs /wo/ or /we/, and /je/. On the other hand, examples 3 and 4 show how Portuguese changed from Latin, with the deletion of /l/ and /n/ sounds between vowels, while the rest of the three languages conserved this sound.
Latin Portuguese Mirandese Asturian Spanish 1 'door' /ɔ/ /ɔ/ /wo/ /we/ /we/
porta porta puorta puerta puerta 2 'rock', 'stone' /ɛ/ /ɛ/ /je/ /je/ /je/
petra pedra piedra piedra piedra 3 'washbin' /l/ /Ø/ /l/ /l/ /l/
pila pia pila pila pila 4 'moon' /n/ /Ø/ /n/ /n/ /n/
15
Table 6 shows how the Latin consonant clusters /kl/ and /pl/ in initial position evolved differently in Portuguese and Mirandese, than in Asturian and Spanish. While in Portuguese and Mirandese these consonant clusters evolved into a voiceless postalveolar sibilant affricate /ʧ/, in standard Asturian and Spanish this sound is a voiced palatal lateral approximant /ʎ/.
Latin Portuguese Mirandese Asturian Spanish 1 'to call' /kl/ /ʧ/ /ʧ/ /ʎ/ /ʎ/
clamāre chamar chamar llamar llamar 2 'full' /pl/ /ʧ/ /ʧ/ /ʎ/ /ʎ/
plenus cheio cheno llenu lleno Table 6: Portuguese and Mirandese phonetic features, different from Asturian and Spanish
Table 7 shows how Spanish distinguishes from the rest of the languages. This language does not conserve /f/ as an initial sound in words from Latin origin.
Latin Portuguese Mirandese Asturian Spanish to make',' to do' /f/ /f/ /f/ /f/ /Ø/
facĕre fazer fazer facer hacer Table 7: Spanish phonetic features different from Mirandese, Asturian and Portuguese
Finally, table 8 shows two of the most typical features of the Astur-Leonese family. Example number 1 shows that the initial sound /l/ in Latin remains in Spanish and Portuguese, but in Mirandese and Asturian it shifted into a voiced palatal lateral approximant /ʎ/. Example number 2 shows another phenomenon of palatalization. In this case, the verb ‘to be’, which starts with a vowel sound in Latin, Spanish and Portuguese developed a palatal semivowel in Mirandese and Asturian.
Latin Portuguese Mirandese Asturian Spanish
1 'moon' /l/ /l/ /ʎ/ /ʎ/ /l/
luna lua lhuna lluna luna 2 'is' (to be) est é yê ye es
Table 8: Mirandese and Asturian phonetic features dfferent from Portuguese and Spanish
16
gradually disappearing (D’Andrés, 2002, p.79). Another example of language convergence is the lexical borrowing from the state language to the regional/minority language, especially when it comes to expressing modern entities. Table 9 shows 3 examples regarding means of transport. The different selections that both Portuguese and Spanish made towards the words used to denote ‘autobus’, ‘car’, and ‘train’, were followed by the regional/minority languages.
Portuguese Mirandese Asturian Spanish 'autobus' autocarro autocarro autobús autobús
'car' carro carro coche coche
'train' comboio comboio tren tren Table 9: List of lexical differences between Mirandese and Asturian. (Quarteu Conde, 2001 p. 95)
2.3 Mirandese – Asturian as regional/minority languages
The following section will provide information on the current situation of Mirandese and Asturian in terms of their vitality, recognition, schooling and associated values.
Mirandese
The language is spoken in a region of 450 km2 in the North-East corner of Portugal, next to the Spanish border (figure 7). According to its location, it can be considered a linguistic enclave (Argenter, 2008; Ceolín, 2002) surrounded by both Portuguese and Mirandese. It is spoken mainly in the Council [conceyu] of Miranda de l Douro, and also in some villages in the Council of Bimioso (Quarteu & Conde, 2001; Ferreira, 2001). The total number of speakers ranges between 7.000 and 15.000 speakers, depending on the estimations.
17
Around the second half of the 20th century, the decrease of Mirandese to the expense of Portuguese became visible both in number of speakers and in domains. A combination of factors explains this. Firstly, an internal migration process brought people from other regions in Portugal to Miranda region to work in factories between 1950 and 1960 (Merlán, 2009, p.215). The growing presence of a monolingual Portuguese population had a big impact on the community. The Portuguese language started occupying certain domains where traditionally Mirandese was spoken, (such as the working place). Moreover, these monolingual speakers, not having heard Mirandese ever before, would stigmatize Mirandese speakers and call them palhantres, someone who does not speak properly either language, Portuguese or Spanish (Merlán, 2009, p.219). At the same time, the expansion of mass media (only in Portuguese) as well as the strengthening of a fully monolingual Portuguese education system, contributed to the decrease of Mirandese language (Merlán, 2009, p.227).
