I am very interested in the topic of maintaining and reviving minorised languages. As the Coptic Christians occurred again in the media in recent times, my view goes again to the Coptic language.
I have read of revivalist attempts in the church by the mid of the 19th century. I wonder why on earth they did not succeed to revive Coptic as well as everyday language. This time was more favorable than our days as there were far less radical Muslims and Panarabists. If a few persons use it as everyday language, the radical Muslims and Panarabists certainly do not mind about it. However, I believe that it is possible that they could start actions against it if it would appear in Egypt as a widespread movement among Coptic Christians.
At any rate, Coptic courses ought to consider everyday use as well and not treat it as dead language. In my point of view, it is important for revivals to teach the language to children and encourage them to use it in everyday life.
Some people say that reviving languages that fell out of everyday use would be artificial. Well, in the case of languages that are totally out of use since long like Ugaritic or Sumerian, I would agree. In the case of Coptic, this would make sense as it has not totally fallen out of presence in church. Furthermore, the Coptic identity still exists with its link to the language even if it is only for liturgical purposes. Some texts left are not from a period that far back. And linguistic heritage is best saved by using languages in everyday life and teaching it as native language to children.
Alex