Constitutional Regulation of Multilingualism in Spain
Constitutional Regulation of Multilingualism in Spain
There is good reason to redirect the focus and position the center of the analysis of the constitutional regulation of multilingualism in the statement that appears at the bottom of the precept: “The richness of the different linguistic modalities of Spain is a cultural heritage that will receive special respect and protection.” As much as these words belong to the last paragraph of Article 3, they are certainly the first in the logic of the article.
Notable is the idea of Spain as a country with a plural linguistic reality, while speaking in different language modalities. However, it remains a rather vague idea of the substantive meaning of “modalities”. This term could have two meanings:
- Restricted: to refer only to the dialects of the languages of Spain.
- Wide: it can be understood that, in addition to the above, it also designates the native languages of Spain and, as one among them, the Spanish language.
Why lean towards one interpretation? We think towards the second, and there are several reasons. Firstly, stating that “mode” is a concept deeply rooted in sociolinguistics is very precise for the sciences of language, and the general dictionaries of the language do not offer a clear definition to settle the question of interpretation. In the absence of a lexical solution, we agree to resort to a systematic interpretation of the criteria and parliamentary history. And here is where things are clarified enough.
Arguments for the Wider Interpretation
1. Parliamentary History
“This article is not a hierarchical gradation of three distinct paragraphs so that the first paragraph should refer to Castilian, the second to the other languages of Spain, and in the third, we would include these other manifestations of the linguistic richness of Spain (likely, Panocho or Fragatino). We understand that paragraph 3 should have an application that can bring in their interpretation of the two preceding paragraphs.”
2. Systematic Interpretation of the Provision
The logic that we derive from this criterion is overwhelming: If what the article aims to evaluate is the linguistic reality as a cultural heritage of Spain, how could it be interpreted that only dialectal forms, ancillary linguistic realities, and not the major languages? The main living languages of Spain have this privileged access to constitutional consideration? We conclude that “the richness of the different linguistic modalities” covers the total linguistic reality of Spain.
The Substantive Meaning of “Wealth”
This term contains subtle nuances of great importance for the full understanding of the constitutional regulation model of multilingualism. The key lies in that the object of protection is not the linguistic modalities of Spain themselves, but rather the wealth of them. The presence of this substantive outlines two basic ideas:
- The conception of the linguistic diversity of Spain as a united whole reinforces its consideration as a cultural heritage.
- An evaluative and positive consideration of the diverse reality.
In short, the Constitution clearly indicates that what is currently valued is not each of these languages and varieties separately, but all of them together and their own diversity as a positive legacy of history, as a common cultural heritage.
Merits of the Constitutional Formula
The greatest merit of the constitutional formula is that it causes a flash of light on the linguistic reality of Spain. By using “wealth”, the Constitution is part of a stream of positive, optimistic thinking about multilingualism. Bilingualism is considered positive, additive, or even a major intellectual and pedagogical advantage if prior social and political conflicts are neutralized. Additionally, the media and literate societies today have totally new and unknown possibilities, compared to the past, to establish and maintain real and fair use of two or more languages at once. However, there are surveys that refer to pessimistic bilingualism as a transient state that ends with the expulsion of the weaker language.