Talk:National language

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 August 2019 and 11 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Wendell guan.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 04:58, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Review of the Article

Predicate of the first sentence

"A national language is a language (or language variant, e.g. dialect) that has some connection—de facto or de jure—with and the territory they occupy."

Proposed Correction: "with the territory within which it is spoken".

Rationale: Cursory reading of the pertained sentence, the phrase "xxx with and the territory they occupy" simply don't make sense in as much as it does not conform with basic grammar. To clarify, a language don't occupy a territory that the term "occupy" is simply not the appropriate term to use to best articulate the sense for which the sentence is constructed. The plural pronoun "they" (xxx territory they occupy) is not only a misrepresentation of the subject being "A national language" expressed in singular form. Said use of pronoun could have been more appropriate had the form of the subject been likewise in plural that is, "National languages". Particularly, the Article "A" and the (linking) verb "is" should have been considered in the use of the aforesaid pronoun "they".

Definition by construction: The complete term subject of this review is "National language" thus be it noted that the term consists of two (2) terms: national and language. More than the scarcity of related literature (assuming the fact of the matter), it more objective for an observation to state that the article seem to have based the focus exclusively on the latter without taking as much consideration with the former. This observation is better explained given the question; "How is a given language related with the nation where such language is spoken?"

Discussion geared towards qualifying level of preference, usage parameters and perhaps, legislative signification are the paramount topics sufficient to satisfy the topic question. Unfortunately with the Article that is obviously wanting a more objective discourse, the focus and concern of the contributing Lexicographer simply out-of-place. For one, the list provided (which, plain reading gives the impression the purpose is to achieve accuracy by completeness if not otherwise some sublime motives) is simply suggestive that gives away the displaced focus of the composition. It is beyond debate the purpose of the list is to show instances of relevance between a NATIONAL VERSUS OFFICIAL LANGUAGES. That, (if at all necessary) should be a topic of an entry of its own.

Said elsewise, the personal bias and preference -- PARTIALITY -- of the approach or choice of scope of the discussion in so being focused too much on insisting relevance between a "NATIONAL LANGUAGE" and an "OFFICIAL LANGUAGE" caused such flaw in the composition in a manner so palpable it requires attention. Note that the entry intended a technical lexicon not a comparative discourse. While there are instances when said terms are used interchangeably, it is the opinion of this Reviewing Technical Contributor that the better and preferred approach is to provide both the terms of their separate and distinct entries in the body of the Wikipedia Lexicon.

Perhaps other reviews will agree with the observation that instead of the Article providing a clear distinctive definition and delineation of principles involved relative the more significant purpose for which the Article is written (provide lexicographical reference on the term "National Language"), the article unfortunately is constructed in such a manner which composition implies THE NEED to link as per definition and significance the terms "NATIONAL LANGAUGE" AND "OFFICIAL LANGAUGE". Objectivity therefore is palpably compromised that the Contributing Lexicographer sounded not a technical writer but an advocate trying to disseminate an idea or a cause. Hence, the foregoing review submitted for the appreciation of the community for appropriate revision and development of the subject entry.

Thank you User:ScriptOriumTerminus, for this review, which was added to the top of the page on 1 July 2017. Given mention of possible other reviews, would it be appropriate to relocate this edit in the chronological stream below (perhaps with section title in CAPS), and encourage other reviews to do the same? (Unless of course there is a WP policy to put reviews at the head of discussion pages.) IMO that would help following the evolution of discussion, such as it has been and as it develops. --A12n (talk) 14:27, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Untitled

This article needs to include some counterexamples. It's also unclear whether the term "nation" is intended in a political sense, or one which is closer to "ethnic group". --Tbv 10:17, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Tangential to Tbv's suggestion, the intro to the article could use a rewrite to accommodate wider geographical scope. In particular, "national language" in a number of African countries refers to an indigenous language with some legal status (as opposed to official language). Even in this context, "national language" may cover a few more widely spoken languages, or all indigenous tongues. And then there are some instances where "national language" is used in a sense like "official language" - I agree that the article needs attention from an expert. --A12n 00:45, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

I added a "globalize" tag. --A12n 20:05, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

National Languages of India - info here differs from another wiki page!

