This article introduces a framework for systematically evaluating and comparing language rights across national contexts. We develop an index to assess the range of language freedoms, focusing on areas such as government services, education, healthcare, and media. The index compiles multiple variables into a single indicator, offering a concise measure of linguistic freedom. Our analysis shows that larger language communities typically enjoy more language rights, though this relationship is influenced by civil liberties. We argue that this index is both descriptive and normative, providing a tool for comparing language policy and advocating for linguistic justice.

This article introduces the Corpus of Language Discrimination in Interaction (CLDI)—an open-access corpus of transcribed video data, capturing moments where individuals are policed in some way for the language they are speaking or otherwise endorsing while sharing public space (e.g. in stores, restaurants, parking lots, and parks). Despite having thus far largely evaded systematic inquiry, such interactions are illustrative of a particular genre of language policymaking and enforcement that takes place in everyday social life, which the CLDI aims to document and make available for ongoing empirical examination. After presenting the corpus itself, as an initial exploration into some of the practices and actions observable in these data, we describe the recurrent use of Speak English directives, accompanied by nation-state declarative accounts like This is America. Detailed analysis of such turns, and the responses they receive, throws into relief ways that language policies and ideologies can be instantiated, ratified, challenged, defended, and otherwise negotiated in and through the particulars of interactants' joint conduct. We conclude by describing some future avenues for research, teaching, and public engagement on the basis of the CLDI.

This article is a critical analysis of principles for the provision of translanguaging in the language policy of North-West University. It draws on the conceptualization of translanguaging as a transformative, inclusive, and empowering practice (Cenoz & Gorter 2022a,b, Kleyn & García 2019, Tai 2022) and attempts to uncover the mood and dispositions of the university toward main-streaming this practice for the inclusion of indigenous African languages in teaching and learning. We discuss how the wording of the provisions reveals the language policy to be power-inflected, reproducing contestations between indigenous and ex-colonial languages. The article ends by suggesting a continuous review of the language policy to eliminate vague and escapist policy provisions.

Since the establishment of the People's Republic of China in 1949, language management has been a central activity of the party and government, interrupted during the years of the Cultural Revolution. It has focused on the spread of Putonghua as a national language, the simplification of the script, and the auxiliary use of Pinyin. Associated has been a policy of modernization and terminological development. There have been studies of bilingualism and topolects (regional varieties like Cantonese and Hokkien) and some recognition and varied implementation of the needs of non-Han minority languages and dialects, including script development and modernization. Asserting the status of Chinese in a globalizing world, a major campaign of language diffusion has led to the establishment of Confucius Institutes all over the world. Within China, there have been significant efforts in foreign language education, at first stressing Russian but now covering a wide range of languages, though with a growing emphasis on English. Despite the size of the country, the complexity of its language situations, and the tension between competing goals, there has been progress with these language-management tasks. At the same time, nonlinguistic forces have shown even more substantial results. Computers are adding to the challenge of maintaining even the simplified character writing system. As even more striking evidence of the effect of politics and demography on language policy, the enormous internal rural-to-urban rate of migration promises to have more influence on weakening regional and minority varieties than campaigns to spread Putonghua. Overall, linguists and a strongly developed cadre of sociolinguists have played a useful role, but the driving force has been the Communist leadership.

This commentary focuses on three main topics raised in MufWene's (2017) target article, in addition to language policy, which I propose must be taken into account in order to support language vitality. First, this commentary explores the nature and role of speakers’ agency regarding the fate of their language. Second, it addresses whether it is always the case that populations shift because they sense that preserving a language can marginalize them, since this is presented as a possible cause of language loss in MufWene's article. Third, it reflects on the role of multilingualism in language death. I argue that multilingualism and/or competing languages need not result in language loss but may rather result in language coexistence, as long as each language fulfills a distinct function. Finally, I explore the key role of language planning and policy in determining the life or death of languages, likely to be one of the most effective ways to ensure language vitality, if the right language policy is adopted.

