Promises Made or Promises Kept?

M. J. Selinger
{"title":"Promises Made or Promises Kept?","authors":"M. J. Selinger","doi":"10.32396/usurj.v8i1.571","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Reverberating effects of the Indian Residential School system's legacy continue to threaten Indigenous languages. In establishing the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC), all levels of Canadian governments and civil society received 94 ‘Calls to Action’ in coming to terms with Canada’s colonial past and rooted inequities. Some of these Calls stress the need to revive and preserve Indigenous languages. Statistics prove the existence of this decline. Government commissions and Indigenous governing bodies warn of the implications of neglecting this unique crisis facing Indigenous communities nationwide. With the introduction of the Indigenous Languages Act in 2016, the federal government appears ready to commit to the TRC’s recommendations on Indigenous language revitalization. However, what this research finds are that Canadian provincial and federal governments have much room for improvement. This paper assesses the details of legislation and compares inconsistencies with promises made and the results of government inaction. Therefore, contrary to Canada’s optimism, the steps it takes to revitalize Indigenous languages are inadequate and require significant rethinking to prove truly effective.","PeriodicalId":351398,"journal":{"name":"USURJ: University of Saskatchewan Undergraduate Research Journal","volume":"47 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"USURJ: University of Saskatchewan Undergraduate Research Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.32396/usurj.v8i1.571","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Reverberating effects of the Indian Residential School system's legacy continue to threaten Indigenous languages. In establishing the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC), all levels of Canadian governments and civil society received 94 ‘Calls to Action’ in coming to terms with Canada’s colonial past and rooted inequities. Some of these Calls stress the need to revive and preserve Indigenous languages. Statistics prove the existence of this decline. Government commissions and Indigenous governing bodies warn of the implications of neglecting this unique crisis facing Indigenous communities nationwide. With the introduction of the Indigenous Languages Act in 2016, the federal government appears ready to commit to the TRC’s recommendations on Indigenous language revitalization. However, what this research finds are that Canadian provincial and federal governments have much room for improvement. This paper assesses the details of legislation and compares inconsistencies with promises made and the results of government inaction. Therefore, contrary to Canada’s optimism, the steps it takes to revitalize Indigenous languages are inadequate and require significant rethinking to prove truly effective.
许下的承诺还是兑现的承诺?
印第安寄宿学校制度遗留下来的影响继续威胁着土著语言。在成立真相与和解委员会时,加拿大各级政府和民间社会收到了94份“行动呼吁”,要求正视加拿大的殖民历史和根深蒂固的不平等。其中一些呼吁强调必须复兴和保护土著语言。统计数据证明了这种下降的存在。政府委员会和土著管理机构警告说,忽视全国土著社区面临的这一独特危机的影响。随着2016年《土著语言法案》的出台,联邦政府似乎准备履行TRC关于土著语言振兴的建议。然而,这项研究发现,加拿大省级和联邦政府有很大的改进空间。本文评估了立法的细节,比较了与承诺的不一致和政府不作为的结果。因此,与加拿大的乐观相反,它为振兴土著语言所采取的步骤是不够的,需要进行重大的重新思考才能证明真正有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信