Performing Inclusion, Enforcing Control: A Critical Discourse Analysis of Taiwan’s Indigenous Language Development Act
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Legal frameworks are often positioned as instruments for protecting and promoting Indigenous language rights. In Taiwan, the Indigenous Language Development Act (ILDA) is presented as a key policy for linguistic justice and revitalisation. However, how such rights are discursively constructed and governed through legal language remains under-examined. Drawing on van Leeuwen’s ‘construction of purpose’ framework within the Critical Discourse Studies approach, this study critically examines ILDA as a form of specialised legal and multilingual discourse. The analysis focuses on grammatical ambiguity, conditional modality, and the attribution of agency to examine how linguistic rights are framed and operationalised within the policy. The findings reveal that while the ILDA aims to protect and promote indigenous language rights, the study critiques the empowerment discourse of the policy as serving the dominant ideological interests. Through rigid structural and grammatical means, authority and ideology are structurally embedded within policy texts. Although the government positions itself as supportive with symbolic inclusion, the controlling nature of the policy mechanism limits the revitalisation efforts, thus functioning as a discursive mechanism of multilingual governance, legitimising state control while appearing to promote linguistic justice, discursively recognising linguistic rights but constraining them institutionally. By treating legal texts as specialised multilingual discourse, this study demonstrates that power and rights are mediated through rigid structural means and that multilingualism is carefully managed rather than supported. The study contributes to global discussions on the role of language policy in sustaining minority languages, suggesting that closer attention should be paid to how purpose and agency are constructed to inform more equitable policy design.
Article Details
References
Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and symbolic power. Polity Press.
Chang, H. (1996). Yuan zhu min mu yu jiao xue huo shuang yu jiao yu? [Bilingualism or mother-tongue education?]. Aboriginal Periodic, 4, 34–42.
Chiung, W. T. (2001, June 23–25). Language and ethnic identity in Taiwan. Paper presented at the North American Taiwan Studies Conference, Seattle, WA.
Council of Indigenous Peoples. (n.d.). Council of Indigenous Peoples. https://www.apc.gov.tw/portal/index.html?lang=en_US
Coulthard, M., Johnson, A., & Wright, D. (2016). The language of the law. In M. Coulthard, A. Johnson, & D. Wright (Eds.), An introduction to forensic linguistics: Language in evidence (pp. 35–53). Routledge. https://ebookcentral.proquest.com
Dupré, J.-F. (2017). Culture politics and linguistic recognition in Taiwan: Ethnicity, national identity, and the party system. Routledge.
Dupré, J.-F. (2019). Taiwan's Indigenous Languages Development Act: Democratic politics, transitional justice, and the quest for diplomatic recognition. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 40(2), 105–120. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2018.1497481
Fairclough, N. (2001). Critical discourse analysis as a method in social scientific research. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of critical discourse analysis (pp. 121–138). Sage.
Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing discourse: Textual analysis for social research. Routledge.
Fairclough, N. (2010). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Ferrer, A., & Lin, T. B. (2024). Official bilingualism in a multilingual nation: A study of the 2030 bilingual nation policy in Taiwan. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 45(2), 551–563. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2021.1909054
Fishman, J. A. (2001). Can threatened languages be saved? Reversing language shift, revisited: A 21st century perspective. Multilingual Matters. https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/aut/reader.action?docID=3007693
Foucault, M. (1990). The history of sexuality: Volume 1. An introduction. Vintage Books.
Hinton, L., & Hale, K. (Eds.). (2001). The green book of language revitalization in practice. Academic Press.
Hornberger, N. H. (2006). Frameworks and models in language policy and planning. In T. Ricento (Ed.), An introduction to language policy: Theory and method (pp. 24–41). Blackwell.
Hu, A.-R. (2002). Tái wān yuán zhù mín mǔ yǔ jiào yù zhèng cè zhī yán jiū [A study on educational policy over Taiwan Indigenous languages]. Journal of Sun Yat-sen Studies [三民主義學報], (24), 153–173.
