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-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T12:31:41.172Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

1 - Modelling Language Standardization

from Part I - Revisiting Models and Theories of Language Standardization

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2021

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

Summary

In this chapter, I outline the development of some of the most widely used models of standardization and consider the extent to which they are able to account for the complexities of the standardization process and its different manifestations in diverse linguistic, historical and sociocultural contexts. I begin by discussing some of the ‘classic’ texts by Haugen, Garvin, Kloss, Ferguson and Stewart. I trace the establishment of certain key notions, as well as the publication of important texts in the 1980s and 1990s, including those by Milroy and Milroy, Le Page, Joseph and Cooper. I then outline some of the emerging and important themes in the work on standardization since 2000 which have proved challenging for the classic models of standardization. These include the standardization of minority and non-European languages and the consideration of standardization ‘from below’. Other developments concern an increasing focus on the agents of standardization and research on destandarization and restandardization, both of which need to be accommodated in standardization models. I conclude by revisiting Haugen’s model of standardization, which continues to be used in many studies and descriptions of standardization, despite its well-known limitations. I evaluate how far it is still valid and propose some possible modifications.

Keywords

models of standardizationprocesses of standardizationtypologies of standardizationcomparative standardology‘classic’ textsHaugen
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Language Standardization , pp. 27 - 64
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

