The work on this language group pertains to the Italian province of Bolzano (or Bozen) in the Alto Adige (or South Tyrol) region. It is estimated that there are 290,000 German speakers who constitute two thirds of the total population in the region. It is a region that has been subject to considerable political realignment during the 20th century, having been under both Austrian and Italian control. A Statute of Autonomy, granted to the area in 1972, accords equal status to German and Italian within the region.

The field work was undertaken during June 1995 involving eleven interviewers from the RCM in Brussels and six local interviewers. The work focused upon the two main urban centres of Bozen/Bolzano and Meran/Merano and the surrounding rural areas.

Tables 1 and 2 give a good indication of the extent of in-migration into the area of the respondents and of their parents and grandparents:

It seems that all the respondents were born in the Alto Adige (South Tyrol) province and particularly in Bozen and Merano. Their parents were also nearly all from the region, though a greater number were from outside Bozen and Merano.

The tendency for spatial exogamy does appear to have increased by the respondent's generation with only 45% of the partners deriving from Bozen or Merano.

The same pattern is evident in table 2 which refers to the parental place of residence at time of birth. Again over 80% of the respondents were from one of the two localities:

The high incidence of spatial endogamy by reference to marriage at least affords the possibility of a correspondingly high rate of language group endogamy by reference to spatially restricted language incidence. The indication of such patterns is found by considering the extent of language ability of different family members. This is found in tables 3 to 5 below.

It is clear that 71% of the fathers and 80% of the mothers speak fluent German, this presumably serving as an indication of the extent of language group endogamy for the preceding generation. Again there is a suggestion that there is a slight tendency for more men to marry into the language group than vice versa. This also appears to have been the case among the grandparental generation where 79% of the maternal grandparents and 68% of the paternal grandparents were fluent in German:

GERMAN:

ITALIAN:

The same pattern is evident by reference to a knowledge of Italian with almost 20% of the mothers knowing little or no Italian compared with only 13% of the fathers. The comparable figures for grandparents are 37% for the maternal side and 36% for the parental side. These last figures suggest that the extent of language group endogamy is similar for both sides, something that contradicts the previous data.

It is hardly surprising therefore that almost three quarters of the respondents have German as their 'first language':

A further 11% learned both languages together in the home. This would suggest that the extent of language group exogamy is fairly limited. This data should be paralleled by that concerning the language used by the parents when the respondent was a child (table 5):

Almost 70% claimed that their parents spoke German together when they were children, a further 14% claiming that both German and Italian were used. Clearly the number of respondents who have not learned the language in the home is small, being of the order of about 15%. It is incidentally of concern that 87 respondents did not give an answer to this question, for reasons which are not clear.

The extent of language group exogamy among the respondent's generation should be evident from a knowledge of the language ability of the partner, even though, of course, many will have learned German since marriage:

A relatively small number claim to have a partner, because the sample seems to have an overrepresentation of young people and clergymen, to some extent explicable by the fact that the population of Bozen itself does display these characteristics. Of the 114 respondents who report having a partner, 70% state that the partner's German is fluent and a further 13% say their spoken German is 'quite good'.

The incidence of ability among the respondents is indicated in table 7:

GERMAN:

ITALIAN:

This does throw some light on the extent of entry into the language group among those who were interviewed. Almost 90% claim to be able to understand German, but the percentage able to speak the language fluently is 84%. The degree of literacy is fairly high with 84% claiming a high level of reading ability and 74% a high writing ability. What is also significant is that the subjective ability levels by reference to German are far higher than for Italian, a remarkable situation for a minority language group even if the relevant language is a state language. This must one of the few cases in which abilities in the minority language are universally higher than in the state language.

Among those who did not learn German as a first language inside the family, as an agency of language group reproduction, most claim to have learned it in school (n=56) or in the family as a second language (=43). 14 quote friends as a a source, and 11 give other answers. Percentages are not given as some respondents gave several answers.

