Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Language Standardization
- cambridge handbooks in language and linguistics
- The Cambridge Handbook of Language Standardization
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Introduction
- Part I Revisiting Models and Theories of Language Standardization
- Part II Legitimacy, Authority and the Written Form
- Part III Norms, Literacy and Education
- Part IV Beyond the National
- Part V Standardization in Late Modernity
- Name Index
- Subject Index
- References
Introduction
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 July 2021
Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Language Standardization
- cambridge handbooks in language and linguistics
- The Cambridge Handbook of Language Standardization
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Introduction
- Part I Revisiting Models and Theories of Language Standardization
- Part II Legitimacy, Authority and the Written Form
- Part III Norms, Literacy and Education
- Part IV Beyond the National
- Part V Standardization in Late Modernity
- Name Index
- Subject Index
- References
Summary
Linguistic standardization has long preoccupied researchers from different sub-disciplines of linguistics, including historical, applied and sociolinguists, as well as those working on language policy. This Introduction outlines some of the key issues that run through the literature on standardization, as well as the chapters in this volume, and on which there has not always been a clear consensus. These include terminological issues, the relationship between written and spoken standards, the variability of the standard both synchronically and diachronically and the authorities on which standard languages are based. We consider how traditional models are being reviewed and challenged by opening up the scope and type of case studies to embrace multilingual situations, minoritized languages and transnational contexts. Traditional standardization narratives are also being questioned through consideration of standardization ‘from below’. Standard languages play an important role in the legal and educational systems, bringing opportunities but also challenges. We conclude by discussing a number of symptoms of the increased ‘democratization’ of standardization, such as online and digital channels, and the emergence of ‘unofficial spoken standards’.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Handbook of Language Standardization , pp. 1 - 24Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2021
References
Abbi, A. (2017). Human cognitive abilities and safeguarding linguistic diversity. IIC Quarterly, 44(2), 83–100.Google Scholar
Androutsopoulos, J. (2011). Language change and digital media: a review of conceptions and evidence. In Kristiansen, T. & Coupland, N., eds., Standard Languages and Language Standards in a Changing Europe. Oslo: Novus, pp. 145–61.Google Scholar
Antoniou, M. (2019). The advantages of bilingualism debate. Annual Review of Linguistics, 5, 395–415.Google Scholar
Auer, P. (2005). Europe’s sociolinguistic unity, or: a typology of European dialect/standard constellations. In Delbecque, N., van der Auwera, J. & Geeraerts, D., eds., Perspectives on Variation: Sociolinguistic, Historical, Comparative. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 7–42.Google Scholar
Auroux, S. (1992). Histoire des idées linguistiques. Vol. II: Le Développement de la grammaire. Liège: Mardaga.Google Scholar
Auroux, S. (1998). La Raison, le langage et les normes. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Ayres-Bennett, W. (2004). Sociolinguistic Variation in Seventeenth-Century France: Methodology and Case Studies. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bartsch, R. (1987). Norms of Language: Theoretical and Practical Aspects. London/New York: Longman (translation of Sprachnormen: Theorie und Praxis, 1985).Google Scholar
Blackledge, A. (2009). Inventing English as a convenient fiction: language testing regimes in the United Kingdom. In Extra, G., Spotti, M. & Van Avermaet, P., eds., Language Testing, Migration and Citizenship. London: Continuum, pp. 66–86.Google Scholar
Blommaert, J., ed. (1999). Language Ideological Debates. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and Symbolic Power, edited and introduced by Thompson, J. B.; translated by Raymond, G. & Adamson, M.. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Burke, P. (2004). Languages and Communities in Early Modern Europe. Cambridge, UK/New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clyne, M., ed. (1992). Pluricentric Languages: Differing Norms in Different Nations. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Coupland, N. & Kristiansen, T. (2011). SLICE: critical perspectives on language (de)standardisation. In Kristiansen, T. & Coupland, N., eds., Standard Languages and Language Standards in a Changing Europe. Oslo: Novus Press, pp. 11–35.Google Scholar
