Classifications of Language Endangerement

Tools to measure language vitality

Joshua Fishman proposed an 8-level Graded Intergenerational Disruption Scale (GIDS) in 1991 that shortly became the framework that language vitality categories developed from. It was been expanded by Lewis and Simson (2010) as the Expanded Graded Intergenerational Disruption Scale (EGIDS).

UNESCO

Fishman's (1991) 8-level Graded Intergenerational Disruption Scale (GIDS)

In 2003, UNESCO published a tool to help categorize a language's vitality level. The endangered languages are categorized as shown in the table. To define the languages, UNESCO uses nine factors that are graded 1-5 to place the language on the scale between safe to extinct. UNESCO has also published the Atlas of the World's Languages in Danger, which classifies languages into six categories, from Safe (NE) to Extinct (EX).

UNESCO’s nine factors for assessing language vitality and endangerment. These factors are each scored 0–5 based on descriptors found in UNESCO (2003).

ELP

The Endangered Language Project (ELP) was started in June 2012 with the objective of creating a "comprehensive, up-to-date source of information on the endangered languages of the world" according to Lyle Campbell, the director of the Catalogue of Endangered Languages (ELCat). Their website features an interactive map to understand language endangerment on a global scale. In this tool the languages are categorized as follows: At risk, endangered, severely endangered, dormant awakening, vitality unknown.  

The ELP uses their own scale when evaluating a language's level of endangerment, which consists of four categories where a language can rate on a 0-5 scale (0 as safe, 5 as critically endangered). Those categories are: Intergenerational Transmission (which is worth double on the scale), Absolute Number of Speakers, Speaker Number Trends, and Domains of use of the language. After the language is evaluated with this scale, the linguists at ELP use a percentage-based formula to decide where a language ultimately falls on their endangerment score based on the information available with regards to the four aforementioned categories.

Other classification systems

There are also other classifications of language endangerment. The easiest indicators ("rule of thumb") are:

• average age of fluent speakers
• amount of speakers and their place in the sociodemographical context
• percentage of speakers who are (evolving into) fluent speakers

ELP language endangerment scale

Some other classifications systems are listed here. A few of them are compared in the orange comparison table on this page.

UNESCO Language Vitality and Endangerment Scale

comparison of different classifications of language endangerment

• Fishman (1991)
• Wurm (1996)
• Reyhner (1999)
• Landweer (2000)
• UNESCO (2003)
• Brenzinger et al. (2003)
• Grenoble & Whaley (2006)
• Krauss (2007)
• Moseley (2009)

References