24 gave the school as the reason for learning the language, while a further 26 respondents learned the language for family reasons, these tending to be those who had married into the language group and felt obliged to learn German as a consequence. The indication that community integration and employment purposes were also incentives suggests that the community is able to serve as an agency of production and that at least some degree of prestige pertains to German within the area. These are issues we will return to below.

The preceding discussion serves as a background for the discussion of language use in the family. Table 9 refers to the experience of the respondents by reference to their use of language within their nuclear family prior to marriage, or in the case of the unmarried, to their current use:

Given what we have said about the patterns of language group endogamy it is not surprising to find that there is a greater tendency to use German exclusively with the mother than with the father, and that the use of Italian is far more significant by reference to fathers than mothers. The same relationships pertain by reference to use with grandparents, use of German being greater on the maternal than on the paternal side, and the situation referred by reference to the use of Italian. Indeed the figures almost balance which suggests that the majority are involved in situation where both parents use German and that the residual cases conform to what has been suggested above, this being a feature of endogamy rather than a tendency to reject German in favour of Italian among people who are fluent in both languages.

This is supported by the similarity of the figures across the two generations. The figures which pertain to siblings do not show any difference that pertains to gender. Neither is the incidence of the exclusive use of German significantly different from that for the preceding generations.

The experience of the partner of the respondent by reference to the familial language use is shown in table 10:

Unlike the respondents own reported language use, the figures for use by partners, across both parents, are remarkably similar, though the incidence of use of Italian is higher.

The use of Italian with the children is also high with almost a third using at least some Italian with their children. This is accounted for by the greater tendency for the partners to derive from outside of the language group than is the case for the respondents. Thus these figures should not be taken as being indicative of inter-generational change in language use.

The incidence of use within the nuclear family of the respondent as it now exists is shown in table 11:

TABLE 11: CURRENT LANGUAGE USE WITHIN THE HOME

(% calculated on basis of valid answers)

Almost three-quarters claim to use German exclusively at mealtime compared with less than 10% who use Italian exclusively. There is also a greater tendency to use both languages at mealtimes than when exclusive use with either mother or father is taken separately. That is, when everyone is together, and not everyone is fluent in German, both languages are used whereas in dyadic family relationships there tends to be a selection of language use in accordance with ability of the parent. Again we draw attention to signs of higher incidence of Italian use with the father rather than the mother.

The amount of Italian used by the (relatively small number of) children of the respondents together is not large (table 12):

Most use German exclusively and a similar number use mainly German together or use both languages equally.

Table 13 indicates the use of language on the telephone:

The difference between the use of German in the home and at work is immediately apparent. Whereas the use of German prevails in the home with two-thirds claiming the exclusive or main use of German, there is a much greater tendency to use Italian at work.

Tables 14 and 15 derive from responses to a subject evaluation of the use of German in different community contexts when the respondents were children and the current use in the same contexts:

The perception of past use according to the respondents (though it must be mentioned that over a third did not answer this item) is high across all contexts, the difference across contexts not being large. However there is a feeling that use has declined, this decline being perceived as greatest in the shops and least in the religious institutions. It is also significant that there are fewer who claim that German is never heard now than in the past. It also seems that religion is divided between the exclusive use of either German or Italian. The religious option of the respondents leads to a relatively monolingual religious environment, and a larger number of respondents reply that they never heard or hear German used in this context than in the others.

A higher proportion of respondents reply this time. There is a slight decline in the number of respondents reporting "frequent" use of German nowadays, though the same can be said of the complete absence of German, which also seems to be reduced.

An attempt to establish the extent of formal German-language activities within the community is shown in the next table:

Clearly the extent of involvement is not large among the respondents but the number who added 'other' activities to the main choices suggests that there is at least one other relatively popular activity available within the community. Nevertheless it seems that fewer than half the respondents are involved in such formal German-language activities.

