"Zor Ama Cezbedici": Halaçça Konuşurlarının Etnodilbilimsel Benlik Algılarının Konumlandırma Kuramı Çerçevesinde İncelenmesi
Öz
Bu çalışma, Orta İran’da konuşulan tehlike altındaki bir azınlık dili olan Halaççanın etnodilbilimsel canlılığına dair algıları derinlemesine incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. İran, Farsçayı neredeyse tüm toplumsal ve kurumsal alanlarda teşvik eden tek dilli bir politika izlediğinden, Halaçça gibi azınlık dilleri giderek daha fazla marjinalleşmektedir. Bu dil politikası, Halaççanın kullanıldığı işlevsel alanların daralmasına neden olmakta ve bu durum dilin canlılığını etkilemektedir. Bu çalışma, Halaçça konuşan toplulukların dillerinin canlılığını baskın dil olan Farsçayla karşılaştırarak nasıl algıladıklarını anlamayı amaçlamaktadır. Bu algıları incelemek için çalışma, yarı yapılandırılmış görüşmeler ve ayrıntılı saha çalışması notları ile elde edilen nitel verilere dayanmaktadır. Halaçça konuşan altı katılımcıyla yapılan yarı yapılandırılmış görüşmeler, konuşurların dillerinin geleceğini nasıl gördüklerine, karşılaştıkları zorluklara ve toplumsal olarak baskın dil olan Farsçanın etkisine dair bilgiler sunmaktadır. Saha gözlemleri, topluluk içindeki günlük dil pratiklerini ve dinamiklerini dikkate alarak bu verileri daha da zenginleştirmiştir. Bulgular, Halaçça konuşanların, dillerinin canlılığını büyük ölçüde düşük algıladıklarını ve dilin tehlike altında olması ve özel ve kamusal yaşamda sınırlı kullanımına dair kaygılarını yansıtmaktadır. Bulgular, aynı zamanda Farsçanın canlılığını son derece yüksek algıladıklarına işaret etmektedir. Bu nitel çalışma, İran’daki azınlık ve baskın diller arasındaki karmaşık etkileşimleri ortaya koymakta ve tehlike altındaki dillerin etnodilbilimsel canlılığını korumanın çekici ama zorlu doğasını konumlandırma teorisi çerçevesinde vurgulamaktadır.
Anahtar Kelimeler
Halaçça konumlandırma kuramı etnodilbilimsel canlılık tehlike altındaki dil Farsça
Teşekkür
We thank our Khalaj informants for their contributions.
Kaynakça
- AHMADI, Soheila. (2023a). “The Maku variety of South Azeri”. Tehlikedeki Diller Dergisi, 13/23: 20–38.
- AHMADI, Soheila. (2023b). “Language change and maintenance among Mandaic speakers of Iran: A socio-linguistic study”. Iranian and Minority Languages at Home and in Diaspora (Edt. Anousha Sedighi). Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, 231-248.
- AKKUŞ, Mehmet; AHMADI, Soheila. (2023). “The central dialect of Khalaj”. Tehlikedeki Diller Dergisi, 13/23: 39–82.
- AKKUŞ, Mehmet; AHMADI, Soheila. (2024). “The ethnolinguistic vitality of Khalaj”. Turkic Languages, 28: 246–61.
- AKKUŞ, Mehmet; SAĞIN-ŞİMŞEK, Çiğdem. (2022). “The zone of ethnolinguistic social networking (ZonES) in Khalaj Turkic: A model for language endangerment”. Dilbilim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 33/2: 221–245.
- AHMADI, Soheila. (2023b). “Language change and maintenance among Mandaic speakers of Iran: A socio-linguistic study”. Iranian and Minority Languages at Home and in Diaspora (Edt. Anousha Sedighi). Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, 231-248.
- BASHIRNEZHAD, Hassan. (2023). “Mazandarani: Current status and future prospects”. Iranian and Minority Languages at Home and in Diaspora (Edt. Anousha Sedighi). Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, 37-60.
- BOURHIS, Richard Yvon; GILES, Howard,; ROSENTHAL, Doreen. (1981). “Notes on the construction of a ‘subjective vitality questionnaire’ for ethnolinguistic groups”. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 2: 145-55.
- BOURHIS, Richard Yvon; SACHDEV, Itesh; EHALA, Martin; GILES, Howard. (2019). “Assessing 40 years of group vitality research and future directions”. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 38/4: 409-422.
- BRAUN, Virginia; CLARKE, Victoria. (2006). “Using thematic analysis in psychology”. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3/2: 77–101.
- BRAUN, Virginia; CLARKE, Victoria. (2012). “Thematic analysis”. APA handbook of research methods in psychology, Vol 2: Research designs: Quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological (Edt. Harris Cooper vd.). American Psychological Association, 57–71.
- CRESWELL, John W.; POTH, Cheryl N. (2016). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among Five Approaches. Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington DC, Melbourne: Sage Publications.
- DAVIES, Bronwyn; HARRÉ, Rom. (1990). “Positioning: The discursive production of selves”. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 20/1: 43-63.
- DOERFER, Gerhard. (1971). Khalaj materials. Indiana: Indiana University Publications.
- DÖRNYEI, Zoltan. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methodologies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- EDWARDS, John. (2010). Language and identity: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- FISHMAN, Joshua A. (1991). Reversing language shift: Theoretical and empirical foundations of assistance to threatened languages. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
- GHOLAMI, Saloumeh. (2020). “Endangered Iranian languages: language contact and language islands in Iran”. Iranian Studies, 53/3-4: 347-351. doi:10.1080/00210862.2020.172199
- GILES, Howard; BOURHIS, Richard Yvon; TAYLOR, Donald M. (1977). “Towards a theory of language in ethnic group relations”. Language, Ethnicity and Intergroup Relations (Edt. Richard Y. Bourhis vd.). London, New York, San Francisco: Academic Press, 307-48.
- GILES, Howard; JOHNSON, Patricia. (1987). “Ethnolinguistic identity theory: A social psychological approach to language maintenance”. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 68: 69-99.
- GRENOBLE, Lenore A.; WHALEY, Lindsay J. (2006). Saving languages: An introduction to language revitalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- GUEST, Greg; MACQUEEN, Kathleen M.; NAMEY, Emily E. (2012). Applied thematic analysis. Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington DC: Sage Publications.
- HUMEAU, Camille; GUIMARD, Philippe; NOCUS, Isabelle; GALHARRET, Jean-Michel. (2023). “Parental language practices and children’s use of the minority language: The mediating role of children’s language attitudes”. International Journal of Bilingualism, 13670069231207326.
- JOHANSON, Lars. (2021). Turkic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- KING, Kendall A. (2001). Language revitalization processes and prospects: Quichua in the Ecuadorian Andes. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
- KING, Nigel. (2004). Using templates in the thematic analysis of text. In C. Cassell & G. Symon (Eds.), Essential guide to qualitative methods in organizational research (pp. 256–270). Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington DC: Sage Publications.
- KVALE, Steinar. (1996). InterViews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing. Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington DC: Sage Publications.
- MAJIDIFARD, Ehsan; HAJMALEK, Mohammad Mahdi; REZAEI, Saeed. (2023). “Attitudes towards Tati language among its native speakers in Western Iran”. Iranian and Minority Languages at Home and in Diaspora (Edt. Anousha Sedighi). Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, 83-110.
- MANN, Steve. (2011). “A critical review of qualitative interviews in applied linguistics”. Applied Linguistics, 32/1: 6-24.
- MAY, Stephen (Ed.) (2014). The multilingual turn: Implications for SLA, TESOL, and bilingual education. New York, London: Routledge.
- NOWELL, Lorelli S.; NORRIS, Jill M.; WHITE, Deborah E., & MOULES, Nancy J. (2017). “Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria”. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16/1: 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847
- YAGMUR, Kutlay. (2004). “Language maintenance patterns of Turkish immigrant communities in Australia and Western Europe: The impact of majority attitudes on Ethnolinguistic vitality perceptions”. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 165: 121-142.
- YAGMUR, Kutlay. (2009). “Language use and ethnolinguistic vitality of Turkish compared with the Dutch in The Netherlands”. Journal of Multilingual & Multicultural Development, 30/3: 219-233.
- YAGMUR, Kutlay; AKINCI, Mehmet-Ali. (2003). “Language use, choice, maintenance, and ethnolinguistic vitality of Turkish speakers in France: intergenerational differences”. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 164: 107-128. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl.2003.050
- YAGMUR, Kutlay; DE BOT, Kees; KORZILIUS, Hubert. (1999). “Language attrition, language shift and ethnolinguistic vitality of Turkish in Australia”. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 20/1: 51-69.
- YAGMUR, Kutlay; KROON, Sjaak. (2003). “Ethnolinguistic vitality perceptions and language revitailisation in Bashkortostan”. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 24/4: 319-36.
- YAGMUR, Kutlay; KROON, Sjaak. (2006). “Objective and subjective data on Altai and Kazakh ethnolinguistic vitality in the Russian Federation Republic of Altai”. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 27/3: 241-58.
- YAGMUR, Kutlay. (2011). “Does ethnolinguistic vitality theory account for the actual vitality of ethnic groups? A critical evaluation”. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 32/2: 111-120.
