We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 February 2009
The meaning of the term “state language” is certainly so obvious that it hardly need be defined. A state language is simply the language used in conducting the official business of a state. The language of the state serves in many areas of life. It is the language which authorities are expected to employ in communicating with each other and with citizens and which citizens speak in dealing with officials; it is the language used in courts of justice, the language of the railway and postal services, the language in which the transactions of representative bodies are conducted and in which the minutes of the debates in those bodies are recorded, and, finally, the language in which the texts of laws and decrees must be written to be legally binding.
1 For just a small selection of these studies, see Fischhof, Adolph, Die Sprachenrechte in den Staaten gemischter Nationalität (Vienna: Manz, 1885)Google Scholar; Buck, Carl D., “Language and the Sentiment of Nationality,” The American Political Science Review, Vol. X (1916), pp. 44–69Google Scholar; Bordihn, Franz, Das positive Recht der nationalen Minderheit (Berlin: Engelmann, 1921)Google Scholar; Epstein, Leo, Der nationale Minderheitenschutz als internationales Rechtsproblem (Berlin: Engelmann, 1922)Google Scholar; Boehm, Max Hildebert, Europa irredenta (Berlin: Hobbing, 1923)Google Scholar; Aucamp, Anna J., Bilingual Education and Nationalism (Pretoria: Van Schaik, 1926)Google Scholar; Auerhan, Jan, Die sprachlichen Minderheiten in Europa (Berlin-Friedenau: Hensel, 1926)Google Scholar; Balogh, Arthur von, Der internationale Schutz der Minderheiten (Munich: Südost-Verlag Dresler, 1928)Google Scholar; Wilfan, Josip, Les minorites ethniques et la paix en Europe (Vienna: Braumüller, 1929)Google Scholar; Redslob, Robert, Le principe des nationalités. Les origines, les fondements psychologiques, les forces adverses, les solutions possibles (Paris: Libr. du Recueil Sirey, 1930)Google Scholar; Erler, Georg H. J., Das Recht der nationalen Minderheiten (Münster: Aschendorff, 1931)Google Scholar; Macartney, Carlile A., National States and National Minorities (London: Oxford University Press, 1934)Google Scholar; Woolner, Alfred C., Languages in History and Politics (London: Oxford University Press, 1938)Google Scholar; and Deutsch, Karl W., “The Trend of European Nationalism. The Language Aspect,” The American Political Science Review, Vol. XXXVI (1942), pp. 533–541Google Scholar.
2 “Independent people” (Das eigenständige Volk) is the title of the following study that for the first time systematically investigates the self-existence of a people confronted with the political order, religious community, race, and other social factors: Boehm, Max Hildebert, Das eigenständige Volk. Volkstheoretische Grundlagen der Ethnopolitik und Geisteswissenschaften (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1932)Google Scholar.
3 In this essay the author will discuss those universally-accepted regulations which in their entirety constituted a kind of body of state language laws. His account has been based mainly on the compilation of documents in Fischel's, Alfred Das Österreichische Sprachenrecht (2nd ed., Brünn: Irrgang, 1910)Google Scholar. Fischel's “collection of sources” is still the best and most comprehensive collection of legal regulations on the language question for the western half of the monarchy, even though many areas of public life have been neglected and even though, generally speaking, much that Fischel has included has been presented only as examples of other regulations that were similar in both subject matter and form. To keep the footnotes as short as possible, hereafter footnote references will be made only for actual quotations from Fischel or when sources other than Fischel are referred to. Moreover, little mention will be made of other literature dealing with the subject.
4 Fischel, Dos Österreichische Sprachenrecht, Doc. No. 59.
5 As quoted in ibid., p. xlii.
6 Presidential communication of the aulic chancellery to the governments at Prague and Brünn, December 15, 1834, ibid., Doc. No. 145.
7 see especially the minutes of the debates of July 12 and September 11, 1848, Verhandlungen des österreichischen Reichstages nach der stenographischen Aufnahme (5 vols., Vienna: K. k. Oesterr. Hof- und Staatsdruckerei, 1848–1949), Vol. I, pp. 7–15; Vol. II, pp. 321–340Google Scholar. See also Burian, Peter, Die Nationalitäten in “Cisleithanien” und das Wahlrecht der Märzrevolution 1848–49 (Graz: Hermann Böhlaus Nachf., 1962), pp. 40–45 and 191Google Scholar.
