Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T00:16:51.423Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

25 - Destandardization

from Part V - Standardization in Late Modernity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2021

By
Tore Kristiansen
Edited by
Wendy Ayres-Bennett  and
John Bellamy
Wendy Ayres-Bennett
Affiliation:
University of Cambridge
John Bellamy
Affiliation:
University of Cambridge
Get access

Summary

If language standardization is understood as a historical process that strengthens a standard norm at the expense of variation, prefixing de- to standardization gives us a notion concerning change in the opposite direction: a progressive weakening of the norm in favour of variation. This is what the chapter discusses: are we experiencing, under the contemporary conditions of Late Modernity, a situation whereby the continued strengthening of the standard norm is being replaced by an incipient weakening? It is argued that the discussion needs to focus on the ideological aspect of the issue. Norway is discussed as an exemplary case of norm weakening, based on evidence that the multiplicity of dialects is more present and accepted in public domains than ever before, as the standard language ideology (tSLI; he belief in a ‘best’ language) has been abandoned: destandardization. In contrast, Denmark is discussed as an exemplary case of continued norm strengthening based on evidence that dialectal variation disappears as SLI changes, but grows stronger than ever before. This latter situation is termed demotization. Other terms are also discussed, including restandardization and vernacularization, which have been proposed in reported work from other countries (including Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, the UK, the USA, New Zealand and Sri Lanka).

