After the announcement of the competition for the head of the Language Inspectorate, experts hope for changes: “The institution is currently compromised” | Culture

In this article, we talk with experts about the need for this institution, what qualities the new leader should possess. We asked Minister Simon Kairis whether this institution should remain at all.

Should be communicative

Editor, publishing project manager Aira Niauronytė said that the person holding the position of head of the language inspectorate should cooperate with other institutions and the public, not be a strict language purist, radical nationalist or xenophobe.

“This institution is currently compromised due to the political statements of the current leader”, said A. Niauronytė.

15min remindsthat the current head of the Language Inspectorate, Audrius Valotka, is famous for his possibly xenophobic statements in the public sphere, such as the fact that he may have called the bus drivers “chirks” during the editors’ conference REDA.

Photo by Aurelija Pakeltytė/Aira Niauronytė-Leonidovna

In her opinion, it would be good for the head of the institution to have a broader vision of the language policy: “Although the inspectorate does not independently formulate the language policy (it is done by the Ministry of Culture), the head could contribute to its formation. It seems to me that there is a lack of communication in Lithuania, what is the policy of the Lithuanian language in general, the strategy of competitiveness of the Lithuanian language. We are talking about the prestige of the language, but it can only come about as a result of a wise and modern language policy.”

A. Niauronytė stressed: not only for the Lithuanian language, but also for all other languages ​​that are not current lingua francathere are challenges as more and more content in the world is used in English.

“It is good that people in Lithuania know foreign languages, we are not closed and provincial. Of course, the Lithuanian language must have its place in culture, remain the language of culture and self-expression, and we must keep in mind that it is the 21st century, not the 19th century, said A. Niauronytė. – A modern language policy strategy is needed, starting with teaching in schools, it is also important to include technology more in language research, a general dictionary of the Lithuanian language is very much needed. We should aim for Lithuanian citizens to be educated and speak as many foreign languages ​​as possible, but it is also important that the Lithuanian language is part of the modern identity.”

When asked if she herself would like to run for this position, A. Niauronytė answered in the negative. Currently, she works at her favorite job at the publishing house “Kitos knygos” and is writing a master’s thesis in the field of art studies.

Translator and member of the State Lithuanian Language Commission Laimantas Jonušys believes that the leader should balance demandingness and tolerance: “Now those functions (Language inspectorates – 15min) is no longer so large, there is no longer a possibility to impose fines for irregular language use, so it should be indicated and announced in some way, but there is no need for excessive strictness here. I think the current manager meets these qualities.”

“Of course, he had a couple of outbursts. It is not good. But looking at all his activities, those statements were secondary”, continued L. Jonušys.

The translator himself would not apply for such a position, because “it’s not for him”.

Valdas Kopūstas / 15min photo / Head of Language Inspection Audrius Valotka

Institutions should not remain?

Some people working in the field of culture see this institution as harmful in general. One of the main principles of its operation is to supervise the language, because the language policy is formed by the Ministry of Culture. 15min asked if it should be closed.

According to A. Niauronytė, she associates the name of the Language Inspectorate with the thought police described in George Orwell’s novels.

“I think that in the future there should not be fines from such an institution, which has been responsible for language control for a long time. It is true that during the leadership of the current leader, Audrius Valotkas, from 2019, the possibility of punishing errors on the list of Major Language Errors was legally abolished. However, many things can be considered mistakes, and as far as I understand, fines for language mistakes are still legalized, only A. Valotka no longer applies them. This, of course, is very good,” commented the editor. She added that language policy has been liberalizing in principle recently, but public opposition to linguists and language institutions is still considerable.

Julius Kalinskas / 15min photo / Laimantas Jonušys

According to L. Jonušius, such an institution is necessary in Lithuania: “If there are certain laws and requirements, it is necessary that someone supervises them. Especially today, the question arises not so much about the correct use of the Lithuanian language, but about its use in the public sphere in general. Speaking of which, in some cases the Language Inspectorate has the right to punish.”

The expert pointed out that regulation is needed for public names and in the sphere of services, such as transportation.

S. Kairys: there were no plans to close the inspectorate

Before commenting, S. Kairys warned that this time his comment will be “very poor”, because “various persons like to appeal the results to the court”.

Recently, the current head of the inspectorate, A. Valotka, posted a question on his Facebook account: “Who would you like to participate in (the competition – 15min)? It would be more fun on the road.” It can be concluded that there are not so many candidates. When S. Kairis was asked how many options there are, he said that no one knows yet.

“Where Mr. Valotka is talking about is strange, because no one knows how many candidates there are,” said S. Kairys, adding that the final picture will be revealed by July 15.

Skirmantas Lisauskas/BNS photo/Simonas Kairys

When asked if there were no plans in the ministry to close the Language Inspectorate and take a more active role in language policy issues, S. Kairys commented: “Perhaps it should not be the ministry that replaces the Language Inspectorate, but the Language Commission operating in the Seimas.”

He assured that there were various thoughts: “There were also written versions about the Law on the State Language, which would reflect the institutional structure, but they did not dare to come to normal considerations. And the ministry and myself, seeing the whole problem, it is obvious that you can do whatever you want until the law is reviewed and changed. There will always be many opinions and interpretations on this matter. If changes are desired, everything depends on the laws that the inspectorate must enforce, and sometimes there is a lot of public noise about that enforcement, although in reality no one is punished.”

S. Kairys emphasized that during this term he had set all his priorities, and the abolition of the Language Inspectorate was not one of them.