DOCSLIB.ORG

Can Parallelingualism Save Norwegian from Extinction?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Can Parallelingualism Save Norwegian from Extinction? This is a repository copy of Can Parallelingualism save Norwegian from extinction?. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/43553/ Article: Linn, Andrew R (2010) Can Parallelingualism save Norwegian from extinction? Multilingua, 29 (3/4). pp. 289-305. ISSN 0167-8507 https://doi.org/10.1515/mult.2010.014 Reuse Unless indicated otherwise, fulltext items are protected by copyright with all rights reserved. The copyright exception in section 29 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 allows the making of a single copy solely for the purpose of non-commercial research or private study within the limits of fair dealing. The publisher or other rights-holder may allow further reproduction and re-use of this version - refer to the White Rose Research Online record for this item. Where records identify the publisher as the copyright holder, users can verify any specific terms of use on the publisher’s website. Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ promoting access to White Rose research papers Universities of Leeds, Sheffield and York http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ This is an author produced version of a paper published in Multilingua. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/43553 Published paper Linn, Andrew R. (2010) Can Parallelingualism save Norwegian from extinction?, Multilingua, 29 (3/4), pp. 289-305 http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/mult.2010.014 White Rose Research Online [email protected] AUTHOR’S COPY | AUTORENEXEMPLAR Can parallelingualism save Norwegian from extinction? ANDREW R. LINN Abstract Language extinction is one of the most pressing issues in linguistics today, and the literature is full of discussion about how to combat it. Statements that Norwegian is amongst the languages that are already extinct are merely examples of a widespread tendency in the literature towards errone- ous information about Norwegian. Nonetheless, there is clear evidence that Norwegian is undergoing a process of ‘domain loss’, and policies to address this form of language shift lie at the heart of the most recent developments in the history of language planning in Norway. A policy of parallelingual- ism is widely advocated, but without proper sanctions in higher education and in the business world for infringements of the parallelingual strategy, it is unlikely to have much effect. Keywords: Norwegian; domain loss; parallelingualism, reversing language shift; language extinction; language policy; language planning 1. Extinction According to an authoritative recent publication on the languages of the world, Norwegian is already extinct. The final volume of the second edition of the Encyclopedia of language and linguistics includes a List of languages (Brown 2006: 143Ϫ487), and on page 373 of this list we learn that there are four varieties of Norwegian: Norwegian Sign Language with 4000 users; Bokma˚l which is ‘extinct’; Nynorsk, ‘extinct’; and Trav- eller Norwegian, also ‘extinct’. Norwegian Sign Language (NSL) is in robust health. According to the 2008 government paper on the language situation in Norway (Ma˚l og meining ϭ Kultur- og kyrkjedepartementet 2008) there are in fact more like 16,500 NSL users, and indeed Sign Language has been one of the principal beneficiaries of Ma˚l og meining which recognises NSL as an official language and enshrines its status in Multilingua 29 (2010), 289Ϫ305 01678507/2010/029Ϫ0289 DOI 10.1515/mult.2010.014 ą Walter de Gruyter AUTHOR’S COPY | AUTORENEXEMPLAR AUTHOR’S COPY | AUTORENEXEMPLAR 290 Andrew R. Linn law (Schrøder 2008). Traveller Norwegian is more correctly known as Rodi and is/was spoken by indigenous traveller people in Norway. Eth- nologue (Lewis 2009) reports its status as “active” as of 1997, but its current status is less sure, and it is not unreasonable for the encyclopedia to list it as extinct (in the absence of available evidence to the contrary), a casualty of the ongoing process of language extinction in the teeth of social and economic pressures on small language communities. The suggestion that Bokma˚l and Nynorsk are extinct is however plainly ab- surd. Bokma˚l is the majority written language of Norway, and even the less-used Nynorsk has around 600,000 users (Grepstad 2005). The data behind the List of languages in Brown (2006) is taken from Ethnologue.TheEthnologue entry for Norwegian is slightly misleading as it treats the language as existing in two dialects, Bokma˚l and Nynorsk, when in fact these are written varieties used alongside the numerous spoken dialects. However, there is no evidence that Norwegian is extinct in any of its modern varieties, and in fact Ethnologue records the popula- tion of Norway as 4,640,000 and describes the