Intangible Cultural Heritage in Need of Protection: The Case of Regional and Minority Languages

Stefan Oeter
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78789-3_4
2018-01-01
Abstract:This chapter explores the relationship between European efforts at protecting regional and minority languages, with a particular focus on the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages, on the one hand, and UNESCO endeavors at protecting intangible cultural heritage, with a special focus on the 2003 UNESCO Convention, on the other hand. The 2003 UNESCO Convention on the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage is a product of decades of debates in the framework of UNESCO on how to improve the protection of the world’s cultural heritage against the onslaught of modernity and globalization. Shifting the perspective to the broad range of intangible cultural heritage produces a certain overlap with traditional undertakings for the protection and promotion of folkloristic practices and rituals and also with the safeguarding of threatened languages. Languages as such are not explicitly covered by the 2003 UNESCO Convention, but the definition of “intangible cultural heritage” is so broad that threatened minority languages can be easily brought under the scope of application.This opens up a fascinating interface with traditional European efforts at protecting regional and minority languages. The historical evolution of these efforts, and of the treaty regime of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages in particular, is described in the chapter. The roots of this treaty, as well as the parallel regime of the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, may be found in the classic discourses on minority protection. Whereas the Framework Convention is designed as a special human rights treaty, the Language Charter explicitly serves the purpose of contributing “to the maintenance and development of Europe’s cultural wealth and traditions,” which creates an interesting connection with the 2003 UNESCO Convention. The setup of the regime of protection in the Language Charter is described in detail, and the parallels in treaty design and the convergence of approaches, and also the conceptual differences are analyzed. At the end of the contribution, the question is raised what a comparative perspective might add to the two parallel endeavors, which up to now take few cognizance of each other.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?