Ammon, U. (2003). On the social forces that determine what is standard in a language and on conditions of successful implementation. Sociolinguistica, 17 (Special Issue), 1–10.Google Scholar
Ammon, U. (2017). On the social forces that determine what is standard in a language – with a look at the norms of non-standard language varieties. In Pandolfi, E. M., Miecznikowski, J., Christopher, S. & Kamber, A., eds., Studies on Language Norms in Context. Frankfurt am Main, etc.: Peter Lang, pp. 17–35.Google Scholar
Amorós-Negre, C. (2018). La estandarización lingu¨ı´stica de los relativos en el mundo hispa´nico: una aproximación empı´rica. Frankfurt am Main: Vervuert Verlagsgesellschaft.Google Scholar
Aracil, L. V. (1982). Lo bilingu¨isme coma mite. Magalàs: IEO Edicions.Google Scholar
Armstrong, N. & Mackenzie, I. E. (2013). Standardization, Ideology and Linguistics. London: Palgrave Macmillan.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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Auroux, S. (1992). Introduction: Le Processus de grammatisation et ses enjeux. In Auroux, S., ed., Histoire des idées linguistiques, Vol. II. Liège: Mardaga, pp. 11–64.Google Scholar
Ayres-Bennett, W. (2020). From Haugen’s codification to Thomas’s purism: assessing the role of description and prescription, prescriptivism and purism in linguistic standardisation. Language Policy, 19(2), 183–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartsch, R. (1987). Norms of Language: Theoretical and Practical Aspects. London/New York: Longman (Translation of Sprachnormen: Theorie und Praxis, 1985).Google Scholar
Bédard, E. & Maurais, J., eds. (1983). La Norme linguistique. [Quebec]: Gouvernement du Québec, Conseil de la langue française; Paris: Le Robert.Google Scholar
Berruto, G. (1987). Lingua, dialetto, diglossia, dilalìa. In Holtus, G. & Kramer, J., eds., Romania et Slavia Adriatica: Festschrift fu¨r Zˇarko Muljacˇic´. Hamburg: Buske, pp. 57–81.Google Scholar
Berruto, G. (1989). On the typology of linguistic repertoires. In Ammon, U., ed., Status and Function of Languages and Language Varieties. Berlin/Boston, MA: De Gruyter, pp. 552–69.Google Scholar
Blommaert, J. (1996). Language planning as a discourse on language and society: the linguistic ideology of a scholarly tradition. Language Problems & Language Planning, 20(3), 199–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blommaert, J., ed. (1999). Language Ideological Debates. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bocadorova, N. (1995). La théorie des langues normées selon V. V. Vinogradov. Histoire, épistémologie, Langage, 17(2), 163–81.Google Scholar
Brandist, C. & Chown, K., eds. (2011). Politics and the Theory of Language in the USSR, 1917–1938: The Birth of Sociological Linguistics. London: Anthem.Google Scholar
Brincat, J., Boeder, W. & Stolz, T., eds. (2003). Purism in Minor Languages, Endangered Languages, Regional Languages, Mixed Languages: Papers from the Conference on ‘Purism in the Age of Globalisation’, Bremen, September 2001. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Cameron, D. (1995). Verbal Hygiene. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Cameron, D. (2012). Verbal Hygiene. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Cerruti, M., Crocco, C. & Marzo, S. (2017). Towards a New Standard: Theoretical and Empirical Studies on the Restandardization of Italian. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Clyne, M., ed. (1992). Pluricentric Languages: Differing Norms in Different Nations. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Clyne, M. & Kipp, S. (1999). Pluricentric Languages in an Immigrant Context: Spanish, Arabic and Chinese. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Cooper, R. L. (1989) Language Planning and Social Change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press: Universidad de la Republica, Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias, Instituto de Filologia, Dept. de Lingüistica.Google Scholar
Coșeriu, E. (1962 [1952]). Sistema, norma y habla, reprinted in Teorı´a del lenguaje y lingu¨ı´stica general: cinco estudios. Madrid: Gredos, pp. 11–113.Google Scholar
Costa, J. (2019). Introduction: regimes of language and the social, hierarchized organization of ideologies. Language and Communication, 66, 1–5.Google Scholar
Costa-Carreras, J. (2007). Réflexions sur la diffusion de la norme linguistique catalane. In Viaut, A., ed., Variable territoriale et promotion des langues minoritaires. Pessac: Maison des Sciences de l’Homme d’Aquitaine, pp. 287–300.Google Scholar
Costa-Carreras, J. (2020). Are terminology planning evaluation and language policy and planning evaluation applicable to the evaluation of standardisation? Current Issues in Language Planning, 21, 1–21.Google Scholar
Costa-Carreras, J., Amorós-Negre, C. & Pradilla, M. A. (forthcoming). ‘Compositionality’ in comparative standardology. In F. Feliu, ed., Desired Language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Coulmas, F. (2005). Changing language regimes in globalizing environments. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 175 /176, 3–15.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
Curzan, A. (2014). Fixing English: Prescriptivism and Language History. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Darquennes, J. & Vandenbussche, W. (2015). The standardisation of minority languages: introductory remarks. Sociolinguistica, 29(1), 1–16.Google Scholar