Out of the 28 states and 7 union territories, only 10 states and 3 union territories have Hindi as the principal official language.

This does not fit in with Official languages of India which has Hindi against 12 states and 2 Union Territories. -- Q Chris 13:39, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

The National Language Of India Is Hindi. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kumarp8390 (talk • contribs) 00:20, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

The remark above does not seem to describe the current content of the Official languages of India article. I suggest (1) that India-specific information be moved to a section headed ==India== introduced with a {{See also|Official languages of India}}, (2) that the ==Official versus national languages== section be reworked to more clearly describe differences/relationships between official languages versus national languages. Cites of sources defining the terms Official Language and National Language would be helpful.-- Boracay Bill 00:07, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

The current page 06:26, 8 March 2007 [1] has Hindi the 12 states

1. Arunachal Pradesh
2. Bihar
3. Chhattisgarh
4. Gujarat
5. Haryana
6. Himachal Pradesh
7. Jharkhand
8. Madhya Pradesh
9. Rajasthan
10. Uttarakhand
11. Uttar Pradesh
12. Delhi

It is also given for the two Union terratories

1. Andaman and Nicobar Islands
2. Chandigarh

As I said before this seems to differ from the information on this page. -- Q Chris 08:38, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Ah. I think I see now. You are working from a list which you put together from the table in the ==Official languages - State Governments== section of the Official languages of India article. The list names the 12 states which that table describes as having Hindi as a state language. I, OTOH, was working from the statement in the Intro of that article which currently reads: "Out of the 28 states and 7 union territories, only 10 states and 3 union territories have Hindi as the principal official language." I think this would be better addressed if discussed in the talk page of that article than in the talk page of this one.

Regarding this National Language article

• I still think this article would be improved if its India-specific portions were moved into a section headed ==India==, introduced with {{See also|Official languages of India}}, and with that new ==India== section of this article containing a small bit of info based on info in that other article, per the relevant section of the Wikipedia guide to layout.
• I still think that the ====Official versus national languages== section of this article does not do a good job of explaining that topic.

I propose that the India-specific remarks be moved as described above and that the ==Official versus national languages== section be removed. Comments? Objections? -- Boracay Bill 22:30, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Redundancy and wikidef--Peter ^Isotalo 07:48, 16 November 2007 (UTC)initions

I believe that this article to a great extent is largely redundant with standard language. As far as I know the concept of a "national language" isn't something that lends itself to encyclopedic definition very easily. The most urgent task that needs to be addressed is a serious, preferably academic source, that attempts to pin down a meaning. I don't know what linguists feel about the term, but when I searched for it at dictionary.com I got a definition that was extremely vague. Merger and a redirect to official language might be much wiser.

Peter ^Isotalo 00:51, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

This article doesn't seem to have a consistent definition of what a national language is or of how (or whether) a national language differs from an official language. According to dictionary.com, Webster says: "the language spoken and written by the majority of people in a country; also, the official language of a country, recognized and adopted by its government". (Webster's New Millennium™ Dictionary of English, Preview Edition (v 0.9.7). Lexico Publishing Group, LLC. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/national%20language (accessed: November 15, 2007).) I don't think that quite captures it, though -- Singapore is a refuting example, as is Afghanistan (according to List of official languages by state).

The lead section of this article has problems. The first sentence looks OK, but the rest of the section has problems as follows (I've commented on each):

• A national language is used for political and legal discourse.
  Comment: In the section on Singapore, this article states that the Malay language is the national and official language, but that English is the language of business and governance and the medium of instruction in public schools. Other refuting examples probably exist.
• Some countries have more than one national language, such as Canada which uses both French and English.
  Comment: The Constitution of Canada does not designate a national language. Section 16 designates French and English as official languages.
• A national language declared as such by legislation is the same as an Official language.
  Comment: see the Philippines section of this article for a refuting example.
• It is different for that reason from the national predominant language, which is a national language only through de facto use or by historical association with a particular nation.
  Comment: I don't follow this.

