1 Closing the policy–practice gap: making Indigenous language policy more than empty rhetoric

Abstract

Though there have been significant advances in some states and territories in reviving Indigenous languages, there are language mechanisms that constantly work throughout society to perpetuate the elevated status of the language of the dominant group -standard Australian English.These language mechanisms include language testing, education curricula and the media.They serve tointentionally or otherwise -undermine the legitimacy of and discriminate against certain non-dominant groups, such as speakers of Aboriginal English, creoles and traditional languages.Consequently a de facto or invisible form of language policy exists that is not explicitly written but is implicitly created: it privileges monolingualism over multilingualism and impedes full revitalisation and maintenance of Indigenous languages.The elevated status of English encourages a shift away from these languages and encourages speaker communities to accept -automatically, unconsciously and therefore without resistance -the hegemonic ideologies of the dominant socio-political group.This shift goes against certain human rights and has significant implications in the fields of health, education, law and social justice.This paper looks at the dominance of Standard Australian English (SAE) and its impact on Indigenous languages.Though the acquisition of English is important it does not need to work against the maintenance of languages as it is doing today.In fact building academic understanding using the home language can help develop competency in English.So the aim here is to raise awareness about the language ideologies that form the invisible language policy experienced in Australia today.An understanding of these invisible linguistic forces can provide language professionals and educators a means to deconstruct and decolonise the discriminatory processes that foster linguistic and cultural assimilation.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 121 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.