Asturian
The language is spoken in the Principality of Asturias, an autonomous region in Spain (figure 7). Despite current decrease, the use of the language has been continuous since its origin (Gil, 2009, p.17). Within Asturian, there are at least three regional varieties: Western, Central and Eastern. The standard is based mainly on the central variety which has a literary tradition and more number of speakers (Gil, 2009, p. 14). Given its proximity to Galicia, there is a transition region where people speak a variety which combines Galician and Asturian (Llera Ramo & Antuña, 2003; Gil, 2009). Because of the many different varieties Asturian has, there is no general agreement towards the standardisation and the name of the language (Garabato, 2006).
18
high domains. Therefore, Spanish native speakers do not suffer from embarrassment or stigmatization, while Asturians tend to be considered uneducated. On the other hand, Asturian is sometimes idealized as something close to nature and feelings (Garabato, 2006).
Language appraisal and language attitudes
During the 19th century in Spain, the liberals continued with the language policy of unification from the Ancient Regime, which proclaimed monolingualism as the base of the State. Nevertheless, reactions against this started growing in different regions in Spain, mainly Catalunya, Valencia, Balearic Islands, the Basque Country and Galicia (Brumme, 2004, p.947). These movements fought for a revalorization and official recognition of the local and regional languages. Even though they joined some years later, the Astur-Leonese group, especially in the case of both Asturian and Mirandese, has been active in fighting for their language recognition since more than forty years now (D´ Andrés, 2002). Different reference works such as grammars or dictionaries were co-written and published (Academia, 2001; Pires, 2009). In order to do this, standardization processes (not without controversies) took place as well.
Legal status
19
Mirandese Asturian
Law number Lei n° 7/99 Ley 1/98
Date approval 29/01/1999 23/03/1998
Main purpose
Acknowledgement of the linguistic rights of the Mirandese community
Protection and promotion of the use of the language
Language terms
‘Mirandese’ ‘Bable’
‘Asturian’ ‘Mirandese language’ ‘Modalities’
‘Traditional language of Asturias’
Varieties No mentions. Galician-Asturian
Table 10: Details of the laws recognizing Mirandese and Asturian
Education
Currently, both regional/minority languages are a school subject in every of the 12 compulsory school years both Spain and Portugal have, as well as in pre-school. Nevertheless, these courses are not compulsory and their grades are not considered in the general average of each student. Moreover, in Asturias the incorporation of this subject, especially in secondary school (12 to 16 years) was not without resistance (D´Andrés, 2002, p.85). Since 1986, Asturian is also a subject in the University of Oviedo, and in 2010, this university launched a Minor Programme in Asturian. There are also adults’ courses and international certifications designed by the Academia della Lingua. Table 11 shows the total number of secondary school pupils in each region, and the total number of students that have the regional/minority language as a school subject.
Total secondary school pupils
Total secondary school pupils with R/ML
Percentage of secondary school pupils
with R/ML
Asturias * 29601 3633 12%
Miranda de l Douro ** 247 28 11%
Table 11: Total number of secondary school pupils in each region, and total of secondary school pupils with the R/ML as a school subject. (*González-Riaño, & Fernández-Costales, 2014) (A. Santos, personal communication, April 12, 2005.)
20
3-LANGUAGE ATTITUDES
In this chapter we will provide further background on language attitudes. The first section consists of an overview of the field and some important definitions for our study. The second section mentions previous studies on language attitudes within the Iberian Peninsula, with an emphasis on those focused on young speakers. Finally, the third section describes the main findings of previous studies on language attitudes towards Mirandese and Asturian. The results of these studies will be compared to our own results in chapter 5, and further discussed in chapter 6.
3.1 Previous definitions
The significance of studies on language attitudes to the field of sociolinguistics has
been confirmed and explained by many authors. In the words of Agheyisi, & Fishman
21 young speakers (section 3.3), and, at the same time, aims at providing further relevant information in this area.
Now that we have explained the relevance of studies on language attitudes, we will define the concept in more specific terms. In this study, we follow a comprehensive
definition provided by Aiken (2002): “Combining elements from several definitions,
attitudes may be viewed as learned cognitive, affective, and behavioural predispositions to respond positively or negatively to certain objects, situations, institutions, concepts, or persons.” (p.3)
According to this definition, attitudes are learned, or in other words, attitudes are
cultural. This means that attitudes are something that an individual acquires on a given community. It is necessary for the individual to interact with the environment in order to develop an attitude. Attitudes do not grow spontaneously or in isolation. Another important element of the previous definition is that attitudes involve three dimensions: cognitive (beliefs), affective (feelings), and behavioural (actions). These three components have been mentioned by several authors (Baker, 1992; Cargile, Giles, & Bradac, 1994). Attitudes are viewed as cognitive in the sense that they say something about people´s beliefs. For example, in section 2.3 we have mentioned certain stigmata both Mirandese and Asturian speakers suffer from, such as the idea that speaking these languages is only for uneducated people. Attitudes are also affective, because people develop not only ideas, but also feelings towards languages. This becomes visible in multilingual situations where one language dominates the other(s). In this context, people develop feelings which, at the same time, might lead them to behave in a certain way. That is why attitudes are also viewed as behavioural: People act and react because of what they believe and feel about something. The movement of linguistic appraisal mentioned in section 2.3 is an example of what people can do when they are moved by their ideas and feelings. Finally, attitudes are described as positive or negative inclinations (or dispositions) towards a certain object, person, or institution. Some of the previous examples we have mentioned can be labeled as positive, such as the appraisal movement; and others as negative, like the social stigmata.
