LANGUAGE PLANNING Andi Asrifan Email: [email protected] Universitas Muhammadiyah Sidenreng Rappang ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT This article will explore linguistic preparation. This paper offers a summary of the various language plans that can be listed. An summary and a revised bibliography of the field of language planing are provided. Language planning is defined as the planning of deliberate changes in the way or the implementation of the variety of languages and is seen as a sociolinguistic sub-discipline. Topic Discussion The themes discussed include linguistic planning, ideal language • What is language planning? planning, language planning goals, linguistic planning styles and levels, linguist's positions in language planning, language planning • The language planning research, language planning and linguistic planning implementation programme and assessment, bilingual training and education policies. • Aims of language planning • Language planning as product planning • Types of language planning • Levels of language planning • Role of the linguist in language planning • Language planning and other types of planning • Language planning surveys INTRODUCTION Language planning is a tentative concept as the planning of deliberate change in the form or use of language(s) (or varieties). Planning as well as language use are social practices and language planning is usually considered to be a subdiscipline of sociolinguistics. However there are strong ties between language planning and other types of planning, for example in economic and cultural areas, which offer a strong multidisciplinary taste to linguistic planning. Never far are linguistic or political gaps (Mazrui 1975; O'Barr, W. & O'Barr 1976) and the complexity of linguistic planning studies in linguistic planning is arguably tied together inextricately. If one agrees that linguistic planning deals more with social than linguistic structures, it can be considered to belong to the 'macro' target of socio-linguistics or linguistic sociology (society study) instead of 'micro' sociolinguistics (society study) (see Hudson, 1980: 4-5 for discussion of the differences). In the fourth concept of Fishman, Language Preparation may definitely be included (Fishman (ed.)1971:9): "Language sociology deals with language diversity as a target, as a barrier and as 9 facilitator, as well as language users and uses as aspects of wider social models and processes." However, the distinctions "makro" and "micro" are not clear: "there are no wide-ranging links between language and society, which are not interactive in individual ways to make them a reality" (Fishman, 1971b: 31). Two ends in one clinic are macro- and micro-sociolinguism, the former stress social, the latter linguistic, structures. Planning would have to take place on various stages in the process of language planning at different points along this path, with a useful mid-way point in Fishman's concept of domain (20071 b). A. What is Language Planning? In socia-linguistics, language planning is relatively recent, but not new, discipline (see, for example, Fishman, 1971 c), and the malel building and theory building are at present very significant in their development. Therefore, the number of different meanings and words of the literature, which 1 may attempt to explain can be initially confused with those who are not acquainted with the language planning. The description from Weinstein provides a useful assessment: language planning is an accepted, long- term, sustained, and conscious attempt on the part of governments to alter the role of language in a society in order to solve communication problems (Weinstein, 1980: 56). Definitely, Jernudd and Das Gupta. On (1971) the political, problems resolving the essence of linguistic planning is similarly stressed, and das Gupta and Ferguson (1977) considers language planning to be a linguistic resource evaluation, the assignment of preferences and functions to one or more languages and a misuse according to previously established goals. Rubin (1973) stresses the future-oriented nature of the company's challenges by identifying priorities and by considering solutions at each point in the process. She underlines the social nature of language planning and the need for plan makers to take account of the needs and expectations of people who plan. The development of policies is not planned. Many so-called 'failures' for language preparation may have been nothing more than policies without any planning. B. The language planning programme In an ideal language planing program, Rubin (1977) offers a detailed overview of the stages. Step 1 requires the compilation of facts, identification of problems and the:solving of possible restrictions. Step 2, where the priorities are set, tactics planned and the results expected, is the preparation phase. The plan is then introduced, I in stage 3 and input on the plan's progress or failure in step 4. Because of the input, adjustments to the programme, the preparation is also an ongoing process at every point. Although this is an ideal sequence, it offers a useful model to schedule and compare with real planning processes. Weinstein (1980) outlines a similar method, attempting to synthesize other models, but in more detail with 11 program steps. In addition, he added examples of Rubin's model process implementation (e.g. the establishment of bureaucracies), outcomes for planning (acceptance or denial by language users) and interaction between policy makers (government), policy journalists (bureaucracy) and planners. An especially helpful feature of his explanation is attempting to classify certain participants in the language preparation process. C. Aims of language planning Language preparation has three objectives: extr-lingual purposes related to linguistic reform; half- language aims related to change in written structures, orthographing and pronunciation; and linguistic purposes related to linguistic changes, including extensions or standardisation. Linguistic priorities include changes in the language or languages of language usage. These words represent a limited meaning of linguistics and suggest that language planning is restricted. For example, even if the goals are extraterringual, the linguist may contribute to language planning (see section 10 below on the role of the linguist in Language Planning). Rubin (1977) also uses the same words to describe goals in a somewhat different way. Extra-language goals are cases where a non-language objective is supported by preparing a language issue that may be inexistent, but intentionally developed. Semi-linguistic goals serve linguistic as well as social as political interests and linguistic objectives strive to solve problems of communication. Apparently, Rabin and Rubin refer to various groups of goals. Rabin's are similar to the division of Kloss between planning status (planning of specific functions or language uses) and corpus (language code shift and the creation of grammars and dictionaries) (Kloss, 1969). Rubin explains to what degree certain goals serve communication, social, political or non-linguistic purposes. Th.: divisions of aims/goals (or mean/end) can be conserved using the following matrix: Purposes (Ends) (Rubin) Aims (Means) (a) Communication (b) Socio-politico (c) Political (Rabin/Elms linguistic (i) Status x x x (ii) Corpus- x x x orthography/ phonology (iii) Corpus-vocabulary x x x From this matrix we can clearly see the form and intent of changes that are expected. Therefore, in order to (e.g. more effective classroom instruction, (b) e.g. protecting minority rights or (c) e.g. protection of political influence, the proposed implementation of mother tongue as a means of education during initial stages of schooling may be intended. There could, of course, be more than one goal and for various reasons, different groups may (or oppose) support a proposal. Similarly, the planning authorities can propose open or protected uses, which are intended to obtain public support, while planning for other unpublicized purposes at the same time. D. Language planning as product planning We saw how a program of language planning should work and what clear purposes and priorities could inspire planing. The changes that might take place in a language (product) within the context of a language planning program must now be taken into account. We distinguish four aspects of product planning following Neustupny (1970): collection, codification, processing and development. Choosing a language is a process that is very different from the other three, since it is a significant consequence of policy decisions. The significance seems similar to the idea of allocation by Gorman (1973), which he considers different from the system. Codification is required when a language is standardized and includes a dictionary and grammar reference system. If a language assumes various functions, it will require additional words to allow the language to handle new designs (elaboration). Finally, provided the stabilization of the different variations in a language, linguistic concepts of adequacy can involve expression. These last three elements, codification, growth and culture can be considered as a planning stage resulting from planning and can be viewed as various types of corpus planning (see section 6 above). They may also represent a temporary linguistic sequence. For example, Neustupny argues that developing countries are generally at the selection ("political" approach) level, choosing for inter and intranational