At present, Costa Rican linguistic diversity is made up of seven Indigenous languages of the Americas with very different states of vitality depending on the village (Sánchez 2009, 2013, 2014):
- Bribri, spoken in the canton of Talamanca, in the province of Limón, and in the canton of Buenos Aires, in the province of Puntarenas.
- Buglere (also referred to in academic publications as Bocotá or Sabanero Guaymí), spoken in the south of the country, in the province of Puntarenas.
- Brunca (Brúnkajk or Boruca), spoken in the canton of Buenos Aires, in the province of Puntarenas.
- Cabécar, spoken in the canton of Talamanca, in the province of Limón, and in the canton of Buenos Aires, in the province of Puntarenas.
- Malecu (Maleku or Guatuso), spoken in the canton of Guatuso, in the province of Alajuela.
- Novere (referred to by many other names in academic publications: Nove, Movere, Ngäbe, Ngöbe or Guaymí), spoken in the south, in the province of Puntarenas.
- Brorán Naso (Costa Rican Naso, language of Brorán or more commonly referred to in academic literature as Térraba), spoken in the canton of Buenos Aires, in the province of Puntarenas.
To these languages, one should add Huetar and Chorotega, two languages of which only some records of toponyms, hydronyms, zoonyms, and phytonyms remain, since they have been extinct since the 18th century or early 19th century (Constenla 1984, Quesada 1996a, Quirós 2002). While migration flows from Nicaragua have also brought the settlement of Miskito, Sumo, and Rama groups to Costa Rica (Constenla 1988, Tenorio 1988), their exact number and the vitality of their languages are unknown. Other languages have also been spoken in Costa Rican territory, but information on this is limited. For example, despite records of the existence of other Indigenous peoples of the Americas in the territory of present-day Costa Rica before the Spanish conquest and during the first years of the colonial period (Quepos, Votos, Ramas, Corobicíes, Suerres, Nahoas, Catapas, Tices, Coctus, Durucacas, Náhuatl, Nicaraos, Quequexques, Zapotes, etc.), no more than succinct references to them have survived in the documentary sources (Constenla 1988, Quesada 1996a, Quesada 2006). Of all these possible languages some anthroponyms from Quepo have survived in manuscripts of the 16th and 17th centuries. On the basis of such data and on the basis of colonial documentation, Quesada (1996b) raises the possibility of a genetic relationship between Quepo and Brunca, but also considers that there is strong evidence to believe that it was a different language from both Brunca and Huetar. There are also some words from the language of the Zapotesfrom which Constenla (1975) determined that they were Rama Indigenous people. In the same way, Constenla (1994) considers it very probable that the Corobicís were Ramas.
In addition to the Indigenous languages mentioned, there is an English-based creole (referred to in various ways, by both community members themselves and academics: Creole English, Limonese Creole, Patois , Mekatelyu or Mekaytelyuw, Limon Tak, Limon Kryol, English), spoken mainly on the Atlantic coast of the country by the descendants of people mostly from Jamaica who arrived during the second half of the 19th century (Herzfeld 2002), and the Costa Rican Sign Language (LESCO), with speakers throughout the territory, but with an obvious concentration in the Greater Metropolitan Area and with two apparently very different varieties: the "new" one and the "original" or "old" one (Woodward 1992, Retana 2011).
It is also known about the settlement in Costa Rican territory of Germans, English, French, Italian, American, Haitian, Lebanese, Jewish and Chinese. In the case of the last three groups, it appears that the general trend has been the early abandonment of their vernacular languages, especially with regard to Arabic and Yiddish (Bozzoli 1995- 1996). However, with the exception of the Italians of the San Vito region, their current sociolinguistic situation has not been studied. Population censuses do not provide information about the language practices and vitality of the languages spoken in Costa Rica, except for the Indigenous languages (Sánchez 2009).
