Linguistic Integration and Standardization in Spain’s Constitution
**c) Linguistic Standardization and Freedom**
More delicate are interventions involving language planning and standardization processes. In standardizing a language, it is easy for compulsion to slip in. Linguistic normalization of regional languages, as a set of actions to restore the equal public status of a minority language, can be perfectly compatible with freedom of language if it does not become unreasonable or contradict the basic demands of equality. The standardization of languages is something outside the law. Determining a language’s internal aspects, such as spelling and phonetic rules, is not for the legislature or public authorities. These are the authority of writers, linguists, and academies.
**2. The Principle of Integration**
The plural state-building consecrated by the Spanish Constitution aims at the political integration of Spain’s linguistic and cultural diversity.
Proof of this desire for integration (in a conceptual sense) is the name given to the common language, “Castilian,” and the plural, “Spanish languages,” referring to the other languages of Spain. This solution has been criticized, and partly rightly so. Philologically, “Castilian” is a narrow term to describe a reality spoken throughout Spain and much of the Americas. However, the word “Spanish” is also a short name for both sides of the Atlantic.
Nevertheless, the legal language tradition predominantly uses the word “Castilian,” from the old regime to democracy, with fewer examples of standards preferring “Spanish.” Hispanic American constitutionalism reflects a similar trend: a large group is silent on the language’s name, four call it “Spanish,” and five prefer “Castilian.” The overall trend marks a statistical preference for “Spanish,” but the reality is a lexical alternation that has not stopped.
However, the name of the common Spanish language itself is merely a symbolic integration of Spain’s linguistic diversity. It would have been better if the Constitution had accepted the suggestion of the SAR to respect the synonymy between “Spanish” and “Castilian.” On the other hand, another proof of that spirit is the plural “Spanish” (with a different unit value than “Spanish”).
“The two names, Castilian and Spanish, are valid. Each speaker’s preference for one of these two terms is based on a strong tradition of centuries, and it is naive to abandon the use of either of them. Each person can use the one they like, but must respect the right of others to prefer the other.”
Another example of integration is the requirement of Article 20.3 of the Spanish Constitution that access to the media by the State or any other public body respect the pluralism of society and the various languages of Spain.
Furthering the desire for integration, the Constitution requires the publication of its text in all of Spain’s languages.
The consequence of this integration is the behavior required of public authorities: the State, the Autonomous Communities, local corporations, and other public bodies have an inexcusable duty to respect and protect that cultural richness. The role of the central organs of the state is to ensure the security of Castilian, and the Autonomous Communities for their respective native languages. However, their responsibility is to ensure the protection of linguistic richness, particularly the two official languages in their territory. This was formulated in the Statutes of Autonomy of Catalonia, the Basque Country, Galicia, and Valencia, and the Constitutional Court has acknowledged it. This conclusion is reinforced by the principle of loyalty governing the Spanish cultural Constitution, which requires public authorities to conduct themselves respecting the system’s rules.