English–medium instruction (EMI) has become a highly contested topic in discussions on the language of instruction policies in the Global South, raising critical questions about whether it truly delivers on the promises made in policy rhetoric and public discourse. While EMI is often promoted as a pathway to social, educational, and economic success for all, its rapid expansion raises concerns about linguistic inequality, social stratification, and unequal educational access. Through a critical synthesis of recent EMI literature, this paper identifies some persistent misconceptions that underpin the promotion and expansion of EMI in the Global South. These include the presumed neutrality of English, the belief in its automatic pedagogical and economic benefits, and the assumption that EMI leads to equitable access and improved content learning. The paper highlights the ideological and material consequences of EMI, such as epistemic injustice, linguistic hierarchies and social reproduction. In doing so, it calls for a rethinking of EMI beyond instrumentalist and Anglocentric logics and urges the centering of linguistic diversity, multilingual pedagogies and critical policy orientations. The article concludes with implications for future EMI scholarship and practices, particularly in contexts marked by deep social, linguistic and educational inequalities.

This paper examines how the distance between a country’s official language and the languages spoken by its citizens influences accountability. Two arguments support this relationship: first, the role of language as a tool for communication between elites and citizens; and second, its role in shaping cultural patterns that underpin social interactions. Using a dataset of 147 countries, we reveal a consistent negative correlation between linguistic distance and levels of accountability across all measures. Higher educational attainment can mitigate the negative impact of a foreign official language on accountability.

With over 17 million children learning English, Bangladesh has one of the world’s largest English-learning populations. However, despite this, the country faces challenges in achieving the optimal level of English proficiency. English language teaching (ELT) initiatives in Bangladesh, which have evolved over time, can be broadly classified based on the Grammar-Translation Method, Communicative Language Teaching, and the English in Action project. These approaches predominantly reinforced traditional monolingual and bilingual frameworks while overlooking the rich metalinguistic, cultural, and intellectual resources that students bring to English classrooms. This article critically examines past ELT efforts, policies and their outcomes through a translanguaging lens, which challenges the rigid language separation ideology in traditional models and encourages the use of all linguistic repertoires in learning English as a target language. This article provides fresh perspectives on the strengths and weaknesses of past initiatives, as well as suggestions for developing linguistically and culturally sustainable ELT models based on translanguaging scholarship.

Over the past two decades, English has become a key medium of instruction in higher education in non-native English contexts, especially Asian countries. Extant research highlights the rapid expansion of English-medium instruction (EMI) and challenges in policy implementation, revealing tensions between different language policy levels (i.e., macro, meso and micro). Thus, a multilevel analysis is needed to understand these tensions. This review examines factors influencing EMI adoption in China, Japan, Malaysia, and Nepal, focusing on policy implementation by educators and students. Findings show that EMI adoption is driven by English's role as a global lingua franca and the permeation of neoliberal ideologies at the macro policymaking level. Such a macro-level endorsement of monolingual EMI has resulted in micro-level inequalities for students, with resistance manifested through multilingual practices, such as translanguaging, in the classroom. The discrepancies between language policies and practices highlight the necessity of reassessing the adequacy of monolingual EMI policies and the importance of adopting a multilingual policy framework. The article concludes with a critical discussion of the trends observed in these contexts and recommends several policy directions for the future.

This study reflects on Japan's language policy, focusing on the government‑led proposals implemented in 2006, which suggested replacing loanwords with Japanese equivalents, known as Gairaigo Iikae Teian ‘proposals for replacing loanwords’. By investigating English loanwords, this article explores the impact of English on Japanese vocabulary, while providing insights into the practical implementation of the government-led language policy in Japan for a broader global audience. It also clarifies that the objective of the proposals was not to strictly regulate the use of English loanwords but to offer suggestions, with replacement as one strategy to improve communication, especially when disseminating information through government agencies and media organisations. Through a quantitative investigation on the usage of English loanwords in the media, the results reveal that the overall number of media articles containing the loanwords in the proposed list has increased over the last 30 years. The findings also confirm that loanwords and their Japanese equivalents are not in competition, with one replacing the other. Instead, their usage exhibits a parallel trend in both frequency and increase rates.

This paper reconsiders long-standing debates in Canada about the relationship between language, race, and culture. Federal policies focused on official bilingualism (1969) and multiculturalism (1971) animated local movements of parents, students, and other community members demanding greater linguistic and racial inclusion in schools. This paper examines two instances of these grassroots politics, namely activism on behalf of heritage-language education and Black cultural-heritage programs, in Toronto, Ontario, between 1970 and 1987. Our analysis reveals key instances in which temporary forms of solidarity emerged between heritage-language and Black activism, as well as contradictory trajectories in this activism that undermined what Roseann Liu and Savannah Shange have theorized as “thick solidarity.” In this paper, we argue that absences of thick solidarity ultimately weakened efforts by heritage-language and Black activists alike to reorganize schools in ways that were more linguistically and racially just.