22
language (or a comparable one) can trigger different beliefs, feelings or behaviours in different settings, because cultural factors such as political, historical, economic and linguistic realities, can affect language attitudes (Cargile et al., 1994, p.221). This is the reason why studies on language attitudes with a comparative approach, such as ours, are relevant and necessary. In our study, for example, we aim at assessing and measuring language attitudes towards similar languages (Mirandese and Asturian as regional/minority languages, and Portuguese and Spanish as state languages) among two different groups of young speakers: One is situated in Miranda (Portugal), and the other group resides in Xixón (Spain). If by the end of this study we find that the attitudes displayed by these two groups towards these languages are different, we can explain that difference by providing a further analysis of the different contexts in which these languages exist. As Cargile et al., state: “Situations and relationships (or situated relationships) energize language attitudes, and this dynamic process remains virtually unstudied (p.227).” By comparing these two groups through the means of a survey which combines monolingual and multilingual questions (section 4.3), we expect to detect specific different points in which these two groups differ.
23
intelligent they consider each of the different speakers is. Some of those recordings are done by the same speaker, but in different languages, but participants ignore this, they are induced to believe that they are hearing different speakers and that they are answering based on the voice of the speaker. However, if the same speaker is labeled as intelligent in a language and uneducated in another one, it means that the participant is judging based on the different languages, and not on the speaker. The matched guise usually involves studies on related languages, such as Schüppert, Hilton and Gooskens (2015) who studied the link between language attitudes and language intelligibility between Swedish and Danish among young speakers of these languages; or different varieties such as Loureiro-Rodríguez et al., (2013) who focused on attitudes towards Spanish, standard and non-standard Galician among young speakers.
The three different types of techniques previously described are not mutually exclusive and, in fact, there are many examples of research combining them, such as Merlán (1997). Deciding on one or other approach depends on many reasons. For example, questionnaires are not only easy to administer and replicate, but they have also been widely used for studying language attitudes, and are regarded as one of the best options to measure attitudes (Agheyisi et al., 1970, p.149). A common strategy in questionnaires is to combine a series of questions addressing the same object. This not only strengthens their reliability (Baker, 1992, p.24), but also allows producing an attitude scale. In words of Aiken (2002): “an attitude scale consists of a series of statements expressing positive or negative feelings toward an institution, a group of people or a concept.” (p28).
24
3.2 Studies on Language Attitudes in the Iberian Peninsula
The multilingual situation in the Iberian Peninsula, particularly in Spain, in combination with the fact that both Spanish and Portuguese are pluricentric languages (Muhr, 2012), has led to a countless amount of studies on language attitudes towards these languages, their varieties, and other languages in contact. For the purpose of this research, we will mention some previous studies on language attitudes among young speakers in different regions of the Iberian Peninsula.
Andersson (2011) carried out a research comparing attitudes towards standard Spanish and the Caló variety (spoken in Andalucía) among young speakers. The study shows that this variety is decreasing in number of speakers but on the other hand, young speakers of Caló show more positive attitudes towards this variety than those who do not speak it. Huguet, (2001) did a comparative study on attitudes towards Catalan and Spanish among young speakers from two different schools: one in Catalunya, and the other in Aragón. Overall, this study showed a trend among students in Catalunya to rate Catalan slightly higher than Spanish when asked about the importance of speaking it and studying it. On the other hand, participants in Aragón rated Spanish higher than Catalan when responding to the same questions.
Loureiro-Rodriguez et al., (2013) used the matched guise technique to assess language attitudes among young speakers in Galicia towards Spanish, standard Galician, and non-standard Galician. Their results indicate a contradiction in young speakers´ behaviour. On one hand, they express support towards maintaining and transmitting non-standard Galician, but at the same time they also display prejudices against it, and consequently, they do not speak it that much.
The final study we will mention in this section is relevant for our research not only because it involves young speakers, but also due to some methodological decisions which are relevant for our own study.
25
the international one, are functional (to different extent) in the students´ lives of those who attend the University of the Basque Country. Given this multilingual (or trilingual) context, Lasagabaster claims the need to assess participants’ language attitudes from a multilingual perspective. This means that “instead of questioning the respondents about each of their languages independently, in the traditional fashion, the three languages are put forward as a unit.” (2005, p.26)
Traditional monolingual questionnaires had shown effect of the sociolinguistic context: Compared to L1 Spanish speakers, L1 Basque speakers showed more positive attitudes towards Basque, and less positive attitudes towards English and Spanish. The scope of Lasagabaster (2005) was to test whether the multilingual approach could have an effect on the results, and contest these previous findings. The hypothesis tested was that the difference between groups of different L1 (Basque and Spanish, respectively) found from a monolingual perspective, would not be confirmed if participants were assessed in their attitudes towards the three languages living together in a multilingual situation, instead of focusing on each of them as separated identities.
