Rights statement: This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development on 30/06/2017, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/01434632.2017.1342651
Accepted author manuscript, 483 KB, PDF document
Available under license: CC BY-NC: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Final published version
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Awkward questions
T2 - language issues in the 2011 census in England
AU - Sebba, Mark
N1 - This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development on 30/06/2017, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/01434632.2017.1342651
PY - 2018/2
Y1 - 2018/2
N2 - The 2011 Census in England broke new ground, as a question about language had never previously been asked. After stakeholder consultations and a series of trials, the census authority decided on two questions based on earlier censuses in the USA: one about the respondent’s ‘main language’ and another about proficiency in English. This paper provides a critique of the census questions, showing how the pressure to produce questions which were straightforward to answer and consistent with the predominant monolingual ideology led to the choice of two questions which were problematic in different ways. This raises doubts about the validity of the questions themselves and the usefulness of the data collected.
AB - The 2011 Census in England broke new ground, as a question about language had never previously been asked. After stakeholder consultations and a series of trials, the census authority decided on two questions based on earlier censuses in the USA: one about the respondent’s ‘main language’ and another about proficiency in English. This paper provides a critique of the census questions, showing how the pressure to produce questions which were straightforward to answer and consistent with the predominant monolingual ideology led to the choice of two questions which were problematic in different ways. This raises doubts about the validity of the questions themselves and the usefulness of the data collected.
KW - Census
KW - multilingualism
KW - language policy
KW - self-assessment of language proficiency
U2 - 10.1080/01434632.2017.1342651
DO - 10.1080/01434632.2017.1342651
M3 - Journal article
VL - 39
SP - 181
EP - 193
JO - Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development
JF - Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development
SN - 0143-4632
IS - 2
ER -