Also, the "Official versus national languages" section doesn't seem to address that topic.

How about removing that section header and replacing the current lead section with something like the following:

“ A national language is a language (or language variant, i.e. dialect) which represents the national identity of a nation or country.

Some governments have officially designated particular languages as national languages, others have not. Some governments have designated minority languages as their national language. Some governments have designated particular languages as "official languages", sometimes so designating other than those designated as "national languages".

Some languages of stateless nations are not officially designated as national languages in any country. Some have no government recognition, while others may enjoy a high degree of official recognition. National languages that are not officially recognized might include Aromanian, Cherokee, and Navajo (and other living Native American languages).

”

-- Boracay Bill 05:45, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

The concept of an official language isn't as strictly defined as you're trying to make it, Bill. For example, there are plenty of de facto official languages around the world. Swedish in Sweden (but not in Finland) is one good example. Citing official legislation and constitutions of states around the world as isn't the way to go, since that would basically become an interpretation of a type of primary sources and a highly legalistic one. What the article needs is the opinions of linguists or other scholars. If they can't provide a clearly independent deifinion, the article should be merged with official language.

Peter ^Isotalo 07:48, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Peter is right about de facto official languages. The US is a prime example, but there are many. There are also "middle cases," if you will, where there is no broad "official language" legislation, but the language of the legislature is specified etc. On the question of "national language," there are cases notably in Africa where this is a specific legal category, different from official language. It is tricky to define "national language" generically, but it deserves a separate article (or perhaps articles?) to define it. The current article tries, but needs a broader international and expert input. --A12n (talk) 23:40, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Some changes & some more thoughts

Pursuant to the above discussion I made a few changes in the opening. These are but first stabs - please feel free to do more.

I think the earlier comment that the definition is vague is at least partly correct. There are several concepts - national language, official language, regional language, standard language, and perhaps some others - that overlap somewhat yet are sometimes appropriated for specific use in different contexts. On the lgpolicy-list someone not too long ago asked "what the h... is an 'official language' anyway?" It can mean a number of things, and indeed it can be something to talk about (as a legislative goal to somehow address this or that), as well as something that functionally exists without anyone talking about or legislating it. As it turns out, one of the scholars on that list came up with a more or less established definition.

It may be that there is such a definition for national language (I should ask there). But in any event, I would not agree at this time merging this article with official language or any other. For one thing there is also the "regional language" category, which the Democratic Republic of the Congo uses. How is this different than "national language" in African contexts where one national language happens to be dominant in one region and another in another, but no one wants to call them regional languages (probably this is the case in Niger)? --A12n (talk) 00:49, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Quick follow-up. Another way of looking at "national language" is that it has at least a couple of different senses:

• "The national language of a nation." (where nation may or may not be a nation-state and the status of the "national language" may be such by custom or legislation)
• "A national language of the nation." (where nation is a country [state but not necessarily with the sense of nation above] and "national language" is a legislated category) --A12n (talk) 13:46, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

CMB Brann reference

I added a paragraph about C.M.B. Brann's typology of "national language." I think it is a useful perspective. National language is a term variously used and it may take a while to reshape this article to more fully and consistently reflect that. The Brann reference might be better in another part of the article, especially if others find some other ways of categorizing the range of uses of this term. --A12n (talk) 23:33, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

4 Definitions

Could we get an expansion on the C. M. B. Brann definitions, as there doesn't seem to be anything distinguishing most of them. --Khajidha (talk) 20:30, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Just reread the definitions, and while I agree there can be overlap, there also seem to be pretty clear distinctions. A language might be "national language" in one or more of the senses Brann outlines, but not in other senses. An expansion of discussion of his definitions would be merited, but at the same time it would be useful to have other definitions. In discussions I've had on the topic, I've referred to a simpler two category schema, but only to get away from what I see as the uncritical (and misleading, IMO) use of "national language" for the Europhone official languages of many African states: "nationwide" (in intended or actual function, on some level; French may be the national language of France, for instance, but it is not "national" in the same sense in say Mali or Senegal, and indeed "national language" may in such countries have a different use - see the following sense); and "language of the nation" (as in a first & heritage language of some part of the population of the country, but not the official language). Are there other definitions for how "national language" is used, that differ from or expand upon/refine Brann's schema?--A12n (talk) 18:26, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Okay, here is the version in the article: "

   "Territorial language" (chthonolect, sometimes known as chtonolect[2]) of a particular people
   "Regional language" (choralect)
   "Language-in-common or community language" (demolect) used throughout a country
   "Central language" (politolect) used by government and perhaps having a symbolic value."