Table 17 indicates the extent of involvement and the language(s) used in both formal and informal activities within the community:

If we now look at activities cited by at least 40 respondents, the picture that emerges is as follows:

As we have already indicated most of the formal religious activity are conducted either exclusively in German or exclusively in Italian. Only 9% of those involved in such activities claimed that both languages were used. We shall return to this issue momentarily. It also seems that the number who are involved in formal or activities exclusively through the medium of Italian re few in number. On the other hand there are numerous who are involved in activities where both languages are used. Thus the theatre and political activities are examples of such bilingual contexts. Yet there are others who are involved in the same activities exclusively through the medium of German. It also seems that sports activities while existing in both languages and bilingually tend to attract participants in German only contexts. The informal activities of socialising with friends and in bars tend to show a fairly high incidence of Italian language use. Again we return to this context below.

It seems that most of the respondents are involved in formal religious activities, only 11% of those who responded to this question claiming that they were not:

Almost three-quarters claimed that they attended either regularly or sometimes. The figures that pertain to the languages used in religious activities are similar to those discussed above with the majority being through the medium of German and an almost equal number of the others conducting their religious affairs either through the exclusive medium of Italian or bilingually. There does not appear to be much difference in language use across the various functions:

Tables 20 and 21 indicate the estimated ability of people encountered in different community contexts and the language used with them:

Most respondents claimed that all or most of their friends spoke German, suggesting that friendship networks are structured by reference to language group. This also appears to pertain to residence in that a greater proportion - 44% - claim that all of their neighbours speak German than who claim that all of their friends speak German. On the other hand there is also a significant proportion that does not live in areas heavily populated by German speakers with 16% claiming that fewer than half of their neighbours speak German. The incidence of exclusivity by reference to language ability decreases when we consider the other three contexts, only 14% claiming that all of the contacts at cultural activities speak German compared with 15% for sports activities and 27% for the shops which they frequent. The higher incidence for 'shops' may derive from a conscious decision to use specific shops wherever possible. It also seems that a minority of between 15 and 20% of the respondents mix with a minority of German speakers in sports and cultural activities.

The language use patterns with these contacts are shown in table 21, which should however be interpreted with caution, given that a large number of respondents did not, for some reason, reply:

A comparison of the two tables indicates that the incidence of exclusive use of German is higher than the cases where everyone speaks the language for shops, sports and cultural activities suggesting that for a significant minority there is a tendency to seek out German speakers in these activities. The number who adopt the opposite posture of using Italian exclusively are small in number. Indeed in sports and shopping those who use more Italian than German are few.

Table 22 considers the language of dyadic exchanges within different community contexts, though as before a disturbingly high number of respondents fail to reply to many of the items:

If they are now ranked by decreasing possibility of use, the following emerges:

It seems that the respondents are able to use German in most contexts if they so choose. Among those who claim that they cannot use German there is no indication that this is more the case in government agencies such as the gas service or the post office than in any other contexts. The greatest incidence of such suggestions is by reference to buying a newspaper, the bar, the police, buying petrol, other shopping, speaking to a councillor, the post office, discussing the rates, and electricity all of which are claimed to be impossible through the medium of German by more than 20% of those who responded. Among those who claimed that they could use German but chose not to the police stands out as the most evident context with over 60% claiming that this was the case. Other high incidence cases within this category were the local authorities, discussing the rates, with the telephone exchange, and Post office all of which were cited in this context by a third or more of the respondents. At the other extreme there are a range of contexts in which most of respondents claim that they can and do use German. These involve sports activities, the school, the doctor and dentist, library, hairdresser, theatre, the bank, hi-fi shop, travel agent, optician, social worker, and the church by reference to all of which 70% or more of those who commented claimed they could and did use German. The lowest frequency of this category occurred in dealings with the police, post office, and the telephone exchange.

Finally table 23 gives information concerning the use of language in children's activities within the community:

Again it would appear that the extent of activity is limited: a very small number of answers has been obtained, and this invalidates any interpetation of the results. However, it does seem that most of these activities are available in both languages and that the majority of the children use German in their participation.

