Multilingual policies and practices in Andorra and the German-speaking community of Belgium

In the context of an emerging sociolinguistics of borders, this paper explores the links between language policy and micro-territoriality as a transbordering experience. While language policy, i.e., the study of the management of language use in society, is a well-established subfield of sociolinguistics (Ricento & Hornberger, 1996; Spolsky, 2004), research on the connections between language policy and the transbordering dynamics of micro-territories is a recent endeavor (Jiménez-Salcedo et al., 2020). Micro-territories refer to small polities (states or autonomous entities within a state) characterized by transborder movement that shapes language practices in the society of the micro-territory.
Two European micro-territories, namely Andorra and the German-speaking Community of Belgium (GCB), serve as case studies for the illustration of the link between language policy and transbordering practices. While different in their degree of sovereignty (Andorra being a recognized state vis-à-vis the GCB as an autonomous community within the Belgian state), their language policies are shaped by the borderland character of their societies. In other words, geographic, historical, political, and socio-economic factors lead to recognition and promotion policies of various languages in each territory: Catalan, Spanish, and French for the case of Andorra, and German, French, and Dutch for the case of the GCB.
By comparing current language policy texts with available demolinguistic data, this paper shows the discontinuity between current language policies and the heterogeneous language practices of each case. As both cases exhibit varying degrees of societal multilingualism that is increasingly conditioned through migration and commuting, their language policies reflect the traditional language dynamics while being strategically ambiguous (Hawkey & Horner, 2022) about more recent language practices that have become prominent in their societies. Although this discontinuity is a common phenomenon of globalized society, we argue that the transbordering practices of these two cases disrupt the top-down implementation of their language policies.