Deumert, A. (2004). Language Standardization and Language Change: The Dynamics of Cape Dutch. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deumert, A. & Vandenbussche, W., eds. (2003). Germanic Standardizations: Past to Present. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Dollinger, S. (2019). The Pluricentricity Debate: On Austrian German and Other Germanic Standard Varieties. New York/Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Eckert, P. & McConnell-Ginet, S. (1992). Think practically and look locally: language and gender as community-based practice. Annual Review of Anthropology, 21, 461–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eliasson, S. (2013). Language ecology in the work of Einar Haugen. In Vandenbussche, W., Håkon Jahr, E. & Trudgill, P., eds., Language Ecology for the 21st Century: Linguistic Conflicts and Social Environments. Oslo: Novus, pp. 15–63.Google Scholar
Elspaß, S. (2005). Sprachgeschichte von unten: Untersuchungen zum geschriebenen Alltagsdeutsch im 19. Jahrhundert. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google 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.Google Scholar
Feliu, F. & Nadal, J. M., eds. (2016). Constructing Languages: Norms, Myths and Emotions. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Ferguson, C. A. (1959). Diglossia. Word, 15(2), 325–40.Google Scholar
Ferguson, C. A. (1962). The language factor in national development. Anthropological Linguistics, 4(1), 23–7.Google Scholar
Ferguson, C. A. (1968). Language development. In Fishman, J. A., Ferguson, C. A. & Das Gupta, J., eds., Language Problems of Developing Nations. New York: John Wiley & Sons, pp. 27–35.Google Scholar
Ferguson, C. A. (1988). Standardization as a form of language spread. In Lowenberg, P. H., ed., Language Spread and Language Policy: Issues, Implications and Case Studies. Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics 1987. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, pp. 119–32.Google Scholar
Fernández, M. (1995). Les orígines del término diglosia: historia de une historia mal contada. Historiographia Linguistica, 22(1–2), 163–95.Google Scholar
Fishman, J. A. (1991). Reversing Language Shift: Theoretical and Empirical Foundations of Assistance to Threatened Languages. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Fishman, J. A., ed. (2001). Can Threatened Languages Be Saved? ‘Reversing Language Shift’ Revisited. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle 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, pp. 13–27.Google Scholar
Gal, S. (2017). Visions and revisions of minority languages: standardization and its dilemmas. In Lane, P. & Costa, J., eds., Standardizing Minority Languages in the Global Periphery: Competing Ideologies of Authority and Authenticity. London: Routledge, pp. 222–42.Google Scholar
Garvin, P. L. (1959). The standard language problem – concepts and methods. Anthropological Linguistics, 1(3), 28–31.Google Scholar
Garvin, P. L. (1993). A conceptual framework for the study of language standardization. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 100 /101, 37–54.Google Scholar
Gazzola, M. (2014). The Evaluation of Language Regimes: Theory and Application to Multilingual Patent Organizations. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Greenberg, J. H. (1986). Were there Egyptian koines? In Fishman, J. A., Tabouret-Keller, A., Clyne, M., Krishnamurti, B. & Abdulaziz, M., eds., The Fergusonian Impact: In Honor of Charles A. Ferguson on the Occasion of His 65th Birthday, Vol. I. Berlin/New York/Amsterdam: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 271–90.Google Scholar
Grin, F. (2003). Language Policy Evaluation and the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar
Haarmann, H. (1990). Language planning in the light of a general theory of language: a methodological framework. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 86, 103–26.Google Scholar
Haugen, E. (1959). Planning for a standard language in modern Norway. Anthropological Linguistics, 1(3), 8–21.Google Scholar
Haugen, E. (1966). Dialect, language, nation. American Anthropologist, 68(4), 922–35.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. (1983). The implementation of corpus planning: theory and practice. In Cobarrubias, J. & Fishman, J. A., eds., Progress in Language Planning: International Perspectives. Berlin/New York/Amsterdam: Mouton, pp. 269–89.Google Scholar
Haugen, E. (1987). Blessings of Babel: Bilingualism and Language Planning. Problems and Pleasures. Berlin/New York/Amsterdam: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hickey, R. (2015). Standards of English: Codified Varieties around the World. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hornberger, N. H. (1994). Literacy and language planning. Language and Education, 8, 75–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hornberger, N. H. (2006). Frameworks and models in language policy and planning. In Ricento, T., ed., An Introduction to Language Policy: Theory and Method. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, pp. 24–41.Google Scholar
Hualde, J. I. & Zuazo, K. (2007). The standardization process of the Basque language. Language Problems and Language Planning, 31(2), 143–68.Google Scholar
Hüning, M., Vogl, U. & Moliner, O., eds. (2012). Standard Languages and Multilingualism in European History. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Jernudd, B. & Nekvapil, J. (2012). History of the field: a sketch. In Spolsky, B., ed., The Cambridge Handbook of Language Policy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 16–36.Google Scholar
Jernudd, B. & Neustupný, J. V. (1987). Language planning: for whom? In Laforge, L., ed., Proceedings of the International Colloquium on Language Planning. Quebec: Les Presses de L’Université Laval, pp. 69–84.Google Scholar
Jernudd, B. H. & Shapiro, M. J., eds. (1989). The Politics of Language Purism. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Jespersen, O. (1925). Mankind, Nation and Individual from a Linguistic Point of View. Oslo, etc.: H. Aschehoug & co., etc.Google Scholar