The majority of the respondents received their education at the primary and secondary level either exclusively through the medium of German or bilingually, though for reasons which are not clear, as many as 15% did not reply to the primary and sewcondary education levels:

Fewer than 10% received an exclusively Italian language education. The extent of bilingual education declines beyond the secondary level, parents choosing between one language and the other. This choice is available to higher educational level.

In order to understand these figures it is necessary to refer to Article 19 of the Statute of Autonomy which states that children have the right to be taught in their maternal language and that each language group has its own educational system. In the German language schools German is the medium of instruction and Italian is introduced as a second language from the second year of elementary school. The converse is the case in the Italian language schools. Given this privileged situation in comparison with most minority language group it is hardly surprising that so many of the children of the respondents opted for German language education:

The claim that there is no choice by reference to higher education is not strictly correct in that there is a German language Hochschule in the area but it is claimed that a German language university is required in the area. As table 26 indicates there is an open choice by reference to language as an educational medium:

Furthermore this choice is available within reach of most of the respondents:

Evidently the customary tendency to teach the arts through the medium of the minority language and the sciences through the medium of the state language in areas where minority language education is available does not pertain here, German language education being available on a universal basis:

Clearly German is the main medium of educational activity in the area.

The economy of the region is dominated by the service sector which accounts for 61·2% of the employment. Within this sector much of the activity involves tourism but the Statute also guarantees that German is used in public administration. Industrial activity accounts for a quarter of the employment and a further 13·5% are employed in agriculture. Table 29 indicates the employment of the respondents within this economic context:

Most of them are employed in small, locally owned enterprises.

Table 30 also suggests that most of these enterprises were locally owned, the owners being members of the German language group:

It is possible that the remainder of the Directors are also local. Indeed, this is suggested in table 31:

Only two of the directors appear not to understand German, the majority being either fluent or having a good grasp of the language.

Tables 32 and 33 indicate the extent of the knowledge and use of German within the labour force within which the respondents were located:

It seems that the majority of the work force at all levels speaks German. Over 90% claimed that all or most of the directors spoke German and 72% claimed that all or most of their colleagues spoke the language. This suggests that there is a greater propensity for German speakers to own the enterprises than to work for them.

German is also the predominant language used at work:

Of those who referred to directors 77% claimed they used mainly German with them compared with 53% who claimed to use mainly with their colleagues, 55% with their subordinates and 43% with their clients. The equal use of both languages is cited in a third of cases, in dealings with both subordinates and clients. This is indicative of a healthy work context by reference to the German language.

It is hardly surprising therefore that German is the main language of administration cited by 51% of the respondents, a further 30% claiming that both languages are used in administration (table 34):

This gives context to the data in table 35 pertaining to the relative importance of the two languages at work:

GERMAN:

ITALIAN:

Almost 90% of all those who responded to this part of the questionnaire claimed that the four elements of German ability were essential for their work. The relative figures for Italian were lower but not significantly so. Clearly bilingualism would appear to be an essential prerequisite for employment in the area, at least in the minds of the respondents.

If this is indeed the case it is not surprising that companies have language specific hiring policies:

While these figures do not appear to be high it must be remembered that we are talking about a limited number of companies - the respondents mentioned 93 enterprises in table 29 and it is quite likely that some companies were mentioned more than once. Thus the figures in table 36 are quite significant, suggesting that German is an important feature of their policy, at least by reference to their public image.

It such circumstances that leads to specific language policies - a context where the work force deems the language to be of important and an awareness on the part of the company of the political importance and relevance of the use of the language in their relationship with the community:

Again it is important to recognise the limited number of companies referred to, and the figures in this table indicates that the respondents were referring to no more than 83 companies in the preceding data. It is evident that most companies are sensitive to language issues and have specific policies by reference to language. Within such a context the lack of a policy does not necessarily indicate that attention is not paid to language issues at work.

