DOCSLIB.ORG

Language Policy & Language Planning Gg G Gg G

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Language Policy & Language Planning Gg G Gg G Language Policy & Course Structure Langgguage Planning 1. Language Contact language change Nigel Musk 2. Individual Bilingualism code-switching & code-mixing Master’s Course Spring Term: Language & Culture 3. Societal Bilingualism diglossia, language maintenance, language shift & http://www.liu.se/ikk/ffu/ske/Masterutbildning/courses/language-and-culture-in-europe?l=en language death (obsolescence) 4. Language Policy and Language Planning national langgg,uages, the EU and multiling ualism, lang gguage revitalisation & bilingual education The Standard Language (Yule 2006: 194194--5)5) Language Planning 1 Definition: an idealised language variety, most often accepted as Langgguage ppglanning is not a new phenomenon even though the the official language of a community or country. (Yule 2006: 194) term is relatively recent the emerggyence of many modern Europ ean nation states by It has a long history , though much of such activity has been the end of 19th century accompanied by the spread of implicit and informal (Blommaert 1996: 206) nationalist ideologies: one nation, one langgguage e.g. the creation of the modern European nation-states with their Codification of vernacular (spoken) languages was national languages influenced by traditions of unified written standard of upsurge in explicit language planning activities since the 1960s, Classical Latin, i.e. grammars prescribed a regulated and in response to the “language problems” of post-colonial states ‘refined’ language (akin to the language of the gentry) (Barber 1993: 203-4) Language Planning 2 Language Planning 3 rd language planning - term first introduced by Haugen (1959: 8) to mean: Coopppper proposes a 3 categgyory: acqqpguisition planning –to increas[e] the activity of preparing a normative orthography, grammar, and dictionary for the number of users – speakers, writers, listeners, or readers (1996: 33) the guidance of writers and speakers in a non-homogenous speech community. Cooper’s definition of langggpuage planning : extended by Kloss (1969) to two foci of language planning: Language planning refers to deliberate efforts to influence the behavior corpus planning (including Haugen’s language planning activities) of others with respect to the acquisition, structure or functional status planning - government recognition of one language in relation to others (Cooper 1996: 32) allocation of their language codes. (1996: 45, his italics) e.g. the relations between a national language and regional or minority languages. the distinction miggppht appear clear cut in theory, but Coop er admits that Today status planning has been broadened: the allocation of languages or this might not be the case in practice (1996: 32) language varieties to given functions (Cooper 1996: 32) e.g. which language(s) is (are) the official language and the medium (media) to be used in education or the mass media. Language Planning in the 1960s The Efficiency Assumption earlyyggp language planners ( 1960s) treated the task of lang ggpuage planning refers to the oppygerational efficiency of multilingualism ((ycommon to many as a non-political problem-solving exercise, and were unaware of the post-colonial states) ideological baggage which accompanied their practices assigggning more than one or two langgguages to the pppurposes of (Blommaert 1996, Ricento 2000) administration, education, the media and economic life, etc. was e.g. sociolinguists and other practitioners inadvertently bore with them the deemed as unworkable and unmanageable (Blommaert 1996: 210-11) blueprint of the European nation-state the promotion of a single “language of wider communication” was their work was blighted by what Blommaert (1996: 210-11) terms: ppyortrayed as a ppgragmatic solution to an efficiencyyp problem an efficiency assumption “little more than an agency of ideological control” which facilitates state an integration assumption ((gg)and in the case of colonial languages even world) domination (Williams 1992: 127) The Integration Assumption Language Planning 4 entails an essentialist or “orggggyanic view of language and society” langggpuage planning is not a neutral or simp pple problem-solvinggy activity: (Blommaert 1996: 212), whereby national unity is threatened by officially Language planning is typically carried out for the attainment of non- recognising more than one (or two) languages. linguistic ends such as consumer protection, scientific exchange, given the assumed language-culture link, an official policy of national integration, political control, economic development, the multilingualism would act as “a centrifugal force” and rouse ethnic creation of new elites or the maintenance of old ones, the pacification political aspirations (Blommaert 1996: 211-12) or cooption of minority groups, and mass mobilization of national or political movements. (Cooper 1996: 35) Eurocentric monolingual and monocultural bias evident: it is assumed that every individual has one and only one ethnolinguistic there are always ideological assumptions and political imperatives identity: s/he speaks one language (the mother tongue), and has which underpin language planning activities therefore only one ethnic identity. (Blommaert 1996: 208) Bourdieu: Linguistic Markets and Language Policy & Planning Symbolic Domination 1 (1986, 1991) language can be characterised as a form of cultural capital increasingly, language planning activities are being termed language policy and planning (LPP) which broadens the perspective somewhat. languages are acquired and used in particular contexts where people Ricento regards language planning as a subordinate category to