The study was done through the means of a questionnaire with a list of 22 items organized in five factors: the social presence and knowledge of multilingualism, learning languages, cognitive and social effects of multilingualism, coexistence of three languages from an international perspective, and coexistence of three languages from a regional perspective. The participants were 1087 university students between 18-50 years old. In general, participants hold positive attitudes towards multilingualism. Nevertheless, the L1 still makes a difference. Even though the holistic questionnaire did not have the expected significant effect, the author suggests a combined approach of both traditional and holistic questionnaires.
26
3.3 Previous research in language attitudes towards Mirandese and
Even though there is no comparative research on language attitudes between these two languages, most of the studies focused on each language show similar results. In both Miranda and Asturias, L1 speakers of the regional/minority language are associated with the same social profile: an adult person, from a low class with a low education level, rural worker. On the other hand, both Spanish and Portuguese are associated with young-adult speakers, from a medium or high class, with a high level of education, and living in urban areas (Martins, 1997; Llera Ramo, 2004; Arnold, 2003; Garabato, 2006).
Descriptor R/ML SL
Age adults over 50 young adults between 20-35
Social class low medium-high
Level of education low high
Residence rural urban
Work agriculture (mining in Asturias) university professionals Table11: Social profiles for regional/minority languages and state languages found in previous research in Miranda and Asturias.
Table 11 shows a summary of the list of descriptors used to describe the social profile associated to speakers of the different languages (age, social class, level of education, residence, and work), together with the answer for each language variable. Despite this common ground, there have also been specific findings for each region. The following section will describe these specific results.
Mirandese
27
of instruction: the more instructed a person is, the less Mirandese (s)he speaks. As Loureiro et al. (2013) with Galician, Martins found that young speakers of Mirandese display contradictory attitudes. In the questionnaires, students report shame and stigmatization as reasons for not speaking Mirandese, but in the matched-guise they respond more positive. There is a dual appreciation of the language by young speakers (Martins, 1997, p.18). On the one hand, they consider the language as representative of the lower social status, but on the other hand, they value it as part of their cultural identity. Moreover, in the last years, the city of Miranda has been intensely promoted as a cultural and touristic attraction which receives visits mainly from Spain. In this situation, Mirandese has turned out to be an added socio-cultural value, and therefore, more positive attitudes are being displayed. Students made explicit mentions of the historical and cultural value of the language for the region.
Merlán (2009) provides an analysis of three different studies carried out in Miranda between 2004 and 2006. In 2004 and 2005 qualitative data was collected in participant observations and interviews, while in 2006, quantitative data was collected through the means of a questionnaire. This research replicated the grouping as in Martins (1997): young and adult speakers of the regional/minority language. Young participants filled in a questionnaire at school. The sections in the questionnaire included: Social Data, Language Use, Linguistic Competences, Acquisition of L1 and L2, Language Attitudes, and Language and Identity. Adult speakers prefer speaking Mirandese while young speakers prefer using Portuguese. Within families, both languages are used. Parents speak Mirandese with grandparents but Portuguese with children. Children´s proficiency in the regional/minority language denotes attrition. Overall, she observes that attitudes towards Mirandese are more positive than in previous studies. During the interviews, participants mentioned that the official recognition together with schooling played a main role in this change.
Asturian
28
p.319-320). On the other hand, an increase in the linguistic identity was observed. There is both more agreement on the opinion that Asturian is a language (and not a dialect), and in the name “bable-asturiano”. Nevertheless, there is not full agreement towards how to deal with diversity and a standard language.
Arnold (2003) performed a combined study doing both content analysis on the main regional newspaper, La Nueva España, and a survey to young adult speakers of Asturian. He observed that the utilisation pattern according to domain and genre of Asturian and Spanish is diglossic, with Asturian limited to private domains of close personal relationship, as well as less sophisticated genres. There is also lack of agreement towards the name of the language, and the degree of standardization. They also reflect the hazards of the close linguistic relationship existing between Asturian and Spanish.
Finally, González-Riaño, & Fernández-Costales, (2014) inform more positive attitudes towards Asturian from those who have the language as a school subject, and in general, positive attitudes towards both Asturian and Spanish.
3.4 Statement of purpose
So far, we have provided a brief story of the origin, evolution and current situation of both Asturian and Mirandese with their similarities and differences. We have as well explained the relevance of focusing on language attitudes towards these languages, especially among young speakers, and the importance of a comparative approach. Accordingly, our main research question is whether there are significant differences between the Mirandese and the Asturian group regarding language use, language proficiency, and language attitudes towards their regional/minority language, and both Spanish and Portuguese. This question can be subdivided in the following sub questions:
a. Which languages do secondary school students in Miranda and Xixón use with other speakers? Is there a difference between groups?
29
b. Which languages do secondary school students in Miranda and Xixón use with media and information technology? Is there a difference between groups?