The Spanish is the national language of the country, of the political and legal administration, commercial transactions (without forgetting the influence of English as an international language), the mass media, formal education and all areas of public life. The Constitution of the Republic of Costa Rica, in Title VII, article 76, as amended by Law 7878 of 1999, states that the State must ensure the maintenance and promotion of national Indigenous languages. According to Executive Decree No. 18967 of 1989, the status of Indigenous languages is that of local languages, and they are considered part of the cultural heritage of the nation.
Everything indicates that the main reason for the greater or lesser vitality of the Indigenous Costa Rican languages and of Limonese Creole so far is the relative isolation of the communities of speakers with respect to the settlement centres of the Spanish-speaking Costa Ricans and the State power centres. In fact, if one observes the map of Costa Rica and analyses the country’s history, with the current distribution of Indigenous groups that maintain their ancestral language to some extent, it easily confirmed that these are regions far from Hispanic urban centres and that, until the second half of the twentieth century, they were difficult to access. However, more recently, all the different Indigenous groups in Costa Rica have seen their territories and autonomy gradually reduced (Sánchez 2009).
In relation to Limonese Creole, the limited interaction with the Spanish-speaking majority of the country and the isolation in which people of African descent fell around 1934 also explains its maintenance, although this has changed abruptly in recent decades (Putnam 2004).
Currently, as evidenced by various qualitative and quantitative studies (Margery 1993; Quesada Pacheco 2008; Sánchez 2009, 2013, 2014), it can be said that four of the Indigenous languages spoken in Costa Rica are going through a process of continuous gradual displacement: Malecu, Bribri, Cabécar, and Limonese Creole. While it is the Indigenous language with the greatest vitality in Costa Rica and with the highest number of speakers in Panama, everything indicates that Novere is also experiencing a process of replacement in Costa Rica (Sánchez 2009). In addition, Buglere is listed as being in serious danger of extinction by Quesada (2008) as regards Costa Rican settlements.
All these languages –some of which are only spoken in Costa Rica (such as Malecu and Cabécar)– seem to be moving towards the same state of severe replacement that characterizes Costa Rican Brunca and Naso, the two languages that in recent times have reached the maximum levels of decline (Quesada Pacheco 2008, Sánchez 2009). There are statistical data on the number of speakers by self-identification in two censuses conducted by the Ministry of Public Education and in the latest national population censuses, which allows us to observe the sustained decline of the vitality, over a period of 24 years, of Bribri, Malecu and Novere; while Cabécar, Brunca and Naso (Térraba) instead show an increasing trend. However, in self-declaration of being a speaker, attitudinal and identity factors undoubtedly play a role that could explain this alleged increase (Sánchez 2009).
In this context, we should also consider the precarious state of the "most indigenous" variety of Costa Rican Sign Language, which for several decades has been gradually replaced by a new variety strongly influenced by American Sign Language, so that it is now apparently only spoken by some older people. To date, this variety of LESCO has not been described and has only begun to be documented (Woodward 1991, Retana 2011).
According to the parameters of UNESCO and the data of the latest population censuses and other sociolinguistic studies, particularly with regard to the intergenerational transmission criterion, it can be said that Novere, Malecu, Bribri and Cabécar are in unsafe or definitely endangered, depending on the region; the original variety of LESCO could be classified as severely endangered or critically endangered, and finally, Naso (Térraba) and Brunca should be classified as languages in extreme danger or very displaced, while Buglere would be severely endangered (Sánchez 2013). However, these global classifications do not reveal the differing vitality of each of these languages in the different villages and families.
With regard to initiatives for the retention, revitalization, visibility and revaluation of all this linguistic diversity, it is worth mentioning that there is a special programme in the formal education system in Indigenous territories, which includes two subjects (one about the Indigenous language, with three lessons per week, and one about the culture, with two lessons per week) at the primary level, although the other subjects are taught predominantly in Spanish. In general terms, the effective implementation of these classes of Indigenous language and culture continues to face serious obstacles, such as the lack of adequate teaching materials and the lack of or little pedagogical training of the teachers in charge (Rojas 1997-1998, 2002; Vásquez 2008).