Huang, L. M. (2014). 台灣原住民族語復振工作之回顧與展望 [Revitalization of Indigenous languages in Taiwan: Past and future]. 臺灣語文研究, 9(2), 67–88.
May, S. (2015). Language rights and language policy: Addressing the gap(s) between principles and practices. Current Issues in Language Planning, 16(4), 355–359. https://doi.org/10.1080/14664208.2014.979649
May, S. (2018). Surveying language rights: Interdisciplinary perspectives. Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand, 48(2), 164–176. https://doi.org/10.1080/03036758.2017.1421565
Mona, A. (2019). Conceptualizing Indigenous historical justice toward a mutual recognition with the state in Taiwan. Washington International Law Journal, 28(3), 653–684.
Nesterova, Y. (2024). Colonial legacies and the barriers to educational justice for Indigenous peoples in Taiwan. Comparative Education, 60(2), 315–333. https://doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2023.2185355
Pawan, C. (2004). Indigenous language education in Taiwan. In A. Garrett & L. Hinton (Eds.), Language is life. University of California, Berkeley.
Presidential Office. (2016). Indigenous Historical Justice and Transitional Justice Committee. https://indigenous-justice.president.gov.tw/EN
Ricento, T. (2005). Theoretical perspectives in language policy: An overview. In T. Ricento (Ed.), An introduction to language policy: Theory and method (pp. 1–9). Blackwell. https://ebookcentral.proquest.com
Sandel, T. L. (2003). Linguistic capital in Taiwan: The KMT's Mandarin language policy and its perceived impact on language practices of bilingual Mandarin and Tai-gi speakers. Language in Society, 32(4), 523–551. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404503324030
Sander, J. (2023). The decline of the Irish language in the nineteenth century. The General, 8, 193–208. https://journals.library.brocku.ca/index.php/bujh/article/view/4191
Shohamy, E. (2006). Language policy: Hidden agendas and new approaches (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203387962
Skutnabb-Kangas, T. (2013). Today’s Indigenous education is a crime against humanity: Mother-tongue-based multilingual education as an alternative? TESOL in Context, 23(1–2), 82–125.
Spolsky, B. (2004). Language policy. Cambridge University Press.
Tang, A. A.-Y. (2011). From diagnosis to remedial plan: A psycholinguistic assessment of language shift, L1 proficiency, and language planning in Truku Seediq (Doctoral dissertation, University of Hawai‘i).
Ting, C. J. (2019). Language ideology within shifting political ideology: A critical discourse study of Taiwan’s Plans for Indigenous Language Revitalization. CADDAAD Journal, 11(2), 125–144. https://www.lancaster.ac.uk/fass/journals/cadaad/volume-11-2-2019/
Ting, C. J. (2021). A Critical Discourse Study of Indigenous Language Revitalisation Policy in Taiwan[Doctoral thesis]. Auckland University of Technology. http://hdl.handle.net/10292/14263
Ting, C. J. (2023). “I feel the government is making an effort”: hegemonic power in Indigenous language revitalisation. New Zealand Journal of Asian Studies, 25(1), 91–108.
Ting, C. J., & Teng, W. (2024). Who is the language policy for? Translation discrepancies and their implications to (dis)trust. Te Kaharoa, 17(1). https://doi.org/10.24135/tekaharoa.v17i1.43
Tiun, H. (2013). Tái wān yǔ yán zhèng cè biàn qiān fēn xī: Yǔ yán rén quán de guān diǎn [An analysis of changes in Taiwan's language policy from a human rights perspective]. Periodical of Taitung University, 3(1), 45–82.
Van Dijk, T. A. (1996). Discourse, power and access. In C. Caldas-Coulthard & M. Coulthard (Eds.), Texts and practices: Readings in critical discourse analysis (pp. 84–106). Routledge.
Van Leeuwen, T. (2008). Discourse and practice: New tools for critical discourse analysis. Oxford University Press.
Wodak, R., & Meyer, M. (2016). Critical discourse studies: History, agenda, theory, and methodology. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of critical discourse studies (3rd ed., pp. 1–22). Sage.