Given this context it is inevitable that companies will have a tendency to recruit workers from within one or other language group:

Evidently in this case the tendency is to demonstrate preference for German speakers but once again we should underline that the context is essentially bilingual, at least by reference to the regional context, with members of the Italian language group learning German in the school, thereby becoming members of the German language group through language group production. It is also important to recognise that a large part of the tourist industry relies upon German speaking tourists drawn from Germany and Austria, this giving the language a specific relevance in this sector of employment.

Article 8.4 of the Statute of Autonomy refers to the use of German in the media. Financial support is offered by the state to implement the relevant laws. There are three main German language newspapers in the area, one of which has a circulation in excess of 40,000 and the other two which tend to be bilingual. There are also several periodicals, the largest of which has circulation of 30,000. In contrast to the newspapers these do not receive any state aid. Of course non-Italian German language publications are also widely available in the area. The population supports the publication of between 150 and 200 German books annually.

There is one public radio station that broadcasts entirely in German and another that broadcasts largely in German. There are also numerous private radio stations that serve German speakers. radio broadcasts can also be received from Austria. There is a minority language television service in German. This broadcasts in excess of 12 hours weekly in German. Once again German language television can be received from Austria.

It seems that the majority of the respondents do receive both television and radio services in German:

German language broadcasting appears to be most popular among the respondents (table 40):

RADIO:

TELEVISION:

A high proportion - 70% - claim not to listen to any Italian language radio, and 53% claim not to watch any Italian language television. In contrast only 54% do not listen to German language radio and 45% do not watch any German language television. Among those who do listen and watch, where the tendency to listen to radio is marginally greater by reference to the Italian service the reverse is the case by reference to television.

The high level of literacy in German, which appears to be higher than the level of literacy in Italian, precludes the customary situation of many minority language groups where the low literacy level and, sometimes, the small population, sets limits upon the availability of the print media.

a. GERMAN:

b. ITALIAN:

Table 41 suggests that the respondents tend to read more books and newspapers in German than they do in Italian. Over two thirds claim to read German books often while almost half claim to read German language newspapers often.

Given the volatile history of the region which has been under the authority of both Austria and Italy during the recent past it would not be surprising to find that language serves as a symbol of political alignment and that such political alignment becomes a feature of subjective identity. That is while we are treating the language group as a distinctive group because of the sociological premise that there is only one society for each state, thereby insisting upon the existence for different language groups for states or state regions which share the same language, this does not preclude the existence of a subjective identity that transcends this conception. On the same score it is perhaps not surprising that at least respondents fail to commit themselves; and this figure rises to fully a half when asked if they regard themselves as "German" or "Italian".

Table 42 suggests that the majority of the respondents - 89% of those who responded - perceive of themselves as South Tyrolean. On the other hand this does not appear to mean that such an identity is expressed in terms of a negation of the state identity for many since almost half of those who responded also claimed an Italian identity; a similar percentage claimed a German identity. The possible correlation between the answers given by individuals has not been calculated to find out to what degree, if any, different combinations of identities are mutually exclusive.

The attitude scale scores presented in Table 43 have to be understood in this context. As before, a disturbingly high proportion of respondents refuse to state their opinion. Where the items are ideally suited to most minority language contexts the privileged context of this particular minority suggests that some of the items may well have appeared absurd to the respondents. be that as it may the results are presented and discussed below.

There is an evident tendency to agree or disagree strongly by reference to six items, with over half of those who responded opting for this single choice on these items. Thus there was little support for the idea that German is old-fashioned, that it is indicative of a low social status, that it is old-fashioned, and that it has no place in the modern world. On the other hand there is strong support for the claim that South Tyrol would not be what it is without the language, that children should learn German and that German should be widely used in work. There is less support for the idea that only German should be used in local administration, but there is general agreement with the claim that German is of value for social mobility. However the range of responses to these two items is greater than by reference to those referred to above. That is there is a certain ambiguity and less agreement about such issues. Somewhat surprisingly there is also a general ambiguity and even support for the idea that there are more valuable languages than German.