8 Note especially František Ladislav Rieger's statement on February 8, 1849, at the meeting of the constitutional committee. See Springer, Anton (ed.), Protokolle des Verfassungs-Ausschusses im Oesterreichischen Reichstage 1848–1849 (Leipzig: S. Hirzel, 1885), pp. 136–144Google Scholar.
9 To be sure, there were differences between the April 25, 1848, constitution, the Kremsier draft, and the March 4, 1849, constitution. Paragraph 4 of the April 25, 1848, constitution reads: “Inviolability of nationality and language is guaranteed to all races.” Paragraph 21 of the Kremsier draft stipulates: “All races of the empire are equal. Each race has an inalienable right to the preservation and cultivation of its nationality in general and its language in particular. The state will guarantee the equality of all native languages in the schools, offices, and public life.” Paragraph 5 of the March 4, 1849, constitution states: “All races are equal, and every race has an inalienable right to the protection and cultivation of its nationality and language.”
10 Friedjung, Heinrich, Österreich von 1848 bis 1860 (2 vols., Stuttgart: J. C. Cotta'sche Buchhandlung Nachf., 1908–1910), Vol. I, p. 288Google Scholar.
11 Decree of November 19, 1903 (the so-called “Pitreich reservation decree”), Fischel, Das Österreichische Sprachenrecht, Doc. No. 449.
12 “All races of the state are equal, and every race has an inviolable right to the preservation and cultivation of its nationality and language. The equality of all native languages [landesübliche Sprachen] in schools, offices, and public life is recognized by the state. In provinces which are inhabited by more than one race public educational institutions are to be set up in such a manner that each race retains the necessary resources to be educated in its own language without being compelled to learn a second native language” (Landessprache). See also ante, p. 89, n. 9.
13 See especially Stourzh, Gerald, “Die Gleichberechtigung der Nationalitäten und die österreichische Dezemberverfassung von 1867. Zur Entstehung und Bedeutung des Artikels XIX des Staatsgrundgesetzes über die allgemeinen Rechte der Staatsbürger,” in Der österreiehischungarische Ausgleich von 1867. Vorgeschichte und Wirkungen (Vienna: Herold, 1967), pp. 205–212Google Scholar.
14 Decree of the presidency of the superior provincial court at Graz, April 18,1882, Fischel, Das Österreichische Sprachenrecht, Doc. No. 379.
15 See ante, p. 92.
16 The government explained to the Dalmatian diet in 1886, after the latter had proposed the introduction of Serbo-Croatian as the language of the inner service of the sovereign's authorities, that “none of the rights of the populace guaranteed by the constitution will be affected by the language employed in the internal service of these authorities.” Fischel, , Das Österreichische Sprachenrecht, p. lxxxi, n. 1Google Scholar.
17 Stourzh, “Die Gleichberechtigung der Nationalitäten und die österreichische Dezemberverfassung von 1867,” pp. 198–205.
18 Mitis, Oskar (ed.), Josef Maria Baernreither. Der Verfall des Habsburgerreiches und. die Deutschen. Fragmente eines politischen Tagebuches 1897–1917 (Vienna: Holzhausen, 1938), p. iiiGoogle Scholar.
19 See Loewenheim, Francis L., “German Liberalism and the Czech Renascence: Ignaz Kuranda, Die Grenzboten, and Developments in Bohemia, 1845–1849,” in Peter, Brock and Skilling, H. Gordon (eds.), The Czech Renascence of the Nineteenth Century (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1970), pp. 146–175Google Scholar.
20 See Kleyle's, report of April 14, 1848, Protokolle der Sitzungen des ständischen Central-Ausschusses zur Berathung über die Reform der Provinzial-Stände-Institute (6 vols., Vienna, 1848), Vol. III, pp. 4–6Google Scholar. The report was reprinted as Appendix VI in Hugelmann, Karl, “Der ständische Zentralausschuß in Österreich im April 1848,” Jahrbuach für Landeskunde von Niederösterreich, new ser., Vol. XII (1913), pp. 247–252Google Scholar. See also Redlich, Josef, Das österreichische Staats- und Reichsproblem (2 vols., Leipzig: P. Reinhold, 1920–1926), Vol. I, Pt. 1, pp. 127–129Google Scholar.