- YIN, Robert K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
"Charming yet challenging": Exploring ethnolinguistic identity perceptions of Khalajs through positioning theory
Öz
This paper provides an in-depth exploration of the ethnolinguistic identity of Khalaj speakers, an endangered minority language community in Central Iran, through the lens of positioning theory. In a socio-political landscape dominated by a monolingual policy that elevates Persian in nearly all social and institutional contexts, minority languages such as Khalaj face increasing marginalization. This policy significantly reduces the functional spaces where Khalaj is used, adversely affecting the language's vitality and prospects for survival. The study investigates how Khalaj-speaking communities position their language in relation to the dominant Persian, examining their perceptions of ethnolinguistic vitality. Utilizing qualitative methods, data were gathered through semi-structured interviews and detailed fieldwork notes. Interviews with six key informants from the Khalaj-speaking community provided rich insights into how speakers perceive their language's future, the challenges it encounters, and the influence of Persian as the socially dominant language. Fieldwork observations further enriched this data, capturing the everyday language practices and dynamics within the community. The findings reveal that Khalaj speakers perceive their language’s vitality as low, reflecting significant concerns regarding its endangerment and limited use in both public and private spheres. In contrast, they recognize the vitality of Persian as overwhelmingly high, acknowledging its predominance in education, governance, and media. These perceptions highlight the positioning of Khalaj within the sociolinguistic landscape, revealing the pressures that contribute to language shift and the potential for revitalization efforts. This qualitative study illustrates the complex interplay between minority and dominant languages in Iran, emphasizing the charming yet challenging nature of maintaining ethnolinguistic vitality for endangered languages like Khalaj through the framework of positioning theory.
Anahtar Kelimeler
Khalaj positioning theory ethnolinguistic vitality endangerment Persian
Kaynakça
- AHMADI, Soheila. (2023a). “The Maku variety of South Azeri”. Tehlikedeki Diller Dergisi, 13/23: 20–38.
- AHMADI, Soheila. (2023b). “Language change and maintenance among Mandaic speakers of Iran: A socio-linguistic study”. Iranian and Minority Languages at Home and in Diaspora (Edt. Anousha Sedighi). Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, 231-248.
- AKKUŞ, Mehmet; AHMADI, Soheila. (2023). “The central dialect of Khalaj”. Tehlikedeki Diller Dergisi, 13/23: 39–82.
- AKKUŞ, Mehmet; AHMADI, Soheila. (2024). “The ethnolinguistic vitality of Khalaj”. Turkic Languages, 28: 246–61.
- AKKUŞ, Mehmet; SAĞIN-ŞİMŞEK, Çiğdem. (2022). “The zone of ethnolinguistic social networking (ZonES) in Khalaj Turkic: A model for language endangerment”. Dilbilim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 33/2: 221–245.
- AHMADI, Soheila. (2023b). “Language change and maintenance among Mandaic speakers of Iran: A socio-linguistic study”. Iranian and Minority Languages at Home and in Diaspora (Edt. Anousha Sedighi). Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, 231-248.
- BASHIRNEZHAD, Hassan. (2023). “Mazandarani: Current status and future prospects”. Iranian and Minority Languages at Home and in Diaspora (Edt. Anousha Sedighi). Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, 37-60.
- BOURHIS, Richard Yvon; GILES, Howard,; ROSENTHAL, Doreen. (1981). “Notes on the construction of a ‘subjective vitality questionnaire’ for ethnolinguistic groups”. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 2: 145-55.
- BOURHIS, Richard Yvon; SACHDEV, Itesh; EHALA, Martin; GILES, Howard. (2019). “Assessing 40 years of group vitality research and future directions”. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 38/4: 409-422.
- BRAUN, Virginia; CLARKE, Victoria. (2006). “Using thematic analysis in psychology”. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3/2: 77–101.
- BRAUN, Virginia; CLARKE, Victoria. (2012). “Thematic analysis”. APA handbook of research methods in psychology, Vol 2: Research designs: Quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological (Edt. Harris Cooper vd.). American Psychological Association, 57–71.
- CRESWELL, John W.; POTH, Cheryl N. (2016). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among Five Approaches. Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington DC, Melbourne: Sage Publications.
- DAVIES, Bronwyn; HARRÉ, Rom. (1990). “Positioning: The discursive production of selves”. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 20/1: 43-63.
- DOERFER, Gerhard. (1971). Khalaj materials. Indiana: Indiana University Publications.