language have different degrees of power and economic resources policy, which for research purposes: these contexts are markets where values of linguistic and cultural is concerned not only with official and unofficial acts of governmental and other resources are negotiated institutional entities , but also with the historical and cultural processes that have influenced, and continue to influence, societal attitudes and practices with (politically and economically) dominant social groups exercise most regard to language use, acquisition and status. (Ricento 2000: 209, footnote 2) symbolic power and therefore define the value of the different forms this acknowledges the broader processes of a historical and cultural nature, of linguistic and cultural capital on each linguistic market involving non-governmental players too, e.g. pressure groups, researchers, journalists, charismatic leaders (with or without the legitimacy of the state) Bourdieu: Linguistic Markets and Bourdieu: Linguistic Markets and Symbolic Domination 2 (1986, 1991) Symbolic Domination 3 (1986, 1991) the state is instrumental in imposing the dominant language (variety) = the legitimate (most prestigious) language through the administration, the media, the courts and especially social and symbolic order throug h the ed uca tion sys tem other languages (varieties) become delegitimised a partilicular symblibolic ord er ihis thus imposed on th hliiie linguistic market proficiency in the legitimate language is unequally distributed in interactional order society, thus regulating access to (economic and political) power language = cultura l capit a l, fdfundamen tlttal to socia l mobilit y Bourdieu: Linguistic Markets and Bourdieu: Linguistic Markets and Symbolic Domination 4 Symbolic Domination 5 Criticism of Bourdieu’s model [I]t remains hard to see how […] Bourdieu’s framework avoids being social and symbolic order a deterministic process of reproduction: We can trade forms of capital, but […] Bourdieu fails to show how actors can actually intervene to change how things happen. (Pennycook, 2001: 126) The power of dominant groups is not monolithic and […] in every situation where there are asymmetrical relations of power between groups, [… ] there are always interstices; that is, spaces where interactional order structures fail to seal hermetically, and which provide sites […] where different practices of resistance (those of students and/or teachers) can be developed and where different world views can be articulated. (Martin-Jones & Heller 1996: 131) Language Revitalisation Reversing Language Shift 1 Huss’s definition of language revitalisation: Fishman (1991, 2000) has constructed a graded typology of a conscious effort to curtail the assimilative development of a threatened language status, which he has called GIDS, the language which has been steadily decreasing in use and to Graded Intergenerational Disruption Scale give it new life and vigour. (Huss 1999: 24) GIDS is a diagnostic test of linguistic vitality (cf Giles et al 1977), deliberate ppglanning is implicated to reverse the trend of but it is also to be read as a ppgractical guide as to the order in language shift, which is why the term reversing language which to reverse the process of language shift: shift is also used. RLS theory seeks to be directive or implicational vis-à-vis social action, rather than merely descriptive or analytic of the sociocultural scene. (Fishman 2000: 464) Stages of Reversing Language Shift1 Reversing Language Shift 2 (Fishman 1991, 2000) to reverse language shift, Fishman stresses that the acid test of all RLS 5. Schools for literacy acquisition, for the old and for the young, efforts is the intergenerational transmission of what he terms “Xish”, and not in lieu of compulsory education. the language (previously) undergoing language shift. 6. The intergenerational
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Aspects of Diglossic Code Switching Situations: a Sociolinguistic Interpretation
    European Journal of Research in Social Sciences Vol. 2 No. 4, 2014 ISSN 2056-5429 ASPECTS OF DIGLOSSIC CODE SWITCHING SITUATIONS: A SOCIOLINGUISTIC INTERPRETATION Hayet BAGUI Naama University ALGERIA ABSTRACT Code switching, a type of discourse that occurs as a natural outcome of language contact, has attracted linguists‟ attention and been studied from a variety of perspectives. Scholars do not seem to share a single definition of the concept, and this is perhaps inevitable, given the different concerns of formal linguists, psycholinguists, sociolinguists, anthropo-linguists and so forth. Whatever the definitions are, it is obvious that anyone who speaks more than one code switches back and forth between these codes or mixes them according to certain circumstances. CS can occur in a monolingual community, or in a plurilingual speech collectivity. In a monolingual context, Code switching relates to a diglossic situation where speakers make use of two varieties for well-defined set of functions: a H variety, generally the standard, for formal contexts, and a L variety typically for everyday informal communicative acts. In addition to alternation between H and L varieties, speakers may also switch between the dialects available to them in that community via a process of CS. In such a case, i.e. monolingual context, CS is classified as being ‘internal’, as the switch occurs between different varieties of the same language. In a multilingual community, the switch is between two or more linguistic systems. This is referred to as „external‟ code switching. Hence, the present research work includes a classification of the phenomenon in terms of „internal‟ code switching which is of a diglossic nation as well as „external‟ one with denotes a kind of extended diglossic contexts.
