Sorbian language use survey

Many of the respondents work in the large urban centres of Dresden, Leipzig and Bautzen many of them returning home only on the weekends. Thus, given that most of the survey work was undertaken on the weekend they were accommodated as respondents.

This would suggest an increasing tendency towards bilingualism, the percentage of people in each generation who cannot speak one or other of the two languages diminishing by reference to both languages. Yet there remains a not insignificant percentage who are not bilingual even by reference to monolingual dominant language. It is also significant that half of the respon- dents had partners who spoke little or no Sorbian. Indeed, only 36% of the partners spoke Sorbian with their mother and 33% with their father while 12% spoke only German with their children and a further 21% spoke mainly German with their children. Almost half spoke both languages with their children. It suggests that the partners do have sufficient command of Sorbian to converse with their children. These figures contrast with those of the respondents with their children of whom 37% of those who answered claimed to speak German only with their children while 35% spoke only Sorbian and the remainder spoke both languages. These figures tally with those given for the language of meals in the household. It would appear that the family has a limited and polarised role as an agency of language reproduction.

Only 25% of the respondents claim to have learnt Sorbian in the school. A further 4% learnt it in the community, 24% through friends, 6% in higher education.

Extending our discussion to encompass different aspects of ability we find that 62% claimed that they understood Sorbian very well and 25% understood it well. Only 13% claimed to understand it poorly or not at all. On the other hand 55% claimed to speak it fluently and a further 28% spoke it well. The percentage speaking it poorly or not at all stood at 17%. The level of literacy was similar with 58% claiming to read Sorbian very well and a further 25% reading it well. The figure of non-literacy is similar to those not claiming to speak and understand it.

Evidently the ability of the respondents spans all four functions despite declining somewhat with reference to writing. Nonetheless it does indicate that there is considerable self-confidence with reference to ability for the majority of the Sorbian-speaking population.

The same procedure can be applied by reference to family use inter-generationally:

N.B. This ignores all the no answer responses which were 220 by reference to siblings, 84 by reference to grandparents, 37 by reference to children and 17 by reference to parents.

What this data shows is the inter-generational shift in the use of Sorbian which is significant between the parental generation of the respondents but which has stabilised subsequently. On the other hand the increase in the amount of German used with the children is also significant. We find that the children tend to divide by reference to the use of German and Sorbian with each other with 22% using German together all the time, 18% using mainly German together, 23% using only Sorbian, 23% mainly Sorbian and 14% using another language together. On the other hand 24% of the respondent's partners spoke only German with their children compared with 42% who spoke only Sorbian with them and 34% who spoke both languages with them. This compared with the respondents who spoke German with their children in 35% of the cases, while 44% spoke Sorbian with their children and 21% used both languages with their children:

44% claimed that their parents used Sorbian when speaking with one another, a further 25% said that their parents communicated in German while 19% said they used both languages but with more Sorbian than German and 21% claimed the reverse.

One section of the questionnaire sought to probe into the current language of the home. This gave the following information:

Again this indicates the high degree of language group endogamy and/or assimilation into Sorbian, with two thirds of the households using either Sorbian or a mixture of Sorbian and German in most of their interactions.

Extending out of the household via telephone suggests that German predominates:

There was a tendency for many families to use both languages at meal times.

The extent of language use in the community over time can be gauged from the following data concerning the use of Sorbian on the street, in shops, Church, clubs, societies when the respondent was a child and now:

Evidently, if such subjective evaluations carry any weight it would appear that there has been a decline in the use of Sorbian in the streets and in the shops. and to a lesser extent in the other two contexts. This is partly explained by the entry of large supermarkets into the area as part of the customary expansion of capitalist retail entering an area into order to absorb a portion of the surplus wealth accumulated in such areas. This is a general trend throughout eastern Germany.

While the data with reference to religion would appear to be promising we should recognise that only 15% of the children attended the predominantly Sorbian language church choir and less than 10% attended the Sorbian language Sunday School. On the other hand 45% claimed to attend church regularly and a further 15% attended sometimes. Of all respondents 34% claimed that the sermon was in Sorbian while a further 34% claimed that a mixture of the two languages was used. The most Sorbian of the religious activities by language would appear to be the stilles gebet (private prayer) with 41% claiming Sorbian only and a further 21% claiming both Sorbian and German for such an activity.

This suggests that religion is an important institution within the community for over three quarters of the respondents even if fewer than half are regular attenders. It also suggests that there is considerable variation with reference to the language of the religious institutions with a minority attending German language chapels and/or churches and over a third attending the Sorbian language institutions. Evidently religion does have a central role to play with reference to language production and reproduction. Historically it was a central agency in consolidating the language and was the main pillar of language production and reproduction in the community prior to the collapse of the former regime. Currently it seeks to continue that role.