21 For the Aussee Program, see Molisch, Paul, Geschichte der deutsehnationalen Bewegung in Österreich von ihren Anfängen bis zum Zerfall der Monarchie (Jena: G. Fischer, 1926), p. 71Google Scholar; and Franz, Georg, Liberalismus. Die deutschliberale Bewegung in der habsburgischen Monarchie (Munich: Georg D. W. Callwey, 1955), p. 244Google Scholar. For the other programs, see Klaus, Berchtold (ed.), Österreichische Parteiprogramme 1868–1966 (Munich: Oldenbourg, 1967), pp. 179–225Google Scholar. For the programs during the World War, see Molisch, Geschichte der deutschnationalen Bewegung in Österreich, pp. 241–244; and Birke, Ernst, “Der Erste Weltkrieg und die Gründung der Tschechoslowakei 1914–1919,” in Karl, Bosl (ed.), Handbuch der Geschichte der böhmischen Länder, Vol. III (Stuttgart: Anton Hiersemann, 1968), pp. 282–283 and 446Google Scholar.
22 The report on Count Wurmbrand's proposal of March 9, 1883, of the language committee appointed by the house of representatives can be found in Alfred, Fischel (ed.), Materialien zur Sprachenfrage in Österreich (Brünn: Irrgang, 1902), pp. 10–17.Google Scholar For a discussion of the Wurmbrand proposal, see Kolmer, Gustav, Parlament und Verfassung in Österreich (8 vols., Vienna: C. Fromme, 1902–1914), Vol. III, pp. 134–135, 244–251, and 255–266Google Scholar; and von Czedik, Alois Freiherr, Zur Geschichte der k. k. österreichischen Ministerien 1861–1916 (4 vols., Teschen: Karl Prochaska, 1917–1920), Vol. I, pp. 406–416. It should be noted that there are mistakes in the text printed in CzedikGoogle Scholar.
23 Anton, Bezeczny (ed.), Die Thronreden Sr. Majestät dea Kaisers und Königs Franz Josefs I. bei der feierlichen Eröffnung und Schließung des österreichischen Reichsrates (2nd ed., Vienna: Manz, 1912), p. 143Google Scholar.
24 For the resolution of the united executive board, see Verhandlungen des Gesammtparteitages der Sozialdemokratie in Oesterreich abgehalten zu Brünn vom 24. bis 29. September 1899. …. Nach dem stenographischen Protokolle (Vienna: Wiener Volksbuchhandlung, 1899), pp. xiv-xvGoogle Scholar. The minutes of the debates on September 27 and 28, 1899, can be found in ibid., pp. 74–84 and 104–108. The definitive text of the resolution can be found in Berchtold, , Österreichische Parteiprogramme 1868–1966, pp. 144–145. See also Hans Mommsen, Nationalitätenfrage und Arbeiterbewegung (Trier: Karl-Marx-Haus, 1971), pp. 35–36Google Scholar
25 Popovici, Aurel C. Die Vereinigten Staaten von Groß-Österreich. Politisehe Studien zur Löaung der nationalen Fragen und staatsrechtlichen Krisen in Österreich-Ungarn (Leipzig: B. Elischer, 1906), pp. 314–316Google Scholar; von Chlumecky, , Erzherzog Franz Ferdinands Wirken und Wollen (Berlin: Verlag für Kulturpolitik, 1929), pp. 286–287Google Scholar; Franz, Georg, Erzherzog Franz Ferdinand und die Pläne zur Reform der Habsburger Monarchie (Brünn: Rohrer, 1943), pp. 86 and 134–135Google Scholar. “The use of German as the language of accommodation in Austria is not a concession to the Germans but a state necessity. Every state needs an official language and language of accommodation. It is clear that all other languages in Austria would have to surmount greater difficulties than German to become the language of accommodation in Austria. It is beside the mark to demand the use of German as a language of accommodation as a right of the Germans. The other nations must concede the superiority of the German language not to the Germans but to the state.” Ignaz, Seipel, Nation und Staat (Vienna: Braumüller, 1916), p. 86, n. 66.Google Scholar
26 For these German demands and the motives behind them, see especially Josef Redlich's entries in his diary for January 13 and October 18, 1915; January 13 and 20, March 12, and December 7, 1916; February 5 and July 12, 1917; and May 17, 1918. See Fritz, Fellner (ed.), Schieksalsjahre Österreichs 1908–1919. Das politische Tagebuch Josef Redlichs (2 vols., Graz: Böhlau, 1953–1954), Vol. II, pp. 7–8, 68, 94–95, 105,163,189, 221, and 274.Google Scholar