language as ‘fully devel- oped’. Not all residents of Norway are users of the Norwegian language, but the population continues to grow. According to Statistics Norway (http://www.ssb.no) the population stood at 4,858,200 on 1 January 2010 and by 1 April it had grown by a further 15,000, many of whom will acquire Norwegian as a first or second language. On the statistical evi- dence (and indeed on the evidence of common sense), there is no reason to believe that the key varieties of Norwegian are extinct or heading in that direction, and we have to assume that the statements in Brown (2006) are an unfortunate consequence of the reporting system used by Ethnologue. Whatever the reason, they are a striking example of the point made in detail by Engh (2006) that references to Norwegian (and by extension, one assumes, other less widely known languages) in the international linguistics literature are invariably wrong. The scant regard apparently paid to correct data by professional linguists does not give much hope to their ability to champion, support and protect those lan- guages in an informed way. Languages do die (or become extinct), of course, and the phenomenon is widely reported and discussed. I would go so far as to suggest that this is the key issue in linguistics today. Linguistics is a plastic discipline. Language is everywhere, so linguistics can go everywhere. Where it goes is dictated by what other disciplines are currently fashionable, which in turn is dictated by whatever issues are currently at the top of the agenda in society in general. It is no surprise therefore that linguistics is cur- rently coloured by ecological debates. On 4 February 2010 The Guardian newspaper reported the death of Boa Sr, the last surviving fluent speaker of Aka-Bo, a language of the Northern group of the Great Andamanese AUTHOR’S COPY | AUTORENEXEMPLAR AUTHOR’S COPY | AUTORENEXEMPLAR Can parallelingualism save Norwegian from extinction? 291 family (Watts 2010). The Encyclopedia of language and linguistics re- ported this language in 2006, like Norwegian, as extinct, and now Eth- nologue concurs. It is an emotive story, and the Guardian report is ac- companied by a large photograph of Boa Sr under the heading ‘Ancient tribal language becomes extinct as last speaker dies: Death of Boa Sr, last person fluent in the Bo language of the Andaman Islands, breaks link with 65,000-year-old culture’. K. David Harrison’s 2007 book When languages die also contains pictures of some of the last speakers of lan- guages from across the world, haunting pictures bringing life to human tragedies, where the disappearance of the languages is a side-effect of much more serious issues. Nettle & Romaine (2000) take the same ap- proach: they look back and lament that ‘about half the known languages of the world have vanished in the last five hundred years’ (2000: 2). Harrison looks forward and predicts that ‘at the current pace, we stand to lose a language about every 10 days for the foreseeable future’ (Har- rison 2007: 5). Readers of Multilingua do not need to be reminded of the statistics which form the backdrop to so much work in theoretical and applied language work at the moment. What may surprise readers, how- ever, is the serious suggestion by Norway’s most high-profile linguist that Norwegian may be on track to join Aka-Bo and that policies are re- quired to prevent the inevitable. Indeed, it may seem arrogant and insen- sitive to suggest that the plight of Norwegian and its speakers might be comparable with that of Aka-Bo and Boa Sr, but there are genuine anxi- eties in Norway, and it has been politically expedient to marshal these anxieties under an ecological banner, as we shall see in the next section. 2. Language planning in Norway Norwegian is literally the textbook case of a planned language, a lan- guage whose development has been deliberately directed by the authori- ties. The textbook in question is Haugen (1966), and Haugen invented the term language planning to describe the Norwegian situation (Haugen 1959), although the theory and practice of language planning have bur- geoned exponentially over the past half century, and language planning is now felt to be more of an issue for developing countries than a Euro- pean concern (but see the case studies in Kaplan & Baldauf 2005Ϫ2007). I have summarised the history of language planning in Norway else- where (e.g. Linn & Oakes 2007: 72Ϫ85), but there are two reasons for presenting some historical context here. Firstly, as Engh (2006: 3) writes: Most astonishing … is the extent of the deficient documentation of Norwegian. No sophisticated statistics is needed to detect a clear ten- dency: Of all the papers with Norwegian material written by foreign AUTHOR’S COPY | AUTORENEXEMPLAR AUTHOR’S COPY | AUTORENEXEMPLAR 292 Andrew R.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Teaching Immigrants Norwegian Culture to Support Their Language Learning
