Abstract
Abstract This chapter compares some of the ways official multilingualism has transformed public institutions across jurisdictions, and comments on why these transformations fall short of expectations. This gap is a product of, among other things, the general lack of specificity in constitutional provisions. The status of official or national language does not carry a fixed legal meaning. What does a government have to do to “enforce” an official language status? Polities that have granted official language status diverge in their understanding of the legal implications of such a status, their degree of commitment, and their corresponding institutional adaptation. The chapter goes on to consider the significance of the current state of legal implementation. It is observed that bureaucratic and funding structures of official language offices limit their power and representativeness, and attempts to create linguistic equality may inadvertently enlarge inequalities among speakers of the same language.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