No definition at all is given for Regional language.

Territorial language is defined in terms of people? The name would seem to indicate to the uninformed reader that it is the language spoken in a particular territory, which is also what an uninformed reader might understand Regional language to be.

Community language, the name of which seems to indicate that it is based on which people speak it is defined as being spoken in a particular place?

Central language is the only one that seems to have a clear and separate definition. --Khajidha (talk) 18:42, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Coming back to this belatedly. Not sure if Brann expanded on this typology elsewhere, or if anyone else did. The meanings seem clear to me, even if the English terms may be problematic (and the parenthetical terms obscure):

• territorial/chthonolect being common in Africa where a government designates languages of certain or all ethnic groups as "national languages" within the national territory (such language may also be used as L2s on some scale); I understand this being really more related to ethnicity than geography, however (see next category), and that may be due to interspersed ethnolinguistic populations, not neatly associated with one or another particular area
• regional/choralect being like the national languages in DRC, which are used as L1+L2 mainly in one region or another, such that they have also been referred to as regional languages - may be this is really regional languages, but the term "national language" is applied for whatever reason; here the reference is more geographic than the preceding
• in-common/community/demolect being the common use in the West as the common language of a country (L1 of vast majority and lingua franca for others) - such that one identifies French as national language of France (but French would not be the national language of Senegal in this sense, nor in Senegalese law, but would fall under the following category)
• central/politolect - I read this as official language (itself a problematic category, but like national language, widely used in various registers); as such it may have symbolic value on the national level, such that this is often termed "national language" (confusingly, and I'd suggest inappropriately, given the range of other meanings).

Agree that it would be useful to also have alternative ways of describing use of "national language." Haven't sourced any, but hope others can. --A12n (talk) 15:57, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Multiple issues since 2007

Yep, it seems a mistake, looking at the thin sourcing for this article, to regard "national language" as a coherent category at all for an article in a general-purpose encyclopedia. This is not terminology preferred by actual linguistics researchers who study the use of various languages in countries around the world. Where are good sources for use of this term in language surveys or specialized studies of language use? -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 15:20, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

The lead section seems to adequately explain that language surveys or specialized studies of language use is not the only use of this term. Perhaps, if it's important and if a reliable supporting source can be cited, a mention could be added that this term is not commonly used in those regards. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 07:50, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

I'd offer that an encyclopedic (wikipedic) article such as this on "national language" is needed precisely due to the range and often imprecision of usage. That would include who uses it how to refer to what (and as WeijiBaikeBianji indicates, who does not use it).--A12n (talk) 16:07, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi, A12n, I see you've made some commendable efforts here to identify sources for this article. I'll be examining this article for sourcing (not necessarily just the parts of the article that have been edited recently by anyone joining the talk page discussion here) with the Wikipedia reliable sources guideline in mind. Thanks for joining the discussion of article improvements here. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (Watch my talk, How I edit) 19:51, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Ethnologue's use of "national language"

As background information of possible use/interest wrt this article, here are links to a couple of blog posts on how Ethnologue has used the term "national language," and the juxtaposition of that with a (the?) widely used sense of the term in Africa:

• Ethnologue and "national languages" in Africa (5 Dec 2013)
• Ethnologue: "National" and "Principal" languages in Africa (14 Oct 2014)--A12n (talk) 16:15, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

An African definition of "national language"

In 1979, a "Subregional Seminar on National Languages and Teacher Training" held in Dar es Salaam defined "national language" as follows:

a national language is defined strictly as either (a) an African language that is also an official language, or (b) a language that has been decreed to be a national language of a country. It must be noted that according to this definition:

