Language and language have had a prominent place in philosophy since antiquity.
However, the problem of linguistic diversity appeared with Leibniz, Vico and Humboldt.
Two closely related questions have always been raised: the link between language and the "real world", and the question of universality, which seems to join the "search for the perfect language", which tends to be confused with the single language and therefore monolingualism.
Everything happens as if diversity and universality were necessarily and irreducibly opposed, and diversity and universality being the two extremes of an axis on which one could classify the situations actually observed. And so to come closer to the universal is always on the side of the unity that opposes singularity. Along the same lines, plurilingualism leans towards diversity, while monolingualism is almost the goal to be achieved in the name of the universality to which we aspire.
Putting plurilingualism and linguistic and cultural diversity at the heart of the universal is not at all self-evident.
If the real world is a physical world and a finite world, all languages are supposed to be able to express it, and since all languages say the same thing, only one language is needed to say everything. This is the foundation of monolingualism, with the corollary of war between languages, each language claiming to be the chosen language.
At the opposite end of the spectrum from this viewpoint, we offer readers two quotes.
Firstly, Picasso, who as an artist produced this very philosophical statement: "If there were only one truth, one would not be able to do a hundred paintings on the same theme.
Then Wittgenstein's famous aphorism, taken from the Tractatus: "The limits of my language are the limits of my own world".
Is it appropriate to introduce this debate into the Conference? The question for us is whether it is a critical question and a fundamental issue.
In our opinion, it would not be a critical issue if the way languages and the language question are perceived in today's society were not dependent on a common opinion that is indefensible today in the light of philosophy and science. To revive this debate seems to us to be in keeping with the vocation of the OEP.
Identity is also a crucial issue from the perspective of languages and plurilingualism.
Much work in sociolinguistics cannot succeed unless it is based on sound thinking about individual and collective identity, and parallel thinking about the relationship between languages and cultures. Like identitarianism, linguistic essentialism is incompatible with plurilingualism as an objective and leads to an existential impasse. However, the plurilingual approach makes it possible to address the question of identity in ways that are not possible with the monolingual confinement from which our societies are suffering today.
We are living in a very particular period where the question of identity is becoming generalized on a global scale in sometimes extreme forms and where the only identity that remains largely unthought of is the European identity. A significant place must therefore be reserved for a reflection on European identity, on European culture and cultures.
There are many sensitive issues in education.
Here are some of them.
The first question, which is rarely addressed, is whether language has a place in education. We learn French in France, which is the least we can do, we also learn two or even three foreign languages, we can even learn Latin and ancient Greek as an option, but language as a linguistic fact is outside the scope of education. In the past, when Latin was taught in a more developed way, it was likely to give rise to a metalinguistic knowledge that could be reinvested in the acquisition of French and modern languages, and was an important element of general culture. The question deserves to be asked.
One can rightly be alarmed that the learning of the mother tongue and the language of education has lost its importance and has seen its level drop, which seems today to be an observation that is no longer disputed. But we must also ask ourselves about the content of language teaching. Working on meaning is essential and must be a dimension of plurilingual and intercultural education. Just think of such passionately charged words as "slavery", "secularism", "truth". Are we sure that they have the same meaning from one language to another, from one culture to another, and even within the same language?
Other questions are important but remain unanswered. No European government, and even less the European Commission, condemned to a dead-end in-between, is taking them on.
The lowering of the age at which languages are taught seems to have received unanimous support from governments. But some have drawn the conclusion that language teaching can be stopped or reduced after secondary school, which in fact takes us further away from the objectives of the 2002 Barcelona summit.
What is being done in higher education?
In the business world, a minimum command of English is a condition for recruitment to even the most modest positions. But English is not enough. For us, it may be obvious, but there is a gulf with the state of public opinion.
We can also change our approach and explore the populations that are most exposed to language issues.
What is the social, economic and political impact, in terms of inequalities and the proper functioning of democracy, of illiteracy or literacy? Social cohesion and a society's capacity to change are directly at stake.
Like zones of fracture or innovation, some populations are more exposed to language issues than others.
There are therefore areas and parts of society where language issues are acute and where responses are expected both in terms of expertise and collective ownership. There are many such areas and the purpose of this call for papers is to identify them, to underline those in which data is lacking, those in which many uncertainties remain, where our knowledge is insufficient, and those in which the political will is lacking, etc.
In fact, language is the basis of everything, but few are aware of this.
We must analyse and then build, and continue to build.
This call for papers is primarily addressed to researchers, but it is also addressed to civil society and the cultural and artistic world.
It is important to emphasise the characteristic of the conference, which is to link the work of research with civil society and decision-makers. This specificity leads to giving partnerships a particular importance and its materialization is the production of conclusions which can take the form of a declaration committing all the partners.
Furthermore, the Assizes have always linked the work on linguistic and cultural diversity to artistic and literary expression, quite simply because artistic expression always aims at a singular view of the universal and it is in this respect that there is an intimate relationship between the aspiration to plurilingualism and artistic expression. Picasso said: "If there were only one truth, one could not paint a hundred paintings on the same theme". This could be our motto. Clearly, this call is open, and if the practical modalities hereafter essentially concern the expected oral and written communications, for the artistic forms, we are obliged to adapt ourselves, as far as possible, to the projects that might be presented to us.
Deadline for submission of abstracts: 30 April 2022.
All other practical information is available on the website and will be updated as needed: