Bilingualism and linguistic identity: Language planning strategies in multilingual Kazakhstan, Canada, and Belgium

2025

Full text Open access: Hybrid Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.22363/2949-5997-2025-3-1-7-18
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

In an environment of concurrent trends toward globalization and regionalization, as well as the strengthening of processes associated with the reinforcement of national identity, the effective management of linguistic diversity becomes a key task for multilingual and multicultural states. These processes affect both indigenous titular and minority languages, as well as exogenous standard languages. Bilingualism, being the norm in such societies, is not only a linguistic phenomenon but also a powerful factor in shaping identity that requires thoughtful policy. The aim of this study is to analyze how bilingualism affects language identity and what the strategies for its regulation are in contexts with different sociolinguistic configurations of language situations. Based on a macro-sociolinguistic approach and a comparative analysis of the language policy models of Kazakhstan, Canada, and Belgium, the study shows that the success of measures to regulate and manage multilingualism directly correlates with the consideration of the specifics of the language situation. Primarily, this refers to parameters such as the type of territorial distribution of languages, the type of their standardization, the degree of autochthonous status, and its significance for the language community. The results demonstrate that the sustainability of multilingualism and the avoidance of conflict dynamics directly depend on systemic state support and management, the effective model of which can vary: asymmetric bilingualism in Kazakhstan, institutional in Canada, territorial in Belgium. The key conclusion is that the success of language policy is based on flexible and inclusive strategies that integrate education, media, and intercultural dialogue, where bilingualism is viewed as a resource for social development and integration, rather than as a problem.