    International Education Studies; Vol. 6, No. 3; 2013 ISSN 1913-9020 E-ISSN 1913-9039 Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education Teaching Immigrants Norwegian Culture to Support Their Language Learning Awal Mohammed Alhassan1 & Ahmed Bawa Kuyini2 1 Adult Education Unit, Pb 1306, 1401 Ski, Norway 2 School of Education, University of New England, Australia Correspondence: Kuyini Ahmed Bawa, School of Education, University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2351, Australia. Tel: 61-267-733-676. E-mail: [email protected] Received: December 17, 2012 Accepted: December 25, 2012 Online Published: January 15, 2013 doi:10.5539/ies.v6n3p15 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ies.v6n3p15 Abstract This study was conducted with 48 adult immigrant students studying Norwegian under basic education program of the Ski Municipality Adult Education Unit between 2009-2011. Using the framework of Genc and Bada (2005), we tried to replicate their study in new setting –Norway. The study investigated migrant students’ perceptions learning Norwegian culture and its effects on their learning of the Norwegian language. The participants responded to a set of questionnaire and one open-ended question adapted from Bada (2000) and Genc and Bada (2005). Descriptive statistics and qualitative analysis procedures were used to analyse the data. The results showed that teaching culture to immigrant students raised their cultural awareness of their own and the Norwegian society. It also improved both their language skills and attitudes to the Norwegian culture. The study revealed some similarity between the students’ views and the theoretical benefits of a culture class as argued by some experts in the field.
    [Show full text]
  • Sign Language Typology Series
    SIGN LANGUAGE TYPOLOGY SERIES The Sign Language Typology Series is dedicated to the comparative study of sign languages around the world. Individual or collective works that systematically explore typological variation across sign languages are the focus of this series, with particular emphasis on undocumented, underdescribed and endangered sign languages. The scope of the series primarily includes cross-linguistic studies of grammatical domains across a larger or smaller sample of sign languages, but also encompasses the study of individual sign languages from a typological perspective and comparison between signed and spoken languages in terms of language modality, as well as theoretical and methodological contributions to sign language typology. Interrogative and Negative Constructions in Sign Languages Edited by Ulrike Zeshan Sign Language Typology Series No. 1 / Interrogative and negative constructions in sign languages / Ulrike Zeshan (ed.) / Nijmegen: Ishara Press 2006. ISBN-10: 90-8656-001-6 ISBN-13: 978-90-8656-001-1 © Ishara Press Stichting DEF Wundtlaan 1 6525XD Nijmegen The Netherlands Fax: +31-24-3521213 email: [email protected] http://ishara.def-intl.org Cover design: Sibaji Panda Printed in the Netherlands First published 2006 Catalogue copy of this book available at Depot van Nederlandse Publicaties, Koninklijke Bibliotheek, Den Haag (www.kb.nl/depot) To the deaf pioneers in developing countries who have inspired all my work Contents Preface........................................................................................................10
    [Show full text]
  • Språknytt 4/2017
    TEMA: 1917-rettskrivingen 100 år 45. ÅRGANG 4 I 2017 18 Språknytt Kari bisp side 6 Leder Innhold 4 I 2017 3 Nye navn i nye kommuner Språkprosjektet 5 Språkbrukeren som sette spor 6 Intervjuet I år er det 100 år sidan tilnærminga mellom dei to nor­ ske målformene for alvor starta, med rettskrivings­ reforma av 1917. I den nasjonale bølgja som prega landet den gongen, låg mykje til rette for at Noreg skulle få eit fellesnorsk skriftspråk. Både i riksmålsrørsla og blant målfolk var det mange som var positivt innstilte til å møtast «på midten». Men slik kom det ikkje til å gå. 10 Ord i grenseland 1917­reforma la opp til ei forsiktig og gradvis til­ nærming mellom målformene. Som de kan lesa om i 12 Ordbøkene rett i lomma dette bladet, står ho i ettertida fram som ei på mange 13 Revisjon av ordbøkene måtar svært vellukka reform. Folket tok imot mange av 14 En verden av klarspråk til Norge dei lite radikale endringane med opne armar. Når det 15 Djuptloddande prisvinnar gjeld dei meir radikale forandringane, var saka ei anna. 16 Løype! Då desse vart obligatoriske med 1938­reforma, vart 17 Med andre ord motstanden større enn ein trudde. Det er fleire grunnar til at samnorskprosjektet kol­ 18 Reformen som satte spor lapsa enn 1938­reforma i seg sjølv. Likevel kan me læra 22 Intervjuer med Torp, for ettertida at grunnleggande og småe rettskrivings­ Guttu, Hoel og Munkvold endringar blir tekne betre imot enn store og radikale. I så måte er 1917­reforma eit godt føredøme.