Previous studies mention much reduced use of the regional/minority language in media and information technology. Nevertheless, it is also mentioned that due to standardization and schooling there is more presence of these languages online (Martins, 1997; Merlán, 2009, Llera Ramo & Antuña, 2003). Because of the higher presence in media and networks, we have included new questions to test this (section 4.2). Therefore some of our questions do not have previous studies to compare with.
c. How proficient are secondary school students in Miranda and Xixón in the regional/minority language, Spanish and Portuguese? Is there a significant difference between groups?
Both groups are native speakers of Spanish or Portuguese, respectively. Thus, in terms of the state language 1, we expect a high self-reported proficiency in both groups, and no differences between groups. As for the regional/minority language, previous studies mention, on one hand, signs of attrition (Martins, 1997), and on the other, improvement of literacy skills due to schooling (Merlán, 2009). Therefore, we expect an intermediate self-reported proficiency in both groups, and no differences between groups. Finally, regarding Portuguese in Xixón and Spanish in Portugal, the region of Miranda has been described as unbalanced trilingual Mirandese-Portuguese-Spanish (Martins, 1997, 2014; Merlán, 2009). That is why, we expect that Spanish will score significantly higher in Miranda than Portuguese in Xixón.
30
Portuguese in Xixón already mentioned, leads us to expect a difference in terms of the state language 2. We expect that Mirandese speakers will like Spanish more than Asturian speakers will like Portuguese.
e. What are the participants´ attitudes towards teaching, and learning the regional/minority language, Spanish and Portuguese, and all three languages as a unit? Is there a significant difference between groups?
Previous studies mention positive attitudes towards the state language 1 and the regional/minority language (Llera Ramo & Antuña, 2003; Merlán 2009; Martins, 2014). We expect high scores and no differences between groups. Regarding the state language 2, we expect intermediate scores in Miranda because Spanish is a functional language in that community (Martins, 1997, 2014; Merlán, 2009). There is no previous research in Asturias to compare with. Nevertheless, it is a fact that Portuguese is not as present in Xixón as Spanish is in Miranda. Considering this lack of exposure, it is possible that participants in Xixón will not agree in the fact that schools should teach Portuguese. Finally, this is the first time participants in these two regions are asked about all three languages being taught at school, therefore there are no previous results to compare with. Nevertheless, because of the trilingualism in Miranda, we can expect that the multilingual questions will score higher in Miranda than those in Xixón to this question.
f. What languages do participants want their future children to speak? Is there a significant difference between groups?
31
g. What are the participants´ attitudes towards the regional/minority language, Spanish and Portuguese as a unity? Is there a significant difference between groups?
The different presence that Spanish has in Miranda, compared to that of Portuguese in Xixón, might have an effect on this set of questions. We expect that participants in Miranda will rate all three languages as a unit on a higher point of the scale than those in Xixón.
h. What do participants think about the future of the regional/minority language? Is there a significant difference between groups?
32
4-METHODS
The present research measured and compared language use, language proficiency, and language attitudes between two groups of speakers of an Astur-Leonese variety: Mirandese and Asturian. Because both groups live in a multilingual setting with unbalanced relationships between the different languages present in each area, language status was a main variable to bear in mind. Table 12 shows the languages involved in each of the regions in terms of their language status: Mirandese and Asturian are regional/minority languages, Portuguese in Portugal and Spanish in Spain are the state language 1 (SL1), and Spanish in Portugal and Portuguese in Spain are the state language 2 (SL2).
Language Status Miranda de l Douro Xixón
Regional Minority Language (R/ML) Mirandese (MI) Asturian (AS)
State Language 1 (SL1) Portuguese (PT) Spanish (SP)
State Language 2 (SL2) Spanish (SP) Portuguese (PT)
Table 12: Languages involved in this study according to their status.
The scope of the research was to investigate whether there is a significant difference between both groups in terms of language use and language attitudes towards the regional/minority language and both Spanish and Portuguese. Attitudes were measured by the means of a questionnaire (see section 4.2) and statistically analyzed (section 4.4).
33
Figure 8 shows the two groups involved in this research (Miranda and Xixón) and the languages they were asked about according to their status. Both Mirandese and Asturian participants were asked about their own regional/minority languages (R/ML), as well as Spanish and Portuguese. These last two languages have a different status in each of the regions. For example, both groups were asked about Spanish, but in the case of Miranda, Spanish is the state language 2 (SL2), while in Spain is the state language 1 (SL1). Finally, in order to assess attitudes towards multilingualism (Lasagabaster, 2005), a set of questions were the three languages were put together as a unit was included.
4.1- Subjects
A total of 48 secondary school students between 14 and 18 years old with the regional/minority language as a school subject participated in this study. Participants were equally distributed into two groups according to their place of birth and residence: either Miranda de l Douro (Portugal) or Xixón (Spain). In both regions, the students were attending different school years but they all had the same regional/minority languages teacher. Both groups have 45 minutes per week of regional/minority languages as an optional subject in their curriculum. In both cases, the samples were selected by contacting the regional/minority languages teachers.