We also asked about the practicality of using Sorbian with different agents in the community.

It would appear that some highly localised services and activities do afford the possibility of using Sorbian but they are few and far between. The professional and official institutions do not offer the same level of opportunity. This seems to be largely a consequence of the inability of key agents to speak the language rather than the institutionalisation of use patterns.

This information can be supplemented by reference to the language of the various community based activities undertaken by the children. Given the small number of children that the information is drawn upon few of the activities produce any relevant data. Nonetheless we do have sufficient information about some activities to suggest the general pattern by reference to language. Thus for example, cabaret attracted 20 of the children 60% of them undertaking this activity through the medium of Sorbian. Similarly 52 children were involved in 'orchestra' with half of them pursuing this activity through the medium of German and most of the others using both German and Sorbian. Sports was an activity that attracted 46 children, three quarters of them being undertaken in German and most of the others using both languages. This and the rest of the data in this question suggests that Sorbian is very much a minority ingredient in the family life of children within the community.

While it appears that the social networks are not exclusively structured by reference to language group almost two thirds of the respondents claimed that half or more of their friends spoke Sorbian. Yet 41% claimed that they spoke mainly or only German with these friends. Among their neighbours 44% claimed that more than half of them spoke Sorbian and that 8% claimed that they used mainly Sorbian with their neighbours. The situation was different in the shops suggesting that the retail sector of the local economy is not in Sorbian control. Only 18% claimed that more than half of the shop workers spoke Sorbian with a similar percentage claiming to use Sorbian most of the time in the shops. Sports activities seem to be similar with as few as 15% claiming that most of the people they meet through sports activities spoke Sorbian the same number using Sorbian in such activities. Yet almost half claimed that those they met through cultural activities spoke Sorbian and the same percentage spoke Sorbian with them. Clearly the cultural activities are localised whereas universal activities such as sports are conducted through the medium of German and are dominated by German personnel.

The following table indicates the extent of participation in the various community activities.

We asked the respondents to tell us the language of the education of their children at the different levels for up to and including four children. Drawing the information for all the children together we have the following table:

Clearly there is a decline in Sorbian only education as one progresses through the educational system. It is also obvious that it is possible to opt out of Sorbian education with as many as a quarter of the children having parents who opted for this choice. This would imply that while education does afford a degree of language production and reproduction it is by no means universal. Given that this is a mater of choice it does indicate the extent of commitment of parents to the language. In this respect it replicates some of the preceding figures suggesting that there are two polarised groups of about equal size and an intermediate group of about half of the respondents who have an intermediate orientation towards the respective languages.

This data can be compared with the experience of the respondents themselves:

Apart from high school where there has been a shift from German to bilingual education the differences are not significant.

This information was then related to preference for the language of education at the primary and secondary level giving the following results:

The preference is similar for both levels of education and it is clear that while their is a majority who reveal a preference for Sorbian language education there is a substantial minority that would opt for German language education. There is also a minority which is not given any choice. It appears that 35% of the respondents had primary education for their children within the language of their choice within the normal catchment area while 28% had to go outside of the area to find it. The respective figures for secondary education were 29% and 28%.

In many minority language contexts it is conceivable that extensive educational provision is available in the minority language but that the sciences are excluded. This is an extension of the modernist distinction between reason and emotion, with the sciences being treated as rational and the arts as emotional and the respective languages being seen in the same light. For this reason we sought to discover the situation for each of the language groups in the LUS. With reference to Sorbian we had the following:

This suggests that while there might be some tendency for the favouring of German for the hard sciences and Sorbian for the arts the difference is not significant.

Of the 69 respondents with children of school age a quarter had their school assembly in German, a further 17% in Sorbian and the remainder in both languages. Of the other children's activities there was little involvement other than in sports activities, orchestra and trachtenrerein. The sports activities were mainly conducted in German whereas trachterein was in Sorbian and the orchestral activities were mainly in German but with some Sorbian introduced in some cases. Another predominant activity for children that was conducted in Sorbian was the cabaret.

To conclude this section of production and reproduction it would appear that the family continues to play an important role in this respect. Formal education also is relevant but would appear to be a mater of choice and decreases withy age. The community on the other hand plays a relatively minor role and we should recognise the difficulty of trying to sustain a minority language within this context. Where not all the community is bilingual and where the minority language is segregated to specific contexts, even if those contexts do guarantee the production of an ability in that language, it is inevitable that difficulty will arise in translating that ability into active use within a broad context for at least a substantial minority of the population. This the has repercussion for the bilingual speakers who choose to operate within community activities where the dominant language achieves a normative role.

To recap our theoretical argument we focus upon the world of work in order to establish the extent of language prestige of the minority language. That is we wish to establish how relevant the minority language is by reference to its role in segmenting the labour market and also for affording channels of social mobility. We maintain that it is this function that is most effective in generating a positive identity with reference to minority languages.