- all mother tongues are not necessarily national languages

- French, English, Portuguese, and Spanish are not national languages, even though they may be official languages

This was cited in work in the mid 1980s, but I do not have references that have used it since. However, it is consistent with use of the term "national language" by many African countries. (See here for more discussion.)--A12n (talk) 16:30, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Article not appearing in categories

Apparently something in the multiple issues template suppresses listing of the page in its categories. I added |nocat=false but that had the weird effect of moving all articles starting with "N" in each of the categories before the letter "A." So reverted pending a better solution.--A12n (talk) 00:38, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on National language. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140209234154/http://www.anc.tn/site/main/AR/docs/constit_proj_26012014.pdf to http://www.anc.tn/site/main/AR/docs/constit_proj_26012014.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100907081446/http://www.opsi.gov.uk/legislation/scotland/acts2005/asp_20050007_en_1 to http://www.opsi.gov.uk/legislation/scotland/acts2005/asp_20050007_en_1

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:29, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

An NGO definition of national language

For info, the NGO FHI 360 has the following definition for national language in its Working Glossary: Language in Education Terms - "A language in a country that is not a colonial language (e.g., in DRC, the national languages are Lingala, Kiswahili, Ciluba, and Kituba)." This is a little different from other definitions, and may be another reference point in discussing how this article covers the topic.--A12n (talk) 21:53, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Definition

It seems to me that, in absence of a single definition or clear academic consensus, it is beyond the scope of Wikipedia to try to define the term 'national language'. Perhaps we should expand the page to include the various definitions outlined here, and any others that might be relevant, and rework the list of country-specific examples to cover all options? Taking Canada as an example, right now it specifies the official languages at the national level as well as some sub-national levels. The United States as another example does not have a legally defined official language but by some definitions, namely what language government business is conducted in, English is a national language. For nations with multiple languages of varying degrees of official-ness, this might be the easiest way to go. If we try to be inclusive with definitions and write everything under the guise of the various definitions hopefully the page will become much clearer and more useful! AntarcticPenguin (talk) 04:35, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

This sounds like a reasonable approach. I think the original effort was to begin with some overarching description that encompassed the diverse definitions. The term is in common use, present in policy documents (and constitutions), and used in academic literature. A user coming to this article needs to get a sense of diverse meanings. The comparison to "official language" which User:ScriptOriumTerminus's review questions was I think relevant to the extent that on the one hand, the two terms are sometimes confused, and on the other, some policy documents and constitutions actually use both.--A12n (talk) 14:27, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Excellent! Although I do have to say I'm a little stuck as to what we would use as an overarching description. Something to the effect of: "the term national language refers, in general, to a language (or dialect?) associated with a particular group, whether that be a geographical region, an ethnic or cultural group, or a political entity like a state"? That seems to cover all of the potential definitions, but it's a little wordy... any thoughts on how to make it a bit clearer?AntarcticPenguin (talk) 01:13, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Philip Baker on definitions of "national language"

Came across another discussion of the ways the term is used (from: BAKER, PHILIP (1997): "Developing ways of writing vernaculars: problems and solutions in a historical perspective". In Vernacular Literacy: a re-evaluation, éds. A. Tabouret-Keller, et al. Oxford University Press, pages 93-141; cited in David Roberts, L'ORTHOGRAPHE DU TON EN KABIYÈ AU BANC D'ESSAI : Thèse pour obtenir le grade de Docteur en études africaines présentée et soutenue publiquement le 29 septembre 2008):

"[In the 1950s], 'national language' had two distinct definitions (i) 'officially declared to be the national language of a state' and (ii) 'language of a nation'. In the colonial era, (i) was frequently and not always accurately interpreted as meaning 'the indigenous language spoken by the majority of the population', in contrast to the 'official language' of the colonial power. The meaning of (ii) varied according to one's definition of the word 'nation'. In more recent times, in Africa at least, 'national language' has come to be applied to any indigenous language in which literacy is encouraged by the government."

