{"title":"Language policy in the Kingdom of Prussia at the junction of the 18th-19th centuries","authors":"Ona Aleknavičienė","doi":"10.15388/taikalbot.2021.16.4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The present paper examines the principles of the language policy designed in the Kingdom of Prussia at the junction of the 18th-19th centuries. This research aims to identify the main factors affecting the introduction of the Lithuanian language as the official regional language in the Kingdom of Prussia and to evaluate the parameters applied to such language planning. The main research objects in this study are the prefaces to Christian Gottlieb Mielcke’s dictionary Littauisch-deutsches und Deutsch-littauisches Wörter-Buch (1800) and the archival material of the end of the 18th century, which provide information on the preconditions, directions, goals, and objectives of the language policy of the time.The politics favorable to the Lithuanian language was preconditioned by the political changes in the 18th century. After the third partition of the Commonwealth of the Two Nations (1795) and with the annexation of Užnemunė to Prussia, the range of the Lithuanian language use expanded, and the ideas of regional particularism strengthened.Christoph Friedrich Heilsberg, the author of the third preface to Mielcke’s dictionary, a counsellor in the Königsberg Chamber of War and Domains, and an inspector of East Prussian schools, was well aware of the Lithuanian attitudes to the influence of language on identity, motives for language learning, legislation, and the potential of schools and churches. On the grounds of this versatile expertise, he undertook language status planning.With regards to Mielcke’s observation about civil servants who need to learn Lithuanian and the Lithuanian approach to language, Heilsberg took a practical position on language planning. He suggested expanding the Lithuanian language use in the public sphere rather than considering the idea of German as a common state language. At Heilsberg’s initiative, the Lithuanian language had to be used in such important areas as education, church, law, business, and administration. Heilsberg sought to ensure that it did not lose its cultural or administrative functions. Such plans presuppose the status of Lithuanian as an official regional language, equivalent to linguistic autonomy, where the language of a national minority has political autonomy and coexists with the official language of the state.Heilsberg initiated not only the development but also the implementation of language policy. He developed the directions and measures of corpus planning: to help non-Lithuanians to learn Lithuanian, he encouraged Mielcke to prepare a Lithuanian-German and German-Lithuanian dictionary and supervised the publication of a Lithuanian grammar and a collection of sermons. This highlights the priorities of his education policy, which aimed to develop the language skills of teachers and priests, and to create conditions for civil servants working in the province to learn the Lithuanian language.Three statements of Heilsberg as a high-ranking state official were important for increasing the prestige of the Lithuanian language: 1) language is a guarantor of identity; 2) provincial languages must be learned by civil servants and not vice versa; and 3) language must be nurtured.The author of the fourth preface to Mielcke’s dictionary, the German philosopher Immanuel Kant, raised the criterion of language purity. Considering that only pure language is important for the maintenance of the nation’s distinctiveness, for science, and especially history, he emphasized the need to preserve the purity of language and proposed two ways to achieve this: to use pure language in schools and churches, and to expand the domains of its use.This is the earliest attempt in the history of Prussian Lithuanian culture to give the Lithuanian language the status of an official regional language. Such policy ensured its functioning in all spheres of public life, its use in the education system, and created conditions for maintaining identity.","PeriodicalId":34080,"journal":{"name":"Taikomoji kalbotyra","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Taikomoji kalbotyra","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15388/taikalbot.2021.16.4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The present paper examines the principles of the language policy designed in the Kingdom of Prussia at the junction of the 18th-19th centuries. This research aims to identify the main factors affecting the introduction of the Lithuanian language as the official regional language in the Kingdom of Prussia and to