    [Show full text]
  • Arabic Sociolinguistics: Topics in Diglossia, Gender, Identity, And
    Arabic Sociolinguistics Arabic Sociolinguistics Reem Bassiouney Edinburgh University Press © Reem Bassiouney, 2009 Edinburgh University Press Ltd 22 George Square, Edinburgh Typeset in ll/13pt Ehrhardt by Servis Filmsetting Ltd, Stockport, Cheshire, and printed and bound in Great Britain by CPI Antony Rowe, Chippenham and East bourne A CIP record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN 978 0 7486 2373 0 (hardback) ISBN 978 0 7486 2374 7 (paperback) The right ofReem Bassiouney to be identified as author of this work has been asserted in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. Contents Acknowledgements viii List of charts, maps and tables x List of abbreviations xii Conventions used in this book xiv Introduction 1 1. Diglossia and dialect groups in the Arab world 9 1.1 Diglossia 10 1.1.1 Anoverviewofthestudyofdiglossia 10 1.1.2 Theories that explain diglossia in terms oflevels 14 1.1.3 The idea ofEducated Spoken Arabic 16 1.2 Dialects/varieties in the Arab world 18 1.2. 1 The concept ofprestige as different from that ofstandard 18 1.2.2 Groups ofdialects in the Arab world 19 1.3 Conclusion 26 2. Code-switching 28 2.1 Introduction 29 2.2 Problem of terminology: code-switching and code-mixing 30 2.3 Code-switching and diglossia 31 2.4 The study of constraints on code-switching in relation to the Arab world 31 2.4. 1 Structural constraints on classic code-switching 31 2.4.2 Structural constraints on diglossic switching 42 2.5 Motivations for code-switching 59 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Demographic Imperatives in Language Planning
    Demographic Imperatives In Language Planning Lachman M Khubchandani Centre for Communication Studies Pune [email protected] Elitist Moorings In the realm of language policy-making and language planning we tend to 'perceive' languages in monolitihic terms. Language rights movements also generally focus attention on monistic aspects of language A or language B. in everyday life. We may identify languages as 'strong' or 'weak' in categorical terms. But when looking at the scene in a plurilingual paradigm, we need to devise a scale plotting stronger and weaker languages in relative terms which respond in a unique manner to the space-and time-bound institutional reality, viz. language accreditation by the state, identity aspirations of a speech community, accessibility of a language in everyday communication. In the entire process of language planning (it also includes language policy-making), the common man - the 'consumer' of LP programs - is present only by proxy, carrying the elite 'cross'. It is mainly the custodians of languages who decide loftily what is 'good' for the masses, by the virtue of their hold on the socio-political and literary scene (Khubchandani 1983: 149). A few remarks from the critique of language planning (Khubchandani 1997) may be relevant here "The notion of language planning in its exhaustive sense is a relatively new concept 1 [ 1 ]. Its models, to a large extent, are influenced by those in the spheres of industrial and agricultural planning. From the narrow linguistic concerns of 'intellectual fostering' of the standard languages (Prague School 1932, Tauli 1968), the canvas of language planning is now enlarged to include language as an object of human manipulation, introducing, the cost-benefit and 1 A distinct enquiry concerning the issues of language planning is attributed to the 1996 Airlie House Conference held in the United States (Fishman et al 1968); it was followed up by the 1969 Conference on corpus language planning at the East-west Center, Honolulu (Rubin and Jernudd 1971).