This would seem to support an approach to the article here leading with mention of two broad alternative definitions of the term. --A12n (talk) 14:27, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Oops, I did not see this until after writing my comment above. This looks like an excellent summary of the multiple definitions and it appears to have been cited enough times by other authors to justify it as a reasonably authoritative source. Do you have time to try to incorporate this into the lead, or would you like me to try to do it in the next few days? AntarcticPenguin (talk) 01:20, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Czechia / Czech Republic

The edit summary of this revert caught my eye. It says: There is a consensus on Wikipedia to call it Czech Republic, at least until November 29, 2020, legal name or not.

The only interest I have in this is that I have a Czech/Canadian friend; he doesn't follow WP, and I doubt that he would be up-to-the-minute on this anyhow. I dug around a bit and eventually came up with Name of the Czech Republic#Adoption of Czechia. Having found that, I thought I would mention it here. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 11:57, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

History of the concept

A new section should be made dedicated to discussing the history of the concept of national language and how it came about. For starters, it has been said that the establishment of Parisian French as the sole national language of the new republic in the aftermath of the French Revolution was the first time ever that language was associated with nation. KLITE789 (talk) 02:57, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Nepal section : edit request

The constitution of Nepal has entitled "national language" status to all languages spoken in Nepal. Requesting to edit the current content as follows: The Constitution of Nepal recognizes all mother tongues of Nepal as national languages. The official language at federal level is Nepali, while provinces can provide official status to one or more than one language spoken by majority of population. — Preceding unsigned comment added by थकुराःमा (talk • contribs) 19:39, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

@थकुराःमा: Thank you for the well-formulated edit request with sources. One important question: which of the two linked documents is relevant here? The second document says in Part I "6. Languages of the nation: All languages spoken as the mother tongues in Nepal are the languages of the nation". This is a charming way to say that Nepal actually does not have a national language, nor any privileged language (like the scheduled languages of India) aside from Nepali as official language. –Austronesier (talk) 10:45, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

@Austronesier: If we had to choose, we could choose the second one. Because it is the official law website run by government of Nepal. Things get lost in translation. The official Nepali version says ६. राष्ट्रभाषाः नेपालमा बोलिने सबै मातृभाषाहरू राष्ट्रभाषा हुन् । which means 6. National language: All mother languages spoken in Nepal are national language. But the official translation provided seems to use 'language of the nation'. So probably 'Nepal actually does not have a national language' may be misleading. Nepal has national languages, but the problem is how many. The census says 123. Language Commission has identified 6 additional language last year. There's also been debate on this constitutional provision as 'vague' because linguists argue that census has recorded foreign languages such as Bengali, Arabic, French and English in the mother tongue list, and that linguists have to identify 'languages of Nepali origin'. --थकुराःमा (talk) 09:29, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

@थकुराःमा: We could use mention the use of राष्ट्रभाषा in the constitution, and also that it can be variously translated as "national language" or "language of the nation". But I think the intended meaning is different from the common usage of "national language", which implies a language that is taught in school and spoken (natively or as a second language) nationwide (in real or at least politically aspired). But nobody will expect that e.g. Kagate can be understood nationwide, so the wide scope राष्ट्रभाषा seems to imply something like recognition for all native languages of Nepal. I guess the main point of the authors of the constitution was to wisely avoid a two-class system of languages as it exists e.g. in India. –Austronesier (talk) 10:00, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

@Austronesier: Yes, it is the product of linguistic rights movement. The historical context is that any language apart from Nepali was not considered as national language, and therefore labelled as 'anti-national' or 'ethnic'. Nepali was associated with 'being Nepali' (also people critique the language being named as 'Nepali'. The constitution still places Nepali over all other languages, but the intent was to break this hegemony. --थकुराःमा (talk) 10:06, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

References

krio

singula kɔnsonat leta n exampul 197.215.23.20 (talk) 12:19, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

adit tya 120.188.36.119 (talk) 06:14, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

Not the same thing as an "official language"

As the disambiguation hatnote indicates, this is not the same thing as an official language. Many of the examples here are not referred to as national languages in the sources, but only as official languages. Brusquedandelion (talk) 04:18, 28 October 2024 (UTC)