    [Show full text]
  • Sign Language Endangerment and Linguistic Diversity Ben Braithwaite
    RESEARCH REPORT Sign language endangerment and linguistic diversity Ben Braithwaite University of the West Indies at St. Augustine It has become increasingly clear that current threats to global linguistic diversity are not re - stricted to the loss of spoken languages. Signed languages are vulnerable to familiar patterns of language shift and the global spread of a few influential languages. But the ecologies of signed languages are also affected by genetics, social attitudes toward deafness, educational and public health policies, and a widespread modality chauvinism that views spoken languages as inherently superior or more desirable. This research report reviews what is known about sign language vi - tality and endangerment globally, and considers the responses from communities, governments, and linguists. It is striking how little attention has been paid to sign language vitality, endangerment, and re - vitalization, even as research on signed languages has occupied an increasingly prominent posi - tion in linguistic theory. It is time for linguists from a broader range of backgrounds to consider the causes, consequences, and appropriate responses to current threats to sign language diversity. In doing so, we must articulate more clearly the value of this diversity to the field of linguistics and the responsibilities the field has toward preserving it.* Keywords : language endangerment, language vitality, language documentation, signed languages 1. Introduction. Concerns about sign language endangerment are not new. Almost immediately after the invention of film, the US National Association of the Deaf began producing films to capture American Sign Language (ASL), motivated by a fear within the deaf community that their language was endangered (Schuchman 2004).
    [Show full text]
  • The Norse Element in the Orkney Dialect Donna Heddle
    The Norse element in the Orkney dialect Donna Heddle 1. Introduction The Orkney and Shetland Islands, along with Caithness on the Scottish mainland, are identified primarily in terms of their Norse cultural heritage. Linguistically, in particular, such a focus is an imperative for maintaining cultural identity in the Northern Isles. This paper will focus on placing the rise and fall of Orkney Norn in its geographical, social, and historical context and will attempt to examine the remnants of the Norn substrate in the modern dialect. Cultural affiliation and conflict is what ultimately drives most issues of identity politics in the modern world. Nowhere are these issues more overtly stated than in language politics. We cannot study language in isolation; we must look at context and acculturation. An interdisciplinary study of language in context is fundamental to the understanding of cultural identity. This politicising of language involves issues of cultural inheritance: acculturation is therefore central to our understanding of identity, its internal diversity, and the porousness or otherwise of a language or language variant‘s cultural borders with its linguistic neighbours. Although elements within Lowland Scotland postulated a Germanic origin myth for itself in the nineteenth century, Highlands and Islands Scottish cultural identity has traditionally allied itself to the Celtic origin myth. This is diametrically opposed to the cultural heritage of Scotland‘s most northerly island communities. 2. History For almost a thousand years the language of the Orkney Islands was a variant of Norse known as Norroena or Norn. The distinctive and culturally unique qualities of the Orkney dialect spoken in the islands today derive from this West Norse based sister language of Faroese, which Hansen, Jacobsen and Weyhe note also developed from Norse brought in by settlers in the ninth century and from early Icelandic (2003: 157).