The occupational classification of the respondents was as follows:

Almost half of the respondents worked for companies. Eighteen percent worked for firms employing fewer than five persons, two thirds worked for firms employing between five and fifty workers and 18% worked for large firms. About 20% of the respondents claimed that nonlocal workers were employed by the firms which they worked for most of these responses relating to the larger companies. The head office of 65% of these firms was to be found locally a further 19% within the Sorbian area, slightly less from the rest of Germany and one firm which did not have its head office in Germany. This reveals a highly localised occupational structure. What must of course be said here is that a substantial number of the repondents do not work localy, most of them working for large firms located outside of their home area which does not have any such large scale economic base.

The manger of 40% of the respondents working for such firms was Sorbian while 58% said their managers were from the German language group and four replied that their managers were from neither language group. Almost half of the managers had some understanding of Sorbian but with only 37% being fluent Sorbian speakers. Almost half of the respondents in such employment said that the market for these firms was local, a further 23% claiming that it was within the Sorbian area and 22% claiming that they marketed both within and outside of the Sorbian area. Again the indication is of a highly localised structure with the qualifier that many of the answers did not refer to the lcoal area.

Only 29% of the superiors of the respondents spoke Sorbian with a further 10% claiming that more than half of their superiors spoke the language. Almost half claimed that none of their superiors spoke the language. On the other hand 12% claimed that all of their colleagues spoke Sorbian and a further 23% claimed that more than half of their colleagues spoke the language. A further 37% claimed that half or more of their subordinates spoke Sorbian. This would seem to suggest that a minority work for entirely Sorbian firms whereas the majority work for predominantly German firms outside of the Sorbian area. It is not easy to recognise the relevance of the cultural division of labour from such data.

Given this information it is hardly surprising that 56% of the relevant respondents claimed to speak only German with their superiors compared with only 29% who used mainly or only Sorbian with them. Similarly almost half spoke German only with their colleagues compared with only 9% who spoke only Sorbian with their colleagues. The language of administration was German in 63% of the cases compared with only 23% of the respondents who reported that it was Sorbian. Clearly Sorbian as the language of work is far removed from the experience of most such workers.

We should recognise in the above table that many of the respondents were unemployed or were self-employed and did not work in a company context. Thus the responses which deny any importance of either language derives from this set of respondents. Despite the unsatisfactory nature of this response what emerges is that, as far as Sorbian is concerned, what is important is being able to speak it, whereas for German, reading and writing are important. That is whereas Sorbian might be the language of working practice in the work place German is the language of administration and external communication. A quarter of the relevant respondents claimed that the firms employed Sorbian speakers to answer the telephone. On the other hand only 17% claimed that their firms employed Sorbian speakers as sales personnel or as representatives. However, 32% claimed that they employed Sorbian speakers to deal with the public while 20% felt that their company used the language for general public politics.

40% of the respondents claimed that their company had some kind of policy with reference to the language with 17% claiming the existence of a complete policy. Yet only a quarter claimed that there was any definite hiring practice that favoured bilinguals, most claiming that there was no policy one way or another.

Most (80%) claimed to have access to Sorbian language radio programmes while 36% claimed there were Sorbian language television programmes in their area. The number of hours of Sorbian language radio listened to was small, 47% not listening to any and 43% listening to one hour a day. Almost 36% claimed to receive Sorbian language television programmes but only 5% watched as much as an hour of these programmes daily. This contrasted with German language service with all but 12% claiming to listen to German language radio and all but 7% claiming to watch German language television, most watching for one or two hours daily.

It would appear to be a highly literate society with a high degree of reading activities. The above figures indicate that half of the respondents have regular contact with the written word in Sorbian and even greater contact with the printed word in German.

The above table demonstrates that Sorbian cultural activities do have a considerable following with few not being involved in some such activities. These range from highly public concerts to more specialised events such as the intellectual discussions and literary circles.

Evidently self-identity is highly structured by reference to being Sorbian but with a significant 27% not sharing such an identity. The other three identities come out with remarkably similar results.

Respondents were next asked to express their degree of agreement or disagreement with the following eleven statements:

1 (-) To get on, there are more valuable languages to learn than Sorbian ("Es gibt wertvollerer Sprachen als Sorbisch, die zu erlernen sind")

2 (+) It seems to me a good idea that some councils use Sorbian in the administration ("Es scheint nur ein guter Einfall zu sein, daß einige Gemeinderäte im sorbischen Sprachgebiet das Sorbisch nur in der Verwaltung verwenden")

3 (-) Sorbian is a dying language ("Sorbisch ist eine sterbende Sprache")

4 (+) The Sorbian area would not really be Sorbian without Sorbian-speaking people ("Das sorbische Gebiet wäre nicht Sorbien, wenn die Menschen nicht Sorbisch sprechen würden")

