Acceso usuarios
Jakelin Troy, Michael Walsh
Australia, as far as Aboriginal languages are concerned, is not yet engaged in systematic language planning exercises. This is in contrast to other parts of the world where language planning is institutionalised and enforced. In this paper we chronicle some of the language planning exercises we have observed, been involved in, or have studied of from the historical record. Terminology planning will obviously vary according to the language situation under consideration and we claim here that much of the terminology planning in Aboriginal Australia has been highly localised, ad hoc and much less institutionalised than elsewhere. With 250Aboriginal languages existing at first significant European contact, it is not so surprising that efforts should be localised. The better documented cases of terminology planning are mostly to be found in northern Australia where the effects of outside contact have been more recent, so that some languages are still being spoken by children. In recent years, some of the more endangered languages have been in a process of revitalisation. We provide some examples of terminology planning from such languages, with a particular emphasis on New South Wales and the Northern Territory. Of particular importance is appropriate consultation with the owners of these languages.