Miranda de l Douro Xixón
Age range 15-18 14-18
Mean age 16.08 15.29
Male participants 8 13
Total participants 24 24
Table 13: Distribution of participants according to age and gender
34
male) with an age range of 14-18 (M: 15.29) who were born and raised in the municipality of Xixón constitute our sample. Students were in one of the last five years of the secondary school. Table 14 shows the distribution of participants according to the school year.
School Year Miranda de l
Douro Xixón 8th - 4 9th - 7 10th 10 10 11th 5 2 12th 9 1 Total 24 24
Table 14: Distribution of participants according to school year 4.2 Materials
35
Table 15: Detail of the questionnaire designed.
Section A consisted of 8 questions about demographics. This section was designed to obtain relevant information about the sample, such as age and gender, and to control that every participant was born and had spent most of their time living in the region. The answers to these questions were used to describe the groups but none of them were included in the statistical analysis.
Sections B to F include the 63 questions that are statistically analyzed in the results. Every question was designed as a closed question, and participants had to indicate agreement to certain statements, or levels of language proficiency, on a scale from 1 to 5.
Section B focused on language use and consisted of two sets of questions. The first set of questions (questions 1 to 8, see Appendix) aimed at describing which language participants use with eight different kinds of speakers: father, mother, siblings, friends at school, friends outside school, teachers, neighbours and grandparents. Each question had 6 possible answers: on a scale from 1 to 5 ranging from speaking only the regional/minority languages to speaking only the state language 1 (Portuguese for Portugal and Spanish for Spain). Finally, the sixth option was left for those cases in which the question could not apply. Figure 9 shows an example of this section in the Mirandese questionnaire:
Section Description Question
number A Demographics Age, sex, place of birth and residence, school year, etc. -
B Language use Speakers (father, mother, etc.) and Media (TV, web,
etc.) 1-15
C Language proficiency Read, write, speak and understand in R/ML, SL1 and
SL2 16-27
D Monolingual questionnaire
Same set of opinions, likes and dislikes for R/ML, SL1
and SL2. 28-51
E R/ML situation Future, endangerment and protection 52-54
F Multilingual
36 Which language do YOU speak to the following people?
Always Mirandese Mirandese more often than Portuguese Mirandese and Portuguese equally Portuguese more often than Mirandese Always Portuguese
Does not apply (either you speak other language or you
don´t speak at all with this person(s))
1. Father
Figure 9: Example of the question designed to assess language use with different kinds of speakers.
The second set of section B (questions 9 to 15) focused on language use and media. Most of this section was based on Merlán (2009), but we added questions involving information technology to our questionnaire. This was done to fill an important gap, since it has been said that more studies assessing the impact of new technologies in regional/minority are needed (McMonagle, 2012). The possible answers in this section were the same six as given in the first set. The questions were about: watching TV, listening to music, posting on Facebook and Twitter, writing e-mails, reading web pages, and sending text messages. The questions involve not only passive actions (such as reading or listening), but also active (such as writing).
Section C (questions 16 to 27) asked participants about their language proficiency in the three different languages. There were four questions per language about each of the four language skills (reading, writing, speaking and understanding) and participants were asked to rate themselves on a scale from 1 to 5 ranging from having no skill at all to a very good command. This section was exactly replicated from Merlán (2009). Figure 10 shows an example of this section:
C- Now we would like to ask you how well you speak, understand, read and write Mirandese, Portuguese, and Spanish.
Mirandese
1. NOT AT ALL 2. A LITTLE BIT 3. MORE OR LESS 4. QUITE WELL 5. VERY WELL Speak
Understand Read Write
37
Section D (questions 28 to 51) was completely based on Lasagabaster (2005) and consisted of 3 sets of 8 questions each. Each set focused on one of the three languages studied. 4 questions were about likes and dislikes in the four linguistic skills. We included these questions in order to compare them with the questions of the previous section. Moreover, asking about the same object but focusing on different components in each question (cognitive and affective, in this case) strengthens the internal reliability of the questionnaire (section 3.1). The other 4 questions focused on opinions about the importance and difficulty of learning it, the need for schools to offer it, and the participants´ wish for their future children to speak it. In this section, participants had to indicate their agreement on a scale from 1 to 5. Figure 11 shows an example of the question set in section D.
Portuguese
1. NOT AT ALL 2. A LITTLE BIT 3. MORE OR LESS 4. QUITE A LOT 5. ABSOLUTELY YESI like hearing Portuguese spoken
Portuguese should be taught to all pupils in Miranda
I like speaking Portuguese
Portuguese is a difficult language to learn
I like writing in Portuguese
I like reading in Portuguese
Portuguese is a language worth learning
If I have children, I would like them to speak Portuguese regardless of other languages they may know
Figure 11: Example of the question set in section D.
38
indicate their agreement on a scale from 1 to 5. Because questions in section D (likes and dislikes) and F (multilingualism) point to the similar objects but from different perspectives, we decided to place the questions about the R/ML in between both of them, to avoid repetition and prevent participants from getting bored or annoyed by the task.
Finally, section F (questions 55 to 63) was entirely based on Lasagabaster (2005) proposal of bearing multilingual parameters in mind (section 3.2). Due to the extension of the questionnaire and some differences in the linguistic setting and age of the participants, only 9 questions out of the original were included. Participants had to indicate their agreement on a scale from 1 to 5.