Creese, A. & Blackledge, A. (2011). Separate and flexible bilingualism in complementary schools: multiple language practices in interrelationship. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(5), 1196–208.Google Scholar
Crystal, D. (2012). Into the twenty-first century. In Mugglestone, L., ed., The Oxford History of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 488–513.Google Scholar
Curzan, A. (2014). Fixing English: Prescriptivism and Language History. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Davies, W. (2012). Myths we live and speak by: ways of imagining and managing language and languages. In Hüning, M., Vogl, U. & Moliner, O., eds., Standard Languages and Multilingualism in European History. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 45–69.Google Scholar
De Cillia, R. (1998). Burenwurscht bleibt Burenwurscht: Sprachenpolitik und gesellschaftliche Mehrsprachigkeit in O¨sterreich. Klagenfurt: Drava.Google Scholar
Del Valle, J., ed. (2013). A Political History of Spanish: The Making of a Language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Deumert, A. (2004). Language Standardization and Language Change: The Dynamics of Cape Dutch, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Deumert, A. & Lexander, K. (2013). Texting Africa: writing as performance. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 17(4), 522–46.Google Scholar
Deumert, A. & Vandenbussche, W., eds. (2003). Germanic Standardizations: Past to Present. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elspaß, S. (2007). A twofold view ‘from below’: new perspectives on language histories and language historiographies. In Elspaß, S., Langer, N., Scharloth, J. & Vandenbussche, W., eds., Germanic Language Histories ‘from Below’ (1700–2000). Berlin/New York: De Gruyter, pp. 3–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elspaß, S. (2012). The use of private letters and diaries in sociolinguistic investigation. In Hernández-Campoy, J. M. & Conde-Silvestre, J. C., eds., The Handbook of Historical Sociolinguistics. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 156–69.Google Scholar
Feitsma, A. (2002). ‘Democratic’ and ‘elitist’ trends and a Frisian standard. In Linn, A. R. & McLelland, N., eds., Standardization: Studies from the Germanic Languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 205–18.Google Scholar
Fishman, J. A. (1968). Nationality-nationalism and nation-nationism. In Fishman, J. A., Ferguson, C. A. & Das Gupta, J., eds., Language Problems of Developing Nations. New York: Wiley, pp. 39–54.Google Scholar
Fishman, J. A. (1991). Reversing Language Shift: Theoretical and Empirical Foundations of Assistance to Threatened Languages. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Gal, S. (1989). Language and political economy. Annual Review of Anthropology, 18, 345–67.Google Scholar
Gal, S. (2006). Migration, minorities and multilingualism: language ideologies in Europe. In Mar-Molinero, C. & Stevenson, P., eds., Language Ideologies, Policies and Practices: Language and the Future of Europe. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 13–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garvin, P. L. (1959). The standard language problem – concepts and methods. Anthropological Linguistics, 1(3), 28–31.Google Scholar
Greenberg, R. D. (2004). Language and Identity in the Balkans: Serbo-Croatian and Its Disintegration. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Haugen, E. (1972 [1969]). Language planning, theory and practice. In Dil, A. S., ed., The Ecology of Language. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, pp. 287–95.Google Scholar
Haugen, E. (1987). Blessings of Babel: Bilingualism and Language Planning. Problems and Pleasures. Berlin/New York/Amsterdam: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Hickey, R. (2012). Standard English and the standards of English. In Hickey, R., ed., Standards of English: Codified Varieties around the World. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hornsby, M. (2005). Néo-breton and questions of authenticity. Sociolinguistic Studies, 6(2), 191–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hornsby, M. (2015). The ‘new’ and ‘traditional’ speaker dichotomy: bridging the gap. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 231, 107–25.Google Scholar