- DÖRNYEI, Zoltan. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methodologies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- EDWARDS, John. (2010). Language and identity: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- FISHMAN, Joshua A. (1991). Reversing language shift: Theoretical and empirical foundations of assistance to threatened languages. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
- GHOLAMI, Saloumeh. (2020). “Endangered Iranian languages: language contact and language islands in Iran”. Iranian Studies, 53/3-4: 347-351. doi:10.1080/00210862.2020.172199
- GILES, Howard; BOURHIS, Richard Yvon; TAYLOR, Donald M. (1977). “Towards a theory of language in ethnic group relations”. Language, Ethnicity and Intergroup Relations (Edt. Richard Y. Bourhis vd.). London, New York, San Francisco: Academic Press, 307-48.
- GILES, Howard; JOHNSON, Patricia. (1987). “Ethnolinguistic identity theory: A social psychological approach to language maintenance”. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 68: 69-99.
- GRENOBLE, Lenore A.; WHALEY, Lindsay J. (2006). Saving languages: An introduction to language revitalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- GUEST, Greg; MACQUEEN, Kathleen M.; NAMEY, Emily E. (2012). Applied thematic analysis. Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington DC: Sage Publications.
- HUMEAU, Camille; GUIMARD, Philippe; NOCUS, Isabelle; GALHARRET, Jean-Michel. (2023). “Parental language practices and children’s use of the minority language: The mediating role of children’s language attitudes”. International Journal of Bilingualism, 13670069231207326.
- JOHANSON, Lars. (2021). Turkic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- KING, Kendall A. (2001). Language revitalization processes and prospects: Quichua in the Ecuadorian Andes. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
- KING, Nigel. (2004). Using templates in the thematic analysis of text. In C. Cassell & G. Symon (Eds.), Essential guide to qualitative methods in organizational research (pp. 256–270). Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington DC: Sage Publications.
- KVALE, Steinar. (1996). InterViews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing. Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington DC: Sage Publications.
- MAJIDIFARD, Ehsan; HAJMALEK, Mohammad Mahdi; REZAEI, Saeed. (2023). “Attitudes towards Tati language among its native speakers in Western Iran”. Iranian and Minority Languages at Home and in Diaspora (Edt. Anousha Sedighi). Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, 83-110.
- MANN, Steve. (2011). “A critical review of qualitative interviews in applied linguistics”. Applied Linguistics, 32/1: 6-24.
- MAY, Stephen (Ed.) (2014). The multilingual turn: Implications for SLA, TESOL, and bilingual education. New York, London: Routledge.
- NOWELL, Lorelli S.; NORRIS, Jill M.; WHITE, Deborah E., & MOULES, Nancy J. (2017). “Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria”. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16/1: 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847
- YAGMUR, Kutlay. (2004). “Language maintenance patterns of Turkish immigrant communities in Australia and Western Europe: The impact of majority attitudes on Ethnolinguistic vitality perceptions”. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 165: 121-142.
- YAGMUR, Kutlay. (2009). “Language use and ethnolinguistic vitality of Turkish compared with the Dutch in The Netherlands”. Journal of Multilingual & Multicultural Development, 30/3: 219-233.
- YAGMUR, Kutlay; AKINCI, Mehmet-Ali. (2003). “Language use, choice, maintenance, and ethnolinguistic vitality of Turkish speakers in France: intergenerational differences”. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 164: 107-128. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl.2003.050
- YAGMUR, Kutlay; DE BOT, Kees; KORZILIUS, Hubert. (1999). “Language attrition, language shift and ethnolinguistic vitality of Turkish in Australia”. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 20/1: 51-69.
- YAGMUR, Kutlay; KROON, Sjaak. (2003). “Ethnolinguistic vitality perceptions and language revitailisation in Bashkortostan”. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 24/4: 319-36.
- YAGMUR, Kutlay; KROON, Sjaak. (2006). “Objective and subjective data on Altai and Kazakh ethnolinguistic vitality in the Russian Federation Republic of Altai”. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 27/3: 241-58.
- YAGMUR, Kutlay. (2011). “Does ethnolinguistic vitality theory account for the actual vitality of ethnic groups? A critical evaluation”. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 32/2: 111-120.
- YIN, Robert K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Ayrıntılar
| Birincil Dil | İngilizce |
|---|---|
| Konular | Toplumsal Dilbilim |
| Bölüm | Makaleler |
| Yazarlar | |
| Erken Görünüm Tarihi | 8 Mayıs 2025 |
| Yayımlanma Tarihi | 12 Mayıs 2025 |
| Gönderilme Tarihi | 13 Ekim 2024 |
| Kabul Tarihi | 13 Mart 2025 |
| Yayımlandığı Sayı | Yıl 2025 Cilt: 19 Sayı: 36 |