A last open question (Section H) were participants were invited to write freely was included but not incorporated in our analysis.
4.3 Procedure
In both groups, participants filled in the questionnaires during the regional/minority language hour at school. In Miranda de l Douro, both the Mirandese teacher and I were present during the task. The procedure was carried out in three different courses. The Mirandese teacher always started the class by presenting me briefly to the students. Afterwards, I would introduce myself again in more detail. The teacher spoke Mirandese and I spoke Spanish. All of the students could understand me, and some of them replied to me in Spanish. Otherwise, they mainly spoke Portuguese with me. During the task, some students had questions, and it was either the teacher or me who answered them. The students filled in a printed version of the questionnaire. After finishing the questionnaires, there was some extra time for more general questions. All of the students showed interest in filling in the questionnaire. None of the students refused to participate, and some of them expressed their interest in knowing the results of the study.
39
4.4 Analysis
The data obtained in section B of the questionnaire was used to answer the first two questions regarding language use with different kind of speakers, and media. In this case, data was analyzed through the means of descriptive statistics. Frequency analysis and subsequent percentage per answers were calculated. In this section, the language status variable had two levels: regional/minority language and state language 1. The dependent variables were nominal and grouped into speakers and media.
40
5-RESULTS
The present chapter shows the results obtained after analyzing the answers to questions 1 to 63 of the questionnaire. The organization of this chapter follows the research questions mentioned in section 3.4
5.1 Language Use: Speakers
a. Which languages do secondary school students in Miranda and Xixón use with other speakers? Is there a difference between groups?
This question was answered considering the answers obtained to questions 1 to 8 in section B of the questionnaire.
5.1.1 Miranda de l Douro
Table 16 shows the total number of answers on a scale from 1 to 5 obtained in Miranda de l Douro for questions 1 to 8 of the questionnaire. The columns show how many answers received each of the five points in the scale, and how many subjects selected the option ‘does not apply’. The rows show the distribution of answers according to the eight different kinds of speakers included in the questionnaire.
41 1- Only MI 2- More MI than PT 3- Both MI and PT 4- More PT than MI 5- Only PT 6- Does not apply Father 0 0 4 9 10 1 Mother 0 0 3 8 13 0 Siblings 0 0 1 8 9 6 Friends school 0 0 1 11 12 0 Friends not school 0 0 1 2 20 1 Teachers 0 0 0 0 24 0 Neighbours 1 3 3 5 12 0 Grandparents 5 5 2 5 7 0 6 8 15 48 107 8 3.1% 4.2% 7.8% 25.0% 55.7% 4.2%
Table16: Distribution of answers for questions 1 to 8 in Miranda de l Douro
5.1.2 Xixón
Table 17 shows the total number of answers obtained in Xixón for questions 1 to 8 of the questionnaire. The columns show how many answers received each of the five points in the scale, and how many subjects selected the option ‘does not apply’. The rows show the distribution of answers according to the speakers included in the questionnaire.
42 1- Only AS 2- More AS than SP 3- Both AS and SP 4- More SP than AS 5- Only SP 6- Does not apply Father 1 0 8 9 6 0 Mother 1 0 8 8 7 0 Siblings 1 1 7 6 6 3 Friends school 0 1 10 7 6 0 Friends not school 0 2 8 5 9 0 Teachers 0 0 5 6 13 0 Neighbours 0 3 8 1 10 2 Grandparents 1 2 7 5 8 1 4 9 61 47 65 6 2.1% 4.7% 31.7% 24.5% 33.8% 3.1%
Table17: Distribution of answers for questions 1 to 8 in Xixón
5.1.3 Comparison between both groups
43
Figure12: Total percentage of answers obtained in each region for questions 1 to 8.
5.2 Language Use: Media and Information Technology
b. Which languages do secondary school students in Miranda and Xixón use with media and information technology? Is there a difference between groups? This question was answered considering the answers obtained to questions 9 to 15 in section B of the questionnaire.
5.2.1 Miranda de l Douro
44 1- Only MI 2- More MI than PT 3- Both MI and PT 4- More PT than MI 5- Only PT 6- Does not apply Watch tv 0 1 0 2 19 2 Listen to music 0 1 1 9 11 2 Post facebook 0 0 0 4 18 2 Post twitter 0 0 0 1 12 11 Write emails 0 1 2 9 12 0 Read webpages 0 0 0 11 12 1 Send messages 0 0 0 5 18 1 0 3 3 41 102 19 0% 1.8% 1.8% 24.4% 60.7% 11.3%
Table18: Distribution of answers for questions 9 to 15 in Miranda de l Douro 5.2.2 Xixón
Table 19 shows the total number of answers obtained in Xixón for questions 9 to 15 in the questionnaire. The scores for the regional/minority language are very low. None of the actions is performed only in Asturian, and not even 1% is done more in Asturian than in Spanish. The percentage of actions performed equally in both languages increases in comparison with that of Miranda, although not drastically (10.7%). Most of the answers are distributed in between performing the action mainly in Spanish (20.9%), or only in Spanish (65.5%). Nevertheless, it is worth to mention that the questions involving the participants as language producers and not mere receptors (e.g. posting on Facebook vs. reading web pages), had a higher frequency of answers including Asturian.