    [Show full text]
  • Review Article: English Influence on the Scandinavian Languages
    Review Article: English Influence on the Scandinavian Languages STIG JOHANSSON Harriet Sharp, English in spoken Swedish: A corpus study of two discourse domains. Stockholm Studies in English 95. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wikseil. 2001. ISBN 91-22-01934-0. 1. Introduction The development of English is truly remarkable. 400 years ago it was spoken by a mere 4 to 5 million people in a limited geographical area. Now it is the native language of several hundred million people in many parts of the world. It is a second language in many countries and is studied as a foreign language in every corner of the world. English is a global language, to quote from the tide of a recent book by David Crystal (1997). The role of English is frequently debated. English has been described as a murder language, threatening the existence of local languages. The spread of English was described as linguistic imperialism in a book by Robert Phillipson (1992). The role of English is a topic frequently raised in the press. 40 years ago the readers of Dagbladet in Norway could read the following statement by a well-known publisher (quoted in translation): The small language communities today are in danger of being absorbed by the large ones. Perhaps in ten years English will have won the day in Iceland, in thirty years in Norway. NORDIC JOURNAL OF ENGLISH STUDIES VOL. I No. 1 89 English Influence on the Scandinavian Languages In Norway there have been several campaigns against unwanted English influence and for the protection of the linguistic environment (språklig miljøvern).
    [Show full text]
  • Germanic Standardizations: Past to Present (Impact: Studies in Language and Society)
    <DOCINFO AUTHOR ""TITLE "Germanic Standardizations: Past to Present"SUBJECT "Impact 18"KEYWORDS ""SIZE HEIGHT "220"WIDTH "150"VOFFSET "4"> Germanic Standardizations Impact: Studies in language and society impact publishes monographs, collective volumes, and text books on topics in sociolinguistics. The scope of the series is broad, with special emphasis on areas such as language planning and language policies; language conflict and language death; language standards and language change; dialectology; diglossia; discourse studies; language and social identity (gender, ethnicity, class, ideology); and history and methods of sociolinguistics. General Editor Associate Editor Annick De Houwer Elizabeth Lanza University of Antwerp University of Oslo Advisory Board Ulrich Ammon William Labov Gerhard Mercator University University of Pennsylvania Jan Blommaert Joseph Lo Bianco Ghent University The Australian National University Paul Drew Peter Nelde University of York Catholic University Brussels Anna Escobar Dennis Preston University of Illinois at Urbana Michigan State University Guus Extra Jeanine Treffers-Daller Tilburg University University of the West of England Margarita Hidalgo Vic Webb San Diego State University University of Pretoria Richard A. Hudson University College London Volume 18 Germanic Standardizations: Past to Present Edited by Ana Deumert and Wim Vandenbussche Germanic Standardizations Past to Present Edited by Ana Deumert Monash University Wim Vandenbussche Vrije Universiteit Brussel/FWO-Vlaanderen John Benjamins Publishing Company Amsterdam/Philadelphia TM The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements 8 of American National Standard for Information Sciences – Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ansi z39.48-1984. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Germanic standardizations : past to present / edited by Ana Deumert, Wim Vandenbussche.
    [Show full text]
  • Sprog I Norden
    Sprog i Norden Titel: Knud Knudsen (1812–1895): norsk skole- og språkreformator og skandinavist Forfatter: Arne Torp Kilde: Sprog i Norden, 2012, s. 1-19 [i hæftet: s. 119-138] URL: http://ojs.statsbiblioteket.dk/index.php/sin/issue/archive © Dansk Sprognævn Betingelser for brug af denne artikel Denne artikel er omfattet af ophavsretsloven, og der må citeres fra den. Følgende betingelser skal dog være opfyldt: • Citatet skal være i overensstemmelse med „god skik“ • Der må kun citeres „i det omfang, som betinges af formålet“ • Ophavsmanden til teksten skal krediteres, og kilden skal angives, jf. ovenstående bibliografiske oplysninger. Søgbarhed Artiklerne i de ældre numre af Sprog i Norden (1970-2004) er skannet og OCR-behandlet. OCR står for ’optical character recognition’ og kan ved tegngenkendelse konvertere et billede til tekst. Dermed kan man søge i teksten. Imidlertid kan der opstå fejl i tegngenkendelsen, og når man søger på fx navne, skal man være forberedt på at søgningen ikke er 100 % pålidelig. Knud Knudsen (1812–1895): norsk skole- og språkreformator og skandinavist Arne Torp Ivar Aasen (1813–1896) og Knud Knudsen (1813–1896) er de to store navna i norsk språkhistorie på 1800-tallet, men Aasen er nok vesentlig bedre kjent både i Norge og ellers i verden enn Knudsen. Dette er heller ikke så merkelig: Aasen grunnla nemlig den ene av de to offisielle norske målformene, lands- målet eller nynorsken, men Knudsens andel i bokmålet eller riksmålet består i at han var den ivrigste pådriveren for å fornorske dansken, som det ble kalt. Utgangspunktet hans var da den uttalen av dansk skriftspråk som var vanlig i den norske overklassa, den såkalte dannede dagligtale.
