The Geolinguistics of State Foreign Language Education Policy Regarding Rarely Taught Languages of the Global South

This paper is based on a talk given by the author at the round table discussion on Current Trends in the Development of Language Policy in CIS, Asia, Africa and the Caribbean (MGIMO University, Moscow, October 12, 2023). Geolinguistics in the context of Russian government foreign language policy planning was discussed in terms of languages of the Global South not yet taught in the Russian Federation. Based on the principle that political multi-polarity implies linguistic multi-polarity, many languages of regional importance were identified. Although great-power status for Russia is assumed to apply at present, demographics suggest that this will change in the future. Nevertheless, with proper foreign language education planning, Russia’s soft-power status can be preserved indefinitely. Different approaches with regard to language policy can exist. One approach is that of promoting homogeneity in language use. Another is encouraging transparency in the transfer of information through multilingualism. Yet another one is that of promoting linguistic multi-polarity, where national, international, and local languages are valued equally. Government language education policies, whether idealistic or Machiavellian, must have concrete, usually politically determined, objectives. On the basis of political and economic considerations, Kurdish, Nepali, Burmese, Sinhala, Tamil, Cambodian, and also Tagalog were recommended. A case was also made for the pidgin and creole language studies being taken seriously. Various African languages of national importance were mentioned, as well as Sundanese a language spoken in Indonesia and Cebuano, a language spoken in the Philippines, on the grounds that they are included on Google and/or Yandex Translate. Finally, emoji was introduced as a worldwide pidgin that is rapidly developing into a language for written communication, especially among people who use sign languages. Language education policies can have political objectives which are positive, negative, or neutral. Though there are too many languages of potential importance to teach all, Russian advocacy of multi-polarity must presuppose a commitment to multilingualism and to transparency as to its methods and objectives.