Keywords

destandardizationdemotizationstandardizationrestandardizationvernacularizationstandard language ideologyfalling standardsemerging standardsNorwayDenmark
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Language Standardization , pp. 667 - 690
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Altendorf, U. (2016). Caught between Aristotle and Miss Marple … – a proposal for a perceptual prototype approach to ‘Estuary English’. Complutense Journal of English Studies, 24, 131–54.Google Scholar
Auer, P. (2017). The neo-standard of Italy and elsewhere in Europe. In Cerruti, M., Crocco, C. & Marzo, S., eds., Towards a New Standard: Theoretical and Empirical Studies on the Restandardization of Italian. Berlin/New York: De Gruyter, pp. 365–74.Google Scholar
Auer, P. & Spiekermann, H. (2011). Demotisation of the standard variety or destandardisation? The changing status of German in late modernity (with special reference to south-western Germany). In Kristiansen, T. & Coupland, N., eds., Standard Languages and Language Standards in a Changing Europe. Oslo: Novus Press, pp. 161–76.Google Scholar
Bayard, D. (2000). New Zealand English: origins, relationships, and prospects. Moderna Spra˚k, 94(1), 8–14.Google Scholar
Bayard, D, Weatherall, A., Gallois, C. & Pittam, J. (2001). Pax Americana? Accent attitudinal evaluations in New Zealand, Australia and America. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 5(1), 22–49.Google Scholar
Bell, A. (2011). Leaving home: de-Europeanization in a post-colonial variety of broadcast news. In Kristiansen, T. & Coupland, N., eds., Standard Languages and Language Standards in a Changing Europe. Oslo: Novus Press, pp. 177–98.Google Scholar
Brink, L. & Lund, J. (1975). Dansk Rigsma˚l. Copenhagen: Gyldendal.Google Scholar
Brink, L., Lund, J., Heger, S. & Jørgensen, J. N. (1991). Den Store Danske Udtaleordbog [The Great Danish Pronunciation Dictionary]. Copenhagen: Munksgaard.Google Scholar
Cameron, D. (1995). Verbal Hygiene. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Cerruti, M., Crocco, C. & Marzo, S. (2017a). On the development of a new standard norm in Italian. In Cerruti, M., Crocco, C. & Marzo, S., eds., Towards a New Standard: Theoretical and Empirical Studies on the Restandardization of Italian. Berlin/New York: De Gruyter, pp. 3–28.Google Scholar
Cerruti, M., Crocco, C. & Marzo, S., eds. (2017b). Towards a New Standard: Theoretical and Empirical Studies on the Restandardization of Italian. Berlin/New York: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Clyne, M., ed. (1991). Pluricentric Languages: Differing Norms in Different Nations. Berlin/New York: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Coupland, N. (2014). Sociolinguistic change, vernacularization and broadcast British media. In Androutsopoulos, J., ed., Mediatization and Sociolinguistic Change. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 67–96.Google Scholar
Coupland, N. & Kristiansen, T. (2011). SLICE: critical perspectives on language (de)standardization. In Kristiansen, T. & Coupland, N., eds., Standard Languages and Language Standards in a Changing Europe. Oslo: Novus Press, pp. 11–35.Google Scholar
Darquennes, J. (2015). Language conflict research: a state of the art. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 235, 7–32.Google Scholar
Deumert, A. & Vandenbussche, W., eds. (2003). Germanic Standardizations: Past to Present. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Dovalil, V. (2016). Konzeptualisierung der Demotisierung und Destandardisierung auf der Grundlage der Sprachmanagementtheorie. In Rössler, P., ed., Standardisierungsprozesse und Variation: Beitra¨ge zur Engfu¨hrung von Standardsprachenforschung und Variationslinguistik. Frankfurt am Main, etc.: Peter Lang, pp. 135–60.Google Scholar
Fairclough, N. (1994). Conversationalisation of public discourse and the authority of the consumer. In Keat, R., Whitely, N. & Abercrombie, N., eds., The Authority of the Consumer. London: Routledge, pp. 253–68.Google Scholar
Garrett, P. (2010). Attitudes to Language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Grondelaers, S. & van Hout, R. (2011a). The standard language situation in the Low Countries: top-down and bottom-up variations on a diaglossic theme. Journal of Germanic Linguistics, 23, 199–243.Google Scholar
Grondelaers, S. & van Hout, R. (2011b). The standard language situation in The Netherlands. In Kristiansen, T. & Coupland, N., eds., Standard Languages and Language Standards in a Changing Europe. Oslo: Novus Press, pp. 113–18.Google Scholar
Grondelaers, S., van Hout, R. & Speelman, D. (2011). A perceptual typology of standard language situations in the Low Countries. In Kristiansen, T. & Coupland, N., eds., Standard Languages and Language Standards in a Changing Europe. Oslo: Novus Press, pp. 199–222.Google Scholar
Haugen, E. (1966). Language Conflict and Language Planning: The Case of Modern Norwegian. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Hickey, R., ed. (2012). Standards of English: Codified Varieties around the World. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Jahr, E. H. (2014). Language Planning as a Sociolinguistic Experiment. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Joseph, J. E. (1987). Eloquence and Power: The Rise of Language Standards and Standard Languages. London: Frances Pinter.Google Scholar
Kloss, H. (1967). ‘Abstand languages’ and ‘Ausbau languages’. Anthropological Linguistics, 9(7), 29–41.Google Scholar
Kristiansen, T. (2001). Two standards: one for the media and one for the school. Language Awareness, 10(1), 9–24.Google Scholar
Kristiansen, T. (2003a). Danish. In Deumert, A. & Vandenbussche, W., eds., Germanic Standardizations: Past to Present. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: Benjamins, pp. 69–91.Google Scholar
Kristiansen, T. (2003b). Language attitudes and language politics in Denmark. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 159, 57–71.Google Scholar
Kristiansen, T. (2009). The macro-level social meanings of Late-Modern Danish accents. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia, 41, 167–92.Google Scholar
Kristiansen, T. (2014). Does mediated language influence immediate language? In Androutsopoulos, J., ed., Mediatization and Sociolinguistic Change. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 99–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kristiansen, T. (2016). Contemporary standard language change: weakening or strengthening? Taal en Tongval, Special issue, 68(2), 93–117Google Scholar
Kristiansen, T. & Coupland, N., eds. (2011). Standard Languages and Language Standards in a Changing Europe. Oslo: Novus Press.Google Scholar
Kristiansen, T. & Grondelaers, S., eds. (2013). Language (De)standardization in Late Modern Europe: Experimental Studies. Oslo: Novus Press.Google Scholar
Kristiansen, T., Pharao, N. & Maegaard, M. (2013). Controlled manipulation of intonational difference: an experimental study of intonation patterns as the basis for language-ideological constructs of geographical provenance and linguistic standardness in young Danes. In Kristiansen, T. & Grondelaers, S., eds., Language (De)standardisation in Late Modern Europe: Experimental Studies. Oslo: Novus Press, pp. 355–74.Google Scholar
Labov, W. (1972). Sociolinguistic Patterns. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Maegaard, M., Jensen, T. J., Kristiansen, T. & Jørgensen, J. N. (2013). Diffusion of language change: accommodation to a moving target. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 17(1), 3–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milroy, J. & Milroy, L. (1985). Authority in Language. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Monka, M. & Hovmark, H. (2016). Sprogbrug blandt unge i Bylderup anno 2015. Danske Talesprog, 16, 73–114.Google Scholar
Mortensen, J., Coupland, N. & Thøgersen, J., eds. (2016). Style, Mediation and Sociolinguistic Change: Sociolinguistic Perspectives on Talking Media. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rickford, J. F. (1999). The Ebonics controversy in my backyard: a sociolinguist’s experiences and reflections. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 3, 267–75.Google Scholar
Røyneland, U. (2009). Dialects in Norway: catching up with the rest of Europe? International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 196 /197, 7–31.Google Scholar
Ryan, E. B. (1979). Why do low-prestige varieties persist? In Giles, H. & St. Clair, R. N., eds., Language and Social Psychology. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 145–57.Google Scholar
Sandøy, H. (2011). Language culture in Norway: a tradition of questioning standard language norms. In Kristiansen, T. & Coupland, N., eds., Standard Languages and Language Standards in a Changing Europe. Oslo: Novus Press, pp. 119–26.Google Scholar
Schiffman, H. F. (1998). Standardization or restandardization: the case for ‘Standard’ Spoken Tamil. Language in Society, 27, 359–85.Google Scholar
Schneider, E. W. (2007). Postcolonial English: Varieties around the World. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Stausland Johnsen, S. (2015). Dialect change in South-East Norway and the role of attitude in diffusion. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 19(5), 612–42.Google Scholar
Swann, J., Deumert, A., Lillis, T. & Mesthrie, R., eds. (2004). A Dictionary of Sociolinguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Thøgersen, J. (2013). Vil De prøve at sige A?: ‘Fladt a’ i Radioavisen 1950–2010. NyS. Nydanske Studier og Almen Kommunikationsteori, 43, 101–32.Google Scholar
Thøgersen, J. & Pharao, N. (2013). Changing pronunciation but stable social evaluation? University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics, 19(2), 191–201.Google Scholar
Thøgersen, J., Coupland, N. & Mortensen, J., eds. (2016). Style, Media and Language Ideologies. Oslo: Novus Press.Google Scholar
Trudgill, P. (2018 [1998]). Norwegian as a normal language. In Trudgill, P., ‘Norwegian as a Normal Language’ and Other Studies in Scandinavian Linguistics. Oslo: Novus Press, pp. 43–50.Google Scholar
Watts, R. J. (1999). The ideology of dialect in Switzerland. In Blommaert, J., ed., Language Ideological Debates. Berlin/New York: De Gruyter, pp. 67–103.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×