    [Show full text]
  • Germanic Languages 825 IV. NORWEGIAN STUDIES*
    Germanic Languages 825 IV. NORWEGIAN STUDIES* LANGUAGE By Arne Kruse, Lecturer in Norwegian, School of European Languages and Cultures, University of Edinburgh 1. General A general presentation in German of the Norwegian language and current language situation is H. Sandøy’s contribution, pp. 865–905 in Nation und Sprache. Die Diskussion ihres Verha¨ltnisses in Geschichte und Gegenwart, ed. Andreas Gardt, Berlin, Mouton de Gruyter. Martin Skjekkeland, Tysk-danske la˚nord i nynorsk og i bygdema˚la. Om ein frisk debatt- og om ei gransking av ordtilfanget i to bygdema˚l (Forskningsserien no. 16), Agder College, 1999, 130 pp., contributes to the discussion about German/Danish loan-words in Nynorsk with an investigation into the actual usage of such words in two local dialects. Other contribu- tions to this debate are by G. Akselberg, pp. 25–35 of 7. Møde om Udforskningen af Dansk Sprog, ed. Peter Widell and Mette Kunøe, Aarhus U.P., 1999, and among others, H. Sandøy, pp. 209–24 of the report Spra˚kbrukeren — fri til a˚ velge? Artikler om homogen og heterogen spra˚knorm, ed. Helge Omdal (Research series no. 17), Kristiansand, Agder College, 1999, 234 pp. The entire report focuses on theoretical and practical implications of restrictive vs. liberal norms for written Norwegian, and questions the validity of the claim that the many optional forms in Bokma˚l and Nynorsk are to the benefit of the user of written Norwegian. The three following books are published in the series ‘Publications of the Ivar Aasen Institute’: Ny-Noreg møter Svensk-Finland, ed. S. J. Walton, Volda, Volda College, 47 pp., is a compilation of five articles which compare the situations for Nynorsk and Swedish in Finland.
    [Show full text]
  • Norsk Ordbok - the Crown of Nynorsk Lexicography?
    Lars S. Vik0r, Sectionfor Norwegian Lexicography, University ofOslo Norsk Ordbok - the Crown of Nynorsk Lexicography? Abstract Norsk Ordbok 'Norwegian Dictionary' is a multi-volume dictionary of the Norwegian standard variety Nynorsk and the Norwegian dialects. It is one of the very few dictionaries which cover both a written standard language and the oral dialects on which this standard is based. It was initiated around 1930, based on dialect material collected by volunteers and stored in a vast card archive, and on a variety of written sources. At present, three oftwelve planned volumes have appeared, reaching into g. The paper gives a historical outline of the project, followed by a brief description of its structure and the types of information it gives. This is exemplified by the treatment of one particular word, bunad. Finally, some fundamental problems are briefly discussed: 1) the selection of lemmas, 2) the character of the sources, 3) the treatment of dialect forms, 4) the sequence of definitions. The full title of Norsk Ordbok is Norsk Ordbok. Ordbok over det norske folkemâlet og det nynorske skriftmâlet 'Norwegian Dictionary. A dic­ tionary of the Norwegian popular language [i.e. the Norwegian dialects], and the Nynorsk written language'. This title at once indicates the dual aspect of the dictionary: It gives integrated coverage of both oral dialects and a written standard language. This dual aspect is the most special distinguishing feature of Norsk Ordbok as a lexicographic work. Normally, dictionaries cover written standard languages or some aspect of them (or, in the case of pro­ nouncing dictionaries, oral standard language).