5 (-) You are considered a lower class person if you speak Sorbian ("Man wird als Person der unteren Klassen angesehen, wenn man Sorbisch spricht")

6 (+) In order to work in the public sector in the Sorbian area, one should be able to speak Sorbian ("Wenn jemand im öffentlichen Bereich des sorbischen Gebietes arbeitet, sollte er in der Lage sein, Sorbisch zu sprechen")

7 (-) Sorbian has no place in the modern world ("Sorbisch hat keinen Platz in der modernen Welt von heute")

8 (+) It is essential that children in the Sorbian areas learn Sorbian ("Es ist erforderlich, daß Kinder im sorbischen Gebiet auch die sorbische Sprache erlernen")

9 (-) The Sorbian language cannot be made suitable for business and science ("Die sorbische Sprache kann den sprachlichen Erfordernissen in Wissenschaft und Wirtschaft nicht angepaßt werden")

10 (+) Speaking Sorbian helps people get promotion in their jobs ("Wenn Personen Sorbisch sprechen, begünstigt dies ihre beruflichen Aussichten")

11 (-) Most people view things associated with Sorbian as too old-fashioned ("Die meisten Leute betrachten Dinge, die mit dem Sorbischen verküpft, als altmodisch")

- Indicates that the statement is negative by reference to the language status. + the converse.

1 - strongly agree, 2 - agree 3 - neither agree nor disagree,

4 - disagree, 5 - strongly disagree, 0 - no response.

The dispersion of responses indicates that there is considerable polarity by reference to the status of Sorbian. This may be the result off the openness of the questions. Thus for example the first statement 'To get on there are more valuable languages to learn than Sorbian' can be interpreted differently depending upon one's understanding of 'to get on'. That is, such measures pertain as much to issues of discourse and the construction of meaning as they do to orientation. However in general terms this can be seen as an indication of the relationship of the status and prestige of Sorbian. It reflects the relatively low prestige of the language. This relates to the fifth item concerning the status of Sorbian, with the majority not agreeing with the claim that the language was a marker of lower class status. It also links with the sixth item where a very large majority felt that Sorbian should be a qualification for work in the public sector. Yet a significant number indicate that they do not feel that Sorbian is capable of relevance with reference to business and science while the respondents were split concerning the relevance of Sorbian for promotion in work. This relationship between these items is very indicative, suggesting that there might well be a distinction between desire and actual practice, and that this may well become a greater source of contention in the future. This in turn relates to the desire to see a greater use of Sorbian in public administration, with only a quarter of the respondents disagreeing with this statement. There was a fairly equal division among those who responded to the item concerning the 'old-fashionedness' of Sorbian. The most positive response was to the item which claimed that the Sorbian territory relied on the language for its identity, with only 8% disagreeing with this item while only 10% disagreed that it was essential that children within that territory should learn Sorbian. Evidently there is a strong emotive commitment to the language.

Turning to the data on the interest in the Sorbian language by different groups and institutions we find the following data:

This is expressed in another way below where the percentage of responses given to ranks 1, 2 and 3 are contrasted with those given to ranks 7, 8 and 9.

Clearly the strongest perceived support relates to Sorbian organisations, friends, family and self, whereas the weakest perceived support derives from the regional government and the Church. However it is unclear what is meant by 'Church' in these responses given that the Sorbian Catholic church has been the main sustaining agency for the language. However it also indicates that there is a significant minority which does not feel that neither they nor their family friends have much interest in the language. This would suggest that there are different layers of militancy operating by reference to language.

This general overview has not sought to do the obvious - to establish which social groups have which orientations and behaviours by reference to the Sorbian language. Rather, it has merely sough to establish a general configuration of language use. This is perhaps misleading and the deeper analysis will have to be undertaken at a later stage.

The Sorbian population appears to constitute a highly localised population showing a high degree of geographical and language group endogamy. This is partly a consequence of the former authorities who treated the language group in territorial or autochthonous terms, though without the necessary economic infrastructure. Given the existence of bilingual education there seems to be a firm basis for the continued production and reproduction of the language. However, given that this education is voluntary we would maintain that its salience depends upon the extent to which the basis for a negative identity can be overcome and supplanted by a positive affirmation on the part of all people by reference to the language. This, in our view, depends upon the role that the language has within the labour market, that is, upon the prestige of the language. What is evident is that the economic structure in thge area is unusual by reference to Europe in the sense that it is a highly localised economy in the sense of ownership, employment and marketing. In this respect it does not appear to be strongly articulated into the rest of the European Union. If and when such an articulation does develop it will inevitably lead to increasing external ownership of the productive and retail sectors which can have profoundly negative repercussions for the Sorbian language, if the limited link which the language has to the world of work and to the labour market is truncated, as may well be the case.