Irvine, J. T. (1989). When talk isn’t cheap: language and political economy. American Ethnologist, 16, 248–67.Google Scholar
Jaffe, A. (1999). Ideologies in Action: Language Politics on Corsica. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joseph, J. E. (1987). Eloquence and Power: The Rise of Language Standards and Standard Languages. London: Frances Pinter.Google Scholar
Koch, P. & Oesterreicher, W. (1985). Sprache der Nähe – Sprache der Distanz: Mündlichkeit und Schriftlichkeit im Spannungsfeld von Sprachtheorie und Sprachgeschichte. Romanistisches Jahrbuch, 36, 15–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kristiansen, T. (2016). Contemporary standard language change: weakening or strengthening? Taal en Tongval, 68(2), 93–117.Google Scholar
Lane, P., Costa, J. & De Korne, H., eds. (2017). Standardizing Minority Languages: Competing Ideologies of Authority and Authenticity in the Global Periphery. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Langer, N. & Davies, W. V., eds. (2005). Linguistic Purism in the Germanic Languages. New York: Walter de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lippi-Green, R. (2012). English with an Accent: Language, Ideology and Discrimination in the United States. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Macaro, E., Curle, S., Pun, J., An, J. & Dearden, J. (2018). A systematic review of English medium instruction in higher education. Language Teaching, 51(1), 36–76.Google Scholar
Marcellesi, J.-B. (1989). Corse et théorie sociolinguistique: Reflets croisés. In Ravis-Giordani, G., ed., L’Iˆle miroir. Ajaccio: La Marge, pp. 165–74.Google Scholar
Mattheier, K. (2003). German. In Deumert, A. & Vandenbussche, W., eds., Germanic Standardizations: Past to Present. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 211–44.Google Scholar
May, S. (2015). The problem with English(es) and linguistic (in)justice. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 18(2), 131–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGroarty, M. (1996). Language attitudes, motivation, and standards. In McKay, S. L. & Hornberger, N. H., Sociolinguistics and Language Teaching. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 3–46.Google Scholar
Milroy, J. (2001). Language ideologies and the consequences of standardization. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 5(4), 530–55.Google Scholar
Milroy, J. (2012). Sociolinguistics and ideologies in language history. In Hernandez-Campoy, J. M. & Conde-Silvestre, J. C., eds., The Handbook of Historical Sociolinguistics, Chichester/Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 571–84.Google Scholar
Milroy, J. & Milroy, L. (2012). Authority in Language: Investigating Standard English, 4th edn. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Nagy, N. & Meyerhoff, M. (2008). Introduction: social lives in language. In Meyerhoff, M. & Nagy, N., eds., Social Lives in Language – Sociolinguistics and Multilingual Speech Communities: Celebrating the work of Gillian Sankoff. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 1–16.Google Scholar
Nelson, Kyra (2019). Informing lexicographic choices through corpus and perceptual data. International Journal of Lexicography, 32(4), 1–18.Google Scholar
Nevalainen, T., Palander-Collin, M. & Säily, T., eds. (2018). Patterns of Change in 18th-Century English: A Sociolinguistic Approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nurmi, A. & Nevala, M. (2018). Polite society and rhetoric. In Nevalainen, T., Palander-Collin, M. & Säily, T., eds., Patterns of Change in 18th-Century English: A Sociolinguistic Approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 13–26.Google Scholar
ó Murchadha, N. (2013). Authority and innovation in language variation: teenagers’ perceptions of variation in spoken Irish. In Kristiansen, T. & Grondelaers, S., eds., Language (De)standardisation in Late Modern Europe: Experimental Studies. Oslo: Novus, pp. 71–96.Google Scholar
O’Rourke, B. & Ramallo, F. (2011). The native-non-native dichotomy in minority languages: comparisons between Irish and Galician, Language Problems and Language Planning, 35(2), 139–59.Google Scholar
Rey, A. (1972). Usages, jugements et prescriptions linguistiques. Langue franc¸aise, 16, 4–28.Google Scholar
