By Riona Kennedy
As a Gaelic speaker, I have often wondered why my peers are so bewildered at my continued use of what they view as a “dead language”. This question is one that so many minority language speakers find themselves scrabbling to answer, trying to defend their culture against those who have never given minority languages a chance.
These are more than just languages, they carry a community’s history and identity. The 2022 census noted that Gaelic speakers made up roughly 1.4% of Scotland’s population. While there is no official census information on Sámi speakers within Norway, their share is estimated at around 0.4%. Norway’s Indigenous Sámi communities have experienced similar struggles to preserve their languages and cultural identity. While Scotland has strengthened legal protections for Gaelic and Scots, Norway’s Sámi Act of 1987 offers a useful comparison. Its language rights and political representation demonstrate that recognition alone cannot guarantee a language’s survival.
There are roughly three times as many Gaelic speakers in Scotland than there are Sami speakers in Norway, yet Norway appears to have a more concrete approach to protecting its Sámi culture. So, what can Scotland learn from Norway to protect its minority languages for future generations?
Norway’s approach
Norway’s Sámi Act (Sameloven) of 1987 recognises the Sámi people’s right to preserve and develop their language and culture. Its language provisions establish specific rights for Sámi speakers, particularly within designated administrative areas. The Sámi Parliament (Sámediggi) represents Sámi interests and supports cultural and linguistic development. Meanwhile, education rights allow pupils to learn Sámi and, in some cases, receive education through the language. These measures provide a legal structure which protects Sámi identity and increases opportunities for intergenerational language transmission. However, Norway’s experience also reveals the limitations of legislation without sufficient practical support.
The problems Norway still faces
Despite these protections, Sámi languages remain vulnerable, particularly South Sámi and Lule Sámi, which have fewer speakers than North Sámi. The Council of Europe has highlighted continuing challenges in implementing minority-language commitments, including shortages of qualified teachers and suitable educational materials.
These shortages can restrict access to education and make it difficult for children to develop fluency. Without sufficient teachers and learning resources, formal language rights cannot always be fully realised. Differences between the Sámi languages also mean that support for one does not necessarily meet the needs of another.
Norway demonstrates that legal recognition must be accompanied by sustained investment. Protecting a language requires not only the right to learn it but also the resources necessary to teach it and opportunities to use it beyond the classroom.
Scotland’s approach
Scotland has taken important steps to protect its minority languages. The Gaelic Language (Scotland) Act 2005 established Bòrd na Gàidhlig, which promotes Gaelic and supports its development. The Act also introduced a framework for Gaelic language plans across public bodies. Gaelic-medium education enables children to learn through Gaelic, supporting language acquisition from an early age. However, provision varies across Scotland and expanding it requires sufficient teachers and educational resources. The Scottish Languages Act 2025 marked another significant development by giving Gaelic and Scots official status and introducing further measures to support their development.
Comparing Norway and Scotland
Both countries recognise the importance of legislation, education and public support, but their approaches differ. Norway includes specific language rights for Sámi speakers in designated administrative areas. Scotland’s protections have developed through legislation, education policy and public-body responsibilities, with the 2025 Act strengthening the position of Gaelic and Scots. Education presents a shared challenge; both countries need qualified teachers, accessible learning materials and opportunities for pupils to continue using their languages as they grow older.
Public services are equally important. Norway’s approach provides rights to use Sámi in certain official settings, although practical barriers remain. Scotland can also consider how Gaelic and Scots can become more visible and accessible in public life, within the different legal provisions applicable to each language.
Ultimately, neither government can secure a language’s future through legislation alone. Families, schools and community organisations are essential to creating environments where speakers can use their languages naturally.
What Scotland could learn
Firstly, Scotland should ensure that official recognition leads to practical opportunities to use Gaelic and Scots. Simply recognising a language is not enough if Scotland is to learn from the Norwegian approach Gaelic and Scots culture should be advocated for and protected within government
Secondly, minority languages need to be used beyond the classroom, although investment in teachers and educational resources should be maintained. Community activities, workplaces, media and public services can help speakers incorporate their languages into everyday life. Learning a language at school is valuable, but regular opportunities to speak it are crucial to maintaining fluency and confidence.
Finally, language communities could help shape policy. Speakers understand the barriers they encounter and the support their communities need. Long-term government funding, combined with meaningful community involvement, can help ensure that language policy responds to these realities rather than remaining a statement of principle.
Norway offers Scotland valuable lessons, but its experience also shows that legal recognition is not a guarantee of survival. Despite established protections, Sámi languages continue to face educational and practical challenges. Scotland’s recent legislation creates an opportunity to strengthen the position of Gaelic and Scots, but its impact will depend on sustained investment, effective implementation and opportunities for everyday use.
As a Gaelic speaker, perhaps the question should not simply be why people continue to speak a language others consider dead. We could also ask what society is doing to ensure that it can be learned, spoken and passed on. Minority languages survive when future generations have the resources and opportunities to make them part of their lives.
Edited by Spiro Kass