In order to revitalize their languages or to use them in new domains, community-based initiatives are regularly launched. These are usually classes given outside the school context by an elder speaker or the creation of non-traditional music by youth groups. The duration of these initiatives is often very variable, but they generally lack continuity.
On the part of university bodies, the work has focused on the description and documentation of languages, with some attempts to create materials or offer workshops. Since 2013 the project "Linguistic Diversity of Costa Rica" has been operating at the University of Costa Rica, as well as the project «Languages and Oral Traditions of Costa Rica» since 2016, in which the languages and the cultural practices linked to them are documented, teaching materials are created drawing from various disciplines (descriptive and documentary linguistics, language pedagogy, graphic design, computer science, music, etc.) and play-based activities (e.g. puppet workshops and physical games) that use the languages and stories of oral tradition are organized.
In addition, there is a growing empowerment of community members, who have begun efforts for the recovery of their territories and are increasingly demanding that appropriate consultation mechanisms be put in place when it comes to government projects that directly affect them. On the part of state bodies and other organizations and institutions, there is also a greater interest in recovering, promoting, or raising awareness of the country’s cultural and linguistic diversity. At the moment, it is not possible to predict what the impact of these actions will be on the vitality of languages.
Bibliography
Bozzoli de Wille, María Eugenia. 1995-1996. “La población costarricense: diversidad, tolerancia y discriminación”. Herencia. 2(1995)-1(1996): 131-148.
Constenla Umaña, Adolfo. 1975. La lengua guatusa: fonología, gramática y léxico. Undergraduate thesis in Hispanic Philology: University of Costa Rica.
Constenla Umaña, Adolfo. 1984. “El huetar: Observaciones sobre los materiales disponibles para su estudio y sobre las hipótesis en torno a sus afinidades lingüísticas”. Revista de Filología y Lingüística. 10 (2): 3-18.
Constenla Umaña, Adolfo. 1988. “El guatuso del Palenque Margarita: su proceso de declinación”. Estudios de Lingüística Chibcha. VII: 7-37.
Constenla Umaña, Adolfo. 1994. "Las lenguas de la Gran Nicoya" Vínculos. 18-19 (1-2): 191-208.
Herzfeld, Anita. 2002. Mekaytelyuw: La lengua criolla. San José: Editorial de la Universidad de Costa Rica.
Margery Peña, Enrique. 1993. “Estados de conservación de las lenguas indígenas de Costa Rica frente al español”. In: Sánchez Corrales, Víctor (ed.). 1993. Memoria del IV Congreso Costarricense de Filología, Lingüïstica y Literatura. San José: Oficina de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Costa Rica, 257-266.
Putnam Lara, Elizabeth W. 2004. «La población afrocostarricense según los datos del censo 2000». In: Rosero (ed.), 375-398.
Quesada, Juan Diego. 2008. “El buglere: lengua obsolescente”. Letras 43: 39-50.
Quesada Pacheco, Miguel Ángel. 1996a. Los Huetares: historia, lengua, etnografía y tradición oral. Cartago: Editorial Tecnología de Costa Rica.
Quesada Pacheco, Miguel Ángel. 2008. Central America. In: Palacios Alcaine, Azucena (coord.). 2008. Estudios de Lingüística Chibcha. 15: 59-76.
Quesada Pacheco, Miguel Ángel. 2006. “Toponimia indígena de Costa Rica”. Revista de Filología y Lingüística XXXII (2): 203-259.
Quesada Pacheco, Miguel Ángel. 2008. “América Central”. In: Palacios Alcaine, Azucena (coord.). 2008. El español en América. Contactos lingüísticos en Hispanoamérica. Barcelona: Ariel: 57-75.
Quirós Rodríguez, Juan Santiago. 2002. Diccionario Español-Chorotega/Chorotega-Español. San José: Editorial de la Universidad de Costa Rica.
Retana Castro, Priscilla. 2011. “Aproximación a la lengua de señas costarricense (LESCO)”. Revista de Filología y Lingüística 37(2):137-146.
