May 23, 2022 - Əlirza Quluncu (Alirza Quluncu)
 |
| Vahid Qarabağlı |
Sociologist Vahid Qarabağlı evaluates the restrictions and prohibitions on non-Persian languages in Iran from a sociolinguistic perspective in a conversation with Voice of America. According to him, by preventing Turkish language from entering official institutions, the Iranian state delegitimizes it.
"A sociolinguistic approach to language sees it as a social phenomenon. That is, the place of language in society, its influence on society and the influence it receives from society are studied. Language affects our relationships, thoughts and our relationship with institutions in the society we live in. Our language is influenced by these institutions, including television and government institutions," says Qarabağlı.
According to him, sociolinguistics also considers how language is used among different social classes, the relationship between language and gender, as well as the place of the language of different ethnic groups in society, the education system, and the media.
The sociologist believes that the best way to understand the language issue in Iran is through a critical sociolinguistic approach: "In a critical sociolinguistic approach, the function of languages in institutions and the relationship between language and power are examined."
According to Vahid Qarabağlı, people's view of different languages spoken in a society is determined by power relations.
"According to critical sociolinguistics, people's attitudes towards different languages are not natural, but rather created by societal and political decisions, as well as power relationships. For example, in Iran, the decision for Persian to be the only official language, the sole language of education, and for national identity to be defined based on the Persian language, was made by a certain elite group during Iran's state-building process. This process could have been different, and a multilingual system could have been created in Iran. In critical sociolinguistics, these institutions, perspectives, and public, political, and ideological decisions are examined and criticized. According to this approach, these definitions are determined at the expense of certain groups and the marginalization of other groups. As a result of these decisions, other languages are delegitimized and put in a minority language situation."
The sociologist believes that language activism is mainly about fighting for the legitimization and institutionalization of a language.
"In the Iranian constitution, only the Persian language is legitimized and institutionalized as the language of the country's official institutions, education, media, and judiciary. In Iran, the language of all institutions is only Persian. The Turkish language is relegated to the level of a conversational language among people and has no place in institutions. As far as importance and role are concerned, the Turkish language is delegitimized."
Qarabagli adds, "language activism, which is the struggle for the language concerns of marginalized groups, is actually a struggle to legitimize their languages. They attach great importance to the institutionalization of their languages. For example, they want the children of families living in Azerbaijan to see the Turkish language on television. If a Turkish child does not see his or her mother tongue within that system when he or she goes to school, the value of that language is not perceived in his or her eyes. But if that language is introduced as a language of instruction in schools, it will be seen as a legitimate language in the eyes of that child and his or her family. If films and TV series are made in that language and people go to cinemas to watch them, that language gains legitimacy and weight. Therefore, Turkish activists try to show that the Turkish language is part of public life by writing in their own language, publishing books, and making films in that language."
Original link to the interview:
https://www.amerikaninsesi.org/a/6584197.html