    [Show full text]
  • Abstract Language Variation and Gender in Egypt; Evidence from Talk Shows
    Abstract Language variation and gender in Egypt; Evidence from talk shows. Dr. Reem Bassiouney: Assistant Professor of Arabic linguistics at Georgetown University, Washington DC. In the Arabic speaking world there is a difference between a ‘prestige variety’ and a ‘standard’ one. There is also a diglossic situation. Diglossia is defined by Ferguson (1959) as a language situation in which two languages or varieties exist side by side - each with a different function. In the Arab world there is a standard Arabic which is used in education and sometimes in formal occasions, and there are also the different vernaculars of different countries (cf. Bassiouney 2006). Many linguistic studies in the Arab world have shown that for most people there is a prestige vernacular, the identity of which depends on many geographical, political and social factors within each country. In Egypt for example, for non-Cairene it is Cairene. It is usually the Urban dialect of the big cities. This linguistic situation does not exist in many Western societies, with the consequence that at a first glance the results reached by some Western linguists concerning language and gender seem to contradict those reached by some linguists in the Arab world. For example, Labov (1972) concludes that women use a more prestigious form of language. Gall (1978-79) in her study of a village in Austria found that women use the prestigious variety of German more than men as a form of securing their position in society. The fact that linguists like Daher (1999) may claim that specific women of a specific background may not use some standard features of language does not contradict the findings of Labov and others, since women may still use the prestige form of language which, as was said earlier, is different from the standard one.
    [Show full text]
  • Linguistics As a Resouvce in Language Planning. 16P
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 095 698 FL 005 720 AUTHOR Garvin, Paul L. TITLE' Linguistics as a Resouvce in Language Planning. PUB DATE Jun 73 NOTE 16p.; PaFPr presented at the Symposium on Sociolinguistics and Language Planning (Mexico City, Mexico, June-July, 1973) EPRS PPICE MF-$0.75 HC-$1.50 PLUS POSTAGE DESCRIPTORS *Applied Linguistics; Language Development; *Language Planning; Language Role; Language Standardization; Linguistics; Linguistic Theory; Official Languages; Social Planning; *Sociolinguistics ABSTPACT Language planning involves decisions of two basic types: those pertaining to language choice and those pertaining to language development. linguistic theory is needed to evaluate the structural suitability of candidate languages, since both official and national languages mast have a high level of standardizaticn as a cultural necessity. On the other hand, only a braodly conceived and functionally oriented linguistics can serve as a basis for choosiag one language rather than another. The role of linguistics in the area of language development differs somewhat depending on whether development is geared in a technological and scientific or a literary, artistic direction. In the first case, emphasis is on the development of terminologies, and in the second case, on that of grammatical devices and styles. Linguistics can provide realistic and practical arguments in favor of language development, and a detailed, technical understanding of such development, as well as methodological skills. Linguists can and must function as consultants to those who actually make decisions about language planning. For too long linguists have pursued only those aims generated within their own field. They must now broaden their scope to achieve the kind of understanding of language that is necessary for a productive approach to concrete language problems.
    [Show full text]
  • Gender Differences in Beliefs About English Language Policies (Elps): the Case of Saudi Higher Education English Departments
    International Journal of Education & Literacy Studies ISSN: 2202-9478 www.ijels.aiac.org.au Gender Differences in Beliefs about English Language Policies (ELPs): The Case of Saudi Higher Education English Departments Suliman Mohammed Nasser Alnasser* Department of English Language and Literature, College of Arts, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia Corresponding author: Suliman Mohammed Nasser Alnasser, E-mail: [email protected] ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Article history Review of literature suggests that issues in English language policies (ELPs) in higher education Received: March 2, 2018 foreign language department levels have not been addressed, and the relationship between Accepted: April 28, 2018 beliefs about general notions of ELPs and gender has been disregarded. The current study Published: April 30, 2018 investigates gender-related differences in beliefs on five main notions of ELPs among staff Volume: 6 Issue: 2 members in Saudi Arabian English departments. An online survey was administered to staff members in different Saudi English departments from different regions in Saudi Arabia. Five general statements on ELPs were included in the survey and were responded to by male (n = 67) Conflicts of interest: None and female (n = 143) staff members (total = 210). Pearson’s chi-square test of independence and Funding: None the calculated percentages of responses were used to analyze gender differences. No statistically significant differences were found between male and female participants, with the exception of one statement. Both genders had generally similar beliefs on ELPs. Moreover, the female staff had slightly stronger beliefs than the male staff, and males showed more hesitation than females did when deciding on ELP matters.