evaluate the parameters applied to such language planning. The main research objects in this study are the prefaces to Christian Gottlieb Mielcke’s dictionary Littauisch-deutsches und Deutsch-littauisches Wörter-Buch (1800) and the archival material of the end of the 18th century, which provide information on the preconditions, directions, goals, and objectives of the language policy of the time.The politics favorable to the Lithuanian language was preconditioned by the political changes in the 18th century. After the third partition of the Commonwealth of the Two Nations (1795) and with the annexation of Užnemunė to Prussia, the range of the Lithuanian language use expanded, and the ideas of regional particularism strengthened.Christoph Friedrich Heilsberg, the author of the third preface to Mielcke’s dictionary, a counsellor in the Königsberg Chamber of War and Domains, and an inspector of East Prussian schools, was well aware of the Lithuanian attitudes to the influence of language on identity, motives for language learning, legislation, and the potential of schools and churches. On the grounds of this versatile expertise, he undertook language status planning.With regards to Mielcke’s observation about civil servants who need to learn Lithuanian and the Lithuanian approach to language, Heilsberg took a practical position on language planning. He suggested expanding the Lithuanian language use in the public sphere rather than considering the idea of German as a common state language. At Heilsberg’s initiative, the Lithuanian language had to be used in such important areas as education, church, law, business, and administration. Heilsberg sought to ensure that it did not lose its cultural or administrative functions. Such plans presuppose the status of Lithuanian as an official regional language, equivalent to linguistic autonomy, where the language of a national minority has political autonomy and coexists with the official language of the state.Heilsberg initiated not only the development but also the implementation of language policy. He developed the directions and measures of corpus planning: to help non-Lithuanians to learn Lithuanian, he encouraged Mielcke to prepare a Lithuanian-German and German-Lithuanian dictionary and supervised the publication of a Lithuanian grammar and a collection of sermons. This highlights the priorities of his education policy, which aimed to develop the language skills of teachers and priests, and to create conditions for civil servants working in the province to learn the Lithuanian language.Three statements of Heilsberg as a high-ranking state official were important for increasing the prestige of the Lithuanian language: 1) language is a guarantor of identity; 2) provincial languages must be learned by civil servants and not vice versa; and 3) language must be nurtured.The author of the fourth preface to Mielcke’s dictionary, the German philosopher Immanuel Kant, raised the criterion of language purity. Considering that only pure language is important for the maintenance of the nation’s distinctiveness, for science, and especially history, he emphasized the need to preserve the purity of language and proposed two ways to achieve this: to use pure language in schools and churches, and to expand the domains of its use.This is the earliest attempt in the history of Prussian Lithuanian culture to give the Lithuanian language the status of an official regional language. Such policy ensured its functioning in all spheres of public life, its use in the education system, and created conditions for maintaining identity.
本文考察了18至19世纪初普鲁士王国制定的语言政策的原则。本研究旨在确定影响立陶宛语作为普鲁士王国官方地区语言引入的主要因素,并评估适用于此类语言规划的参数。本研究的主要研究对象是克里斯蒂安·戈特利布·米尔克(Christian Gottlieb Mielcke)的字典《德意志语与德意志语》(Littauisch deutsches und Deutsch littauisches Wörter Buch)(1800)的序言和18世纪末的档案材料,它们提供了关于当时语言政策的前提、方向、目标和目的的信息。有利于立陶宛语的政治是以18世纪的政治变革为前提的。在第三次分裂英联邦(1795年)后,随着Užnemunï并入普鲁士,立陶宛语言的使用范围扩大,地区特殊主义的思想得到加强。克里斯托夫·弗里德里希·海尔斯伯格是米尔克词典第三序言的作者,也是柯尼斯堡战争与领地商会的顾问,也是东普鲁士学校的督学,他非常清楚立陶宛人对语言对身份、语言学习动机、立法以及学校和教堂潜力的影响的态度。基于这种多才多艺的专业知识,他进行了语言状况规划。关于米尔克对需要学习立陶宛语的公务员和立陶宛语言方法的观察,海尔斯伯格在语言规划方面采取了务实的立场。他建议扩大立陶宛语在公共领域的使用,而不是考虑将德语作为一种共同的国家语言。在Heilsberg的倡议下,立陶宛语必须用于教育、教会、法律、商业和行政等重要领域。Heilsberg试图确保它不会失去其文化或行政职能。这些计划以立陶宛语作为官方地区语言的地位为前提,相当于语言自治,少数民族的语言具有政治自治权,并与国家的官方语言共存。Heilsberg不仅开创了语言政策的发展,而且还推动了语言政策实施。他制定了语料库规划的方向和措施:为了帮助非立陶宛人学习立陶宛语,他鼓励米尔克编写立陶宛德语和德语立陶宛语词典,并监督出版立陶宛语法和布道集。这突出了他的教育政策的优先事项,该政策旨在培养教师和牧师的语言技能,并为在该省工作的公务员学习立陶宛语创造条件。Heilsberg作为一名高级国家官员的三项声明对提高立陶宛语的声望很重要:1)语言是身份的保证;2) 公务员必须学习省级语言,反之亦然;3)语言必须培养。米尔克词典第四序的作者、德国哲学家康德提出了语言纯洁性的标准。考虑到只有纯语言对保持国家的独特性、科学,尤其是历史很重要,他强调了保持语言纯洁性的必要性,并提出了两种实现这一目标的方法:在学校和教堂使用纯语言,以及扩大其使用领域。这是普鲁士立陶宛文化史上最早试图赋予立陶宛语官方地区语言的地位。这种政策确保了它在公共生活的各个领域发挥作用,在教育系统中使用,并为保持身份创造了条件。