1- Only AS 2- More AS than SP 3- Both AS and SP 4- More SP than AS 5- Only SP 6- Does not apply Watch tv 0 0 2 4 18 0 Listen to music 0 0 1 4 19 0 Post facebook 0 0 3 6 13 2 Post twitter 0 0 4 4 15 1 Write emails 0 0 1 6 16 1 Read web pages 0 0 1 4 19 0 Send messages 0 1 6 7 10 0 0 1 18 35 110 4 0% 0.6% 10.7% 20.9% 65.5% 2.4%
45
5.2.3 Comparison between both groups
Our expectations for this comparison (section 3.4) were partially confirmed. We expected low scores for the regional/minority language and, overall, that is what data shows. Nevertheless, we found different trends when comparing the groups. Figure 13 shows the aggregated percentage obtained for each of the six possible answers in the media section according to each region. It is visible how in both regions the state language 1 is highly dominant. Even though both regions behave similarly, it is to be noticed the higher percentage for the balanced bilingual answer obtained in Xixón. On the other hand, Miranda has a higher percentage of non-applicable questions, mainly related to the Twitter question, while in Xixón only one participant informed not using Twitter. Finally, it has already been mentioned that participants in Xixón informed using more Asturian when they are involved as language producers in the social networks.
46
5.3 Language proficiency
c. How proficient are secondary school students in Miranda and Xixón in the regional/minority language, Spanish and Portuguese? Is there a significant difference between groups?
This question was answered by analyzing the answers obtained to questions included in section C of the questionnaire (16 to 27).
5.3.1 Regional/minority language
Figure 14 shows the aggregated percentage obtained in Miranda for each of the five points in the scale when participants were asked about their proficiency in Mirandese according to the four different skills: writing, speaking, reading, and understanding. The overall proficiency in Mirandese has a positive trend. None of the four skills received a completely negative answer, which means these participants consider themselves having at least some knowledge and capability of using Mirandese. The skills in which they scored highest is reading and understanding. This shows that participants consider themselves having a higher proficiency in receptive skills rather than in the productive ones.
Figure14: Total percentage of answers obtained in Miranda for questions 16 to 19 of the questionnaire.
47
higher than the productive ones (writing and speaking). Overall, most of the participants rate themselves as having a good or quite good proficiency in Asturian.
Figure 15: Total percentage of answers obtained in Xixón for questions 16 to 19 of the questionnaire. 5.3.2 State language 1
In both regions, most of the participants consider themselves performing quite well or very well in every skill. In Miranda (figure 16), skills related to literacy (reading and writing) scored slightly lower than those related to orality (speaking and understanding). In Xixón (figure 17), the receptive skills rated higher than the productive skills.
48
Figure 17: Total percentage of answers obtained in Xixón for questions 20 to 23 of the questionnaire. 5.3.3 State language 2
Most participants in Miranda informed having at least some proficiency in Spanish (figure 18). Moreover, most of the answers are between points 3 and 4 of the scale. The writing skill was the one that scored lowest. On the other hand, in Xixón, the oral skills rated slightly higher than reading and writing (figure 19). Nevertheless, all of the answers for every skill are distributed between the first two points of the scale. This means that the vast majority of the participants in Xixón informed having no proficiency at all in Portuguese.
49
Figure19: Total percentage of answers obtained in Xixón for questions 24 to 27 of the questionnaire.
5.3.4 Overview results language proficiency
50 I can … in R/ML
understand speak write read
Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
AS 3.67 1.007 3.25 .944 3.29 .908 3.46 .932
MI 4 .834 3.33 .816 3.08 .776 3.54 .588
sig. .218 .745 .397 .713
F-value -1.249 -.327 .855 -.371
Table 20: Mean, standard deviation, significance, and F-value according to both groups for the question "I can [listen, speak, write, and read] in R/ML.
I can … in SL1
understand speak write read
Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
AS 4.58 .654 4.42 .717 4.21 .658 4.42 .654 MI 4.75 .442 4.58 .504 4.33 .702 4.54 .658
sig. .306 .356 .528 .512
F-value -1.034 -.932 -.636 -.660
Table 21: Mean, standard deviation, significance, and F-value according to both groups for the question "I can [listen, speak, write, and read] in SL1.
I can … in SL2
understand speak write read
Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
AS 1.29 .690 1.21 .414 1.04 .204 1.08 .282 MI 3.58 .830 3.00 1.022 2.38 1.173 3.08 1.139
sig. .000 .000 .000 .000
F-value -10.042 -7.961 -5.488 -8.350
Table 22: Mean, standard deviation, significance, and F-value according to both groups for the question "I can [listen, speak, write, and read] in SL2.
5.4 Language Likes
d. How do secondary school students in Miranda and Xixón like the regional/minority language, Spanish and Portuguese? Is there a significant difference between groups?