    [Show full text]
  • Diglossia and Beyond
    Chapter 9 Diglossia and Beyond Jürgen Jaspers Introduction Diglossia in simple terms refers to the use of two varieties in the same society for com- plementary purposes.1 As unassuming as this may sound, the concept can undoubtedly be called one of the grandes dames or, depending on your critical disposition, monstres sacrés of the sociolinguistic stage, against which new, would-be contenders still have to prove themselves, if they ever manage to emulate its success. For although the con- cept may increasingly be found old- school, politically conservative, and leaving some- thing to be desired in terms of its descriptive and explanatory adequacy, diglossia is still a widely acclaimed celebrity if you keep score of its occurrence in sociolinguistic, language- pedagogical, and linguistic anthropological work. What could be the reasons for this popularity? One obvious reason is that diglossia has been attracting a fair share of criticism in each of these disciplines. But another is certainly that diglossia practicably, in a single term, portrays the sometimes quite wide- spread and in a number of occasions astoundingly long- standing divisions of labor that obtain between the different varieties, registers, or styles that people produce and recog- nize. Indeed, diglossia alludes to two of the most basic, and therefore also most fascinat- ing, sociolinguistic findings— namely, that people talk and write differently even in the most homogeneous of communities, and that they do so in principled ways that matter to them so much that those who fail to observe these principles have to deal with the consequences (cf. Woolard, 1985: 738).
    [Show full text]
  • Diglossia in Arabica Comparative Study of the Modern
    Volume 12 Issue 8 Version 1.0 May 2012 Type: Double Blind Peer Reviewed International Research Journal Publisher: Global Journals Inc. (USA) Online ISSN: & Print ISSN: Abstract - Diglossia is a language situation in which there are two distinct varieties of a language used side by side. One variety, referred to as the High variety (H), is used only on formal and public occasions, while the other one, referred to as the Low variety (L), is used under normal, everyday circumstances. The distance between the H and L are sometimes to the extent that the two varieties are mutually unintelligible. One good example is the diglossic situation held between the Modern Standard Arabic (MSA) and the Egyptian Colloquial Arabic (EA). This article aims to compare the two varieties, at different linguistic levels, to illustrate how these differences have made the two verities mutually unintelligible. Keywords : Diglossia, Standard Arabic, Egyptian Arabic, High Variety, Low Variety etc. GJHSS-F Classification : FOR Code: 160603 Diglossia in Arabic A Comparative Study of the Modern Standard Arabic and Egyptian Colloquial Arabic Strictly as per the compliance and regulations of: © 2012. Mohammad Jafar Jabbari. This is a research/review paper, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 Unported License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/), permitting all non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Diglossia in Arabic A Comparative Study of the Modern Standard Arabic and Egyptian Colloquial Arabic Mohammad Jafar Jabbari Abstract - Diglossia is a language situation in which there are language (which may include a standard or regional two distinct varieties of a language used side by side.
    [Show full text]
  • Language and Status: on the Limits of Language Planning
    Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics, Vol. 39, 2010, 41-58 doi: 10.5774/39-0-3 Language and status: On the limits of language planning Lloyd Hill 1 Department of Sociology and Social Anthropology, Stellenbosch University, Private Bag X1, 7602 Matieland, South Africa Email: [email protected] Abstract 'Language status' is a concept that has been central to South African language policy debates since the early days of the negotiated transition, which culminated in the 1996 Constitutional commitment to developing eleven official languages. This constitutional commitment has not however been translated into a concrete legislative and administrative agenda. Recent critiques of language policy have attributed this 'policy gap' to problems associated with policy implementation. In this article I argue that policy difficulties can equally be attributed to theoretical problems associated with the concept of 'language status', which have their origins in a broader international discourse on language planning. This article is therefore presents a sociological critique of 'language planning', based on a conceptual analysis of key terms that underpin the current debate on language policy: principally 'language', 'language planning' and 'status.' Keywords : Language politics, language policy, language planning, corpus planning, status planning 1. Introduction "A language is a dialect with an army and a navy."2 This well known comment – attributed to Max Weinreich in 1945 – marked the beginning of a new era in the study of language in society. Weinreich's controversial assertion about the historical significance of political conflict in language standardisation also hints at a crucial ontological issue in debates on the meaning of language: to what extent can the status attributed to a language be distinguished from the status associated with those who speak it? 'Language status' is a concept that has been central to South African language policy debates since the early 1990s.