Rojas Chaves, Carmen. 1997-1998. “Revitalización lingüística de las lenguas indígenas de Costa Rica”. Estudios de Lingüística Chibcha. 16:9-17.
Rojas Chaves, Carmen. 2002. “La enseñanza de las lenguas indígenas en Costa Rica”. In: Educare 3: 177-186.
Sánchez Avendaño, Carlos. 2009. “Situación sociolingüística de las lenguas minoritarias de Costa Rica y Censos Nacionales de Población 1927-2000: Vitalidad, desplazamiento y autoafiliación etnolingüística”. Revista de Filología y Lingüística 35(2): 233-273.
Sánchez Avendaño, Carlos. 2013. “Lenguas en peligro en Costa Rica: Vitalidad, documentación y descripción”. Káñina XXXVII(1): 219-250.
Sánchez Avendaño, Carlos. 2014. «Muerte de lenguas y lenguas en peligro en Costa Rica: la perspectiva exocomunitaria». Revista de Filología y Lingüística 40(1): 173-196.
Tenorio Alfaro, Luis. 1988. Las comunidades indígenas de Costa Rica. San José: Imprenta Nacional.
Vásquez Carvajal, Ana Cecilia. 2008. “Caracterización de la situación idiomática de los pueblos indígenas de Costa Rica y su influencia en su educación”. In: Revista Educare 12: 61-66.
Woodward, James. 1992. “Historical Bases of New Costa Rican Sign Language”. Revista de Filología y Lingüística. XVIII (1): 127-132.
Woodward, James. 1991. “Sign Language Varieties in Costa Rica”. Sign Language Studies. 73: 329-346.
Other documents on the languages of Costa Rica in general and their state of vitality:
Arroyo Soto, Victor Manuel. 1966. Lenguas Indígenas Costarricenses. San José: Editorial Costa Rica.
Constela Umaña, Adolfo. 2011. “Estado de conservación y documentación de las lenguas de América Central pertenecientes a las agrupaciones jicaque, lenca, misumalpa, chibchense y chocó”. Revista de Filología y Lingüística 37(1):135-195.
Constela Umaña, Adolfo. 2011. “La diversidad lingüística de Costa Rica: Las lenguas indígenas”. Revista de Filología y Lingüística 37(2):93-106.
Constenla Umaña, Adolfo y Eugenia Ibarra Rojas. 2009. “Mapa de la distribución territorial aproximada de las lenguas indígenas habladas en Costa Rica y en sectores colindantes de Nicaragua y Panamá en el siglo XVI”. Estudios de Lingüística Chibcha XXVIII: 109-112.
Gabb, William M. 1875. On the Indian tribes and languages of Costa Rica. Washington: Stmisonian Museum.
Quesada, Juan Diego. 2008. “Las lenguas chibchas y sus hablantes: resistencia, obsolescencia e indiferencia”. In: Palmisano, Antonio (ed.). 2008. Identità delle comunità indigene del Centro America. Roma: IILA: 183-194.
Quesada Pacheco, Miguel Ángel. 1999-2000. “Situación actual y futuro de las lenguas indígenas de Costa Rica”. Estudios de Lingüística Chibcha 18-19: 7-34.
Quesada Pacheco, Miguel Ángel. 2008. “Las lenguas ístmicas: entre obsolescencia y resistencia”. Letras 43: 23-37.
Quesada Pacheco, Miguel Ángel. 2009. “El panteón lingüístico chibcha y sus vecinos”. Letras 45: 11-24.
Sites with information on the different villages and languages that coexist in the current territory of Costa Rica: Estudios de Lingüística Chibcha 33: 277-315.
Thiel, Bernardo Augusto. 1882. Apuntes lexicográficos de las lenguas y dialectos de los indios de Costa Rica. San José: Imprenta Nacional.
Sites with information about the different peoples and languages that coexist in the current territory of Costa Rica:
Digital Atlas of the Indigenous Peoples:
Site with statistics and maps related to the indigenous populations of Costa Rica.
Site with information about the archaeological sites in the Diquís Valley, where the famous stone spheres are located.