    [Show full text]
  • Does the Nordic Region Speak with a FORKED Tongue?
    Does the Nordic Region Speak with a FORKED Tongue? The Queen of Denmark, the Government Minister and others give their views on the Nordic language community KARIN ARVIDSSON Does the Nordic Region Speak with a FORKED Tongue? The Queen of Denmark, the Government Minister and others give their views on the Nordic language community NORD: 2012:008 ISBN: 978-92-893-2404-5 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.6027/Nord2012-008 Author: Karin Arvidsson Editor: Jesper Schou-Knudsen Research and editing: Arvidsson Kultur & Kommunikation AB Translation: Leslie Walke (Translation of Bodil Aurstad’s article by Anne-Margaret Bressendorff) Photography: Johannes Jansson (Photo of Fredrik Lindström by Magnus Fröderberg) Design: Mar Mar Co. Print: Scanprint A/S, Viby Edition of 1000 Printed in Denmark Nordic Council Nordic Council of Ministers Ved Stranden 18 Ved Stranden 18 DK-1061 Copenhagen K DK-1061 Copenhagen K Phone (+45) 3396 0200 Phone (+45) 3396 0400 www.norden.org The Nordic Co-operation Nordic co-operation is one of the world’s most extensive forms of regional collaboration, involving Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, and the Faroe Islands, Greenland, and Åland. Nordic co-operation has firm traditions in politics, the economy, and culture. It plays an important role in European and international collaboration, and aims at creating a strong Nordic community in a strong Europe. Nordic co-operation seeks to safeguard Nordic and regional interests and principles in the global community. Common Nordic values help the region solidify its position as one of the world’s most innovative and competitive. Does the Nordic Region Speak with a FORKED Tongue? The Queen of Denmark, the Government Minister and others give their views on the Nordic language community KARIN ARVIDSSON Preface Languages in the Nordic Region 13 Fredrik Lindström Language researcher, comedian and and presenter on Swedish television.
    [Show full text]
  • Sign Language Acronyms
    Sign language acronyms Throughout the Manual, the following abbreviations for sign languages are used (some of which are acronyms based on the name of the sign language used in the respective countries): ABSL Al Sayyid Bedouin Sign Language AdaSL Adamorobe Sign Language (Ghana) ASL American Sign Language Auslan Australian Sign Language BSL British Sign Language CSL Chinese Sign Language DGS German Sign Language (Deutsche Gebärdensprache) DSGS Swiss-German Sign Language (Deutsch-Schweizerische Gebärdensprache) DTS Danish Sign Language (Dansk Tegnsprog) FinSL Finnish Sign Language GSL Greek Sign Language HKSL Hong Kong Sign Language HZJ Croatian Sign Language (Hrvatski Znakovni Jezik) IPSL Indopakistani Sign Language Inuit SL Inuit Sign Language (Canada) Irish SL Irish Sign Language Israeli SL Israeli Sign Language ÍTM Icelandic Sign Language (Íslenskt táknmál) KK Sign Language of Desa Kolok, Bali (Kata Kolok) KSL Korean Sign Language LIS Italian Sign Language (Lingua dei Segni Italiana) LIU Jordanian Sign Language (Lughat il-Ishaara il-Urdunia) LSA Argentine Sign Language (Lengua de Señas Argentina) Libras Brazilian Sign Language (Língua de Sinais Brasileira) LSC Catalan Sign Language (Llengua de Signes Catalana) LSCol Colombian Sign Language (Lengua de Señas Colombiana) LSE Spanish Sign Language (Lengua de Signos Española) LSF French Sign Language (Langue des Signes Française) LSQ Quebec Sign Language (Langue des Signes Québécoise) NGT Sign Language of the Netherlands (Nederlandse Gebarentaal) NicSL Nicaraguan Sign Language NS Japanese Sign Language (Nihon Syuwa) NSL Norwegian Sign Language NZSL New Zealand Sign Language DOI 10.1515/9781501511806-003, © 2017 Josep Quer, Carlo Cecchetto, Caterina Donati, Carlo Geraci, Meltem Kelepir, Roland Pfau, and Markus Steinbach, published by De Gruyter.
    [Show full text]