Rutten, G. (2016). Diaglossia, individual variation and the limits of standardization. evidence from Dutch. In Russi, C., ed., Current Trends in Historical Sociolinguistics. Warsaw: De Gruyter Open, pp. 194–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rutten, G., Vosters, R. & Vandenbussche, W. (2014). The interplay of language norms and usage patterns. Comparing the history of Dutch, English, French and German. In Rutten, G., Vosters, R. & Vandenbussche, W., eds., Norms and Usage in Language History, 1600–1900: A Historical-Sociolinguistic and Comparative Perspective. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 1–18.Google Scholar
Schieffelin, B. R. & Doucet, R. C. (1989). The ‘real’ Haitian Creole: ideology, metalinguistics, and orthographic choice. In Schieffelin, B. R., Woolard, K. A. & Kroskrity, P., eds., Language Ideologies: Practice and Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 285–316.Google Scholar
Schwyter, J. R. (2016). Dictating to the Mob: The History of the BBC Advisory Committee on Spoken English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sebba, M. (2007). Spelling and Society: The Culture and Politics of Orthography around the World. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Shortis, T. (2016). Texting and other messaging: written system in digitally mediated vernaculars. In Cook, V. & Ryan, D., eds., The Routledge Handbook of the English Writing System. London: Routledge, pp. 487–516.Google Scholar
Siegel, J. (2005). Literacy in pidgin and creole languages. Current Issues in Language Planning, 6(2), 143–63.Google Scholar
Silverstein, M. (1979). Language structure and linguistic ideology. In Clyne, R., Hanks, W. & Hofbauer, C., eds., The Elements: A Parasession on Linguistic Units and Levels. Chicago, IL: Chicago Linguistic Society, pp. 193–247.Google Scholar
Smith-Christmas, C., ó Murchadha, N., Hornsby, M. & Moriarty, M., eds. (2018). New Speakers of Minority Languages: Linguistic Ideologies and Practices. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Stevenson, P. (2006). ‘National’ languages in transnational contexts: language, migration and citizenship in Europe. In Mar-Molinero, C. & Stevenson, P., eds., Language Ideologies, Policies and Practices: Language and the Future of Europe. Basingstoke/New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 147–61.Google Scholar
Trudgill, P. (1999). Standard English: what it isn’t. In Bex, T. & Watts, R., eds., Standard English: The Widening Debate. London/New York: Routledge, pp. 117–28.Google Scholar
Trudgill, P. (2000). Sociolinguistics: An Introduction to Language and Society. London/New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
Trudgill, P. & Hannah, J. (2008). International English: A Guide to the Varieties of Standard English, 5th edn. London/New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
Van Parijs, P. (2011). Linguistic Justice for Europe and for the World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Vogl, U. (2012). Multilingualism in a standard language culture. In Hüning, M., Vogl, U. & Moliner, O., eds., Standard Languages and Multilingualism in European History. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 1–42.Google Scholar
Wächter-Kollpacher, E. (1995). Die Sprecherschulung im ORF. In Muhr, R., Schrodt, R., & Wiesinger, P., eds., O¨sterreichisches Deutsch: Linguistische, sozialpsychologische und sprachpolitische Aspekte einer nationalen Variante des Deutschen. Vienna: Hölder Pichler-Tempsky, pp. 269–79.Google Scholar
Walsh, O. (2016). Linguistic Purism: Language Attitudes in France and Quebec. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Watts, R. J. (2011). Language Myths and the History of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Watts, R. J. (2015). Setting the scene: letters, standards and historical sociolinguistics. In Auer, A., Schreier, D. & Watts, R. J., eds., Letter Writing and Language Change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–13.Google Scholar
Watts, R. & Trudgill, P., eds. (2002). Alternative Histories of English, London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Woolard, K. (1998). Language ideology as a field of inquiry. In Schieffelin, B. B., Woolard, K. & Kroskrity, P. V, eds., Language Ideologies: Practice and Theory. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 1–27.Google Scholar
Woolard, K. (2005). Language and identity choice in Catalonia: the interplay of ideologies of linguistic authenticity and anonymity. International Colloquium on Regulations of Societal Multilingualism in Linguistic Policies. Berlin: IAI-PK. Retrieved from https://cloudfront.escholarship.org/dist/prd/content/qt47n938cp/qt47n938cp.pdfGoogle Scholar
Wright, L. (2018). A multilingual approach to the history of Standard English. In Päivi, P., Skaffari, J. & Wright, L., eds., Multilingual Practices in Language History. Berlin/Boston, MA: De Gruyter Mouton, pp. 339–58.Google Scholar