    [Show full text]
  • Sociolinguistic Situation of Kurdish in Turkey: Sociopolitical Factors and Language Use Patterns
    DOI 10.1515/ijsl-2012-0053 IJSL 2012; 217: 151 – 180 Ergin Öpengin Sociolinguistic situation of Kurdish in Turkey: Sociopolitical factors and language use patterns Abstract: This article aims at exploring the minority status of Kurdish language in Turkey. It asks two main questions: (1) In what ways have state policies and socio- historical conditions influenced the evolution of linguistic behavior of Kurdish speakers? (2) What are the mechanisms through which language maintenance versus language shift tendencies operate in the speech community? The article discusses the objective dimensions of the language situation in the Kurdish re- gion of Turkey. It then presents an account of daily language practices and perceptions of Kurdish speakers. It shows that language use and choice are sig- nificantly related to variables such as age, gender, education level, rural versus urban dwelling and the overall socio-cultural and political contexts of such uses and choices. The article further indicates that although the general tendency is to follow the functional separation of languages, the language situation in this con- text is not an example of stable diglossia, as Turkish exerts its increasing pres- ence in low domains whereas Kurdish, by contrast, has started to infringe into high domains like media and institutions. The article concludes that the preva- lent community bilingualism evolves to the detriment of Kurdish, leading to a shift-oriented linguistic situation for Kurdish. Keywords: Kurdish; Turkey; diglossia; language maintenance; language shift Ergin Öpengin: Lacito CNRS, Université Paris III & Bamberg University. E-mail: [email protected] 1 Introduction Kurdish in Turkey is the language of a large population of about 15–20 million speakers.
    [Show full text]
  • LINGUISTICS 160 Lecture #2
    LINGUISTICS 160 Lecture #2 LANGUAGE CHOICE IN MULTILINGUAL COMMUNITIES 1. Choosing your variety or code code → a neutral term language, dialect, standard, etc.: these terms imply judgement, emotion, not neutral terms! attitude The linguistic (=verbal) repertoire of speakers may be of three main types: (i) monolingual (ii) bilingual (iii) multilingual Monolingualism: the ability to use only one language. In some countries (especially in the western world) it is assumed that speaking one language is a world-wide norm, so much so that bilingual or multilingual speakers are considered somewhat strange. However, in most places in the world speaking two or more languages is natural; in those speech communities speaking one language only is considered to be a handicap. Bilingualism: the ability to use two languages. It is important to distinguish between speakers who are bilingual from those who are bidialectal. Why? “LANGUAGE” or “DIALECT” ?? These terms do not represent clear-cut concepts. Traditionally, dialect is defined as follows: a. It is a specific form of a given language spoken in a certain geographic area. 1 b. It differs substantially from the standard of that language (pronunciation, grammatical construction, idiomatic usage of words, etc.). c. It is not sufficiently distinct to be regarded as a different language. Problem: It has often been said that language is a collection of mutually intelligible dialects. ‘mutually intelligible’ → this is a linguistic criterion. From the speaker’s perspective it is less important, than political and social criteria! Examples: Serbian and Croatian -- languages or dialects? Mandarin and Cantonese -- languages or dialects? Hindi and Urdu -- languages or dialects? Ranamål and Bokmål (see Example 6 on p.
    [Show full text]
  • DIGLOSSIA: an OVERVIEW of the ARABIC SITUATION Morad Alsahafi King Abdulaziz University
    International Journal of English Language and Linguistics Research Vol.4, No.4, pp.1-11, June 2016 ___Published by European Centre for Research Training and Development UK (www.eajournals.org) DIGLOSSIA: AN OVERVIEW OF THE ARABIC SITUATION Morad Alsahafi King Abdulaziz University ABSTRACT: One of the most distinctive features of the Arabic language is the existence of diglossia. Arabic largely exists in a diglossic situation, which is manifested through the co- existence of Standard Arabic and Colloquial Arabic (Ferguson, 1959). Any discussion of the language situation in Arabic-speaking communities in the Middle Eastern and North African countries and elsewhere cannot overlook the existence of diglossia. Indeed, Arabic represents the world’s most complicated diglossic situation (Kaye, 2002). This paper provides an overview of diglossia in Arabic. It attempts to outline the meaning of the concept, its different types and its relationship to language stability and change. The overview is meant to be representative rather than comprehensive. KEYWORDS: Diglossia, Standard Arabic, Colloquial Arabic, Language variety INTRODUCTION Ferguson (1959) and Fishman (1972) are among the major sociolinguists who have developed this notion of functional differentiation of languages or language varieties in order to explain patterns of language use and choice. Ferguson (1959) first introduced the notion of diglossia to describe the functional distribution of two genetically related varieties in different settings. Since then, the notion of diglossia has been developed and become widely and usefully employed to describe patterns of language use and choice in diglossic and bi/multilingual communities in different places around the world. The following section provides an overview of diglossia, outlining the meaning of the concept, its different types and its relationship to language stability and change.
    [Show full text]