Joseph, J. E. (1987). Eloquence and Power: The Rise of Language Standards and Standard Languages. London: Frances Pinter.Google Scholar
Joseph, J. E., Rutten, G. & Vosters, R. (2020). Dialect, language, nation: 50 years on. Language Policy, 19(2), 161–82.Google Scholar
Kachru, B. (1976). Models of English for the third world: white man’s linguistic burden or language pragmatics? TESOL Quarterly, 10(2), 221.Google Scholar
Kahane, H. & Kahane, R. (1979). Decline and survival of Western prestige languages. Language, 55(1), 183–98.Google Scholar
Kerswill, P. (2002). Koineization and accommodation. In Chambers, J. K., Trudgill, P. & Schilling-Estes, N., eds., The Handbook of Language Variation and Change. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 669–702.Google Scholar
Kloss, H. (1952). Die Entwicklung neuer germanischer Kultursprachen von 1800 bis 1950. Munich: Pohl.Google Scholar
Kloss, H. (1967). ‘Abstand languages’ and ‘Ausbau languages’. Anthropological Linguistics, 9(7), 29–41.Google Scholar
Kloss, H. (1968). Notes concerning a language-nation typology. In Fishman, J., Ferguson, C. A. & Das Gupta, J., eds., Language Problems of Developing Nations. New York: John Wiley & Sons, pp. 69–85.Google Scholar
Kloss, H. (1969). Research Possibilities on Group Bilingualism: A Report. Quebec: International Center for Research on Bilingualism.Google Scholar
Kloss, H. (1978 [1952]). Die Entwicklung neuer germanischer Kultursprachen seit 1800, 2nd enlarged edn. Düsseldorf: Schwann.Google Scholar
Koch, P. (2014). Phases et charnières: modéliser l’histoire de la langue (élaboration – standardisation – coiffure – régression). In Ayres-Bennett, W. & Rainsford, T. M., eds., L’Histoire du franc¸ais: état des lieux et perspectives. Paris: Classiques Garnier, pp. 321–55.Google Scholar
Koch, P. & Oesterreicher, W. (1990). Gesprochene Sprache in der Romania: Franzo¨sisch, Italienisch, Spanisch, Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.Google Scholar
Koch, P. & Oesterreicher, W. (2001). Gesprochene Sprache und geschriebene Sprache. Langage parlé et langage écrit. In Holtus, G., Metzeltin, M. & Schmitt, C., eds., Lexicon der romanistischen Linguistik, Vol. I, 2. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag, pp. 584–627.Google 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)standardisation in Late Modern Europe: Experimental Studies. Oslo: Novus Press.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.Google Scholar
Le Page, R. B. (1988). Some premises concerning the standardization of languages, with special reference to Caribbean Creole English. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 71, 25–36.Google Scholar
Le Page, R. B. & Tabouret-Keller, A. (1985). Acts of Identity: Creole-Based Approaches to Language and Ethnicity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lebsanft, F. & Tacke, F., eds. (2020). Manual of Standardization in the Romance Languages. Berlin/Boston, MA: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Lodge, R. A. (1993). French: From Dialect to Standard. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lüdi, G. (2012). Traces of monolingual and plurilingual ideologies in the history of language policies in France. In Hüning, M., Vogl, U. & Moliner, O., eds., Standard Languages and Multilingualism in European History. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 205–30.Google Scholar
Maas, U. (1985). Lesen – Schreiben – Schrift: Die Demotisierung eines professionellen Arkanums im Spätmittelalter und in der frühen Neuzeit. Zeitschrift fu¨r Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik, 15(59), 55–81.Google Scholar
Machan, T. W. (2016). Snakes, ladders, and standard languages. In Machan, R. W., ed., Imagining Medieval English: Language Structures and Theories, 500–1500. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 54–77.Google Scholar
Mattheier, K. J. (1997). Über Destandardisierung, Umstandardisierung und Standardisierung in modernen europäischen Standardsprachen. In Mattheier, K. J. & Radtke, E., eds., Standardisierung und Destandardisierung europa¨ischer Nationalsprachen. Frankfurt am Main: Lang, pp. 1–9.Google Scholar
Metzeltin, M. (2004). Las lenguas roma´nicas esta´ndar (historia de su formación y su uso). Uviéu: Academia de la Llingua Asturiana.Google Scholar
Millar, R. M. (2005). Language, Nation and Power: An Introduction. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.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. and Conde-Silvestre, J. C, eds., The Handbook of Historical Sociolinguistics. Chichester, UK/Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 571–84.Google Scholar
Milroy, J. & Milroy, L. (2012). Authority in Language: Investigating Language Prescription and Standardisation, 4th edn. London/Boston, MA: Routledge & K. Paul (previous editions 1985, 1991, 1999).Google Scholar
Muljačić, Ž. (1993). Standardization in Romance. In Posner, R. & Green, J. N., eds., Trends in Romance Linguistics and Philology, Vol. V. Berlin: De Gruyter, pp. 77–116.Google Scholar
Nahir, M. (1977). The five aspects of language planning – a classification. Language Problems and Language Planning, 1(2), 107–23.Google Scholar
Nahir, M. (1984). Language planning goals: a classification. Language Problems and Language Planning, 8(3), 294–327.Google Scholar
Neustupný, J. V. (1974). Basic types of treatment of language problems. In Fishman, J., ed., Advances in Language Planning. The Hague: Mouton, pp. 37–48.Google Scholar
Nevalainen, T. & Tieken-Boon van Ostade, I. (2006). Standardisation. In Hogg, R. & Denison, D., eds., A History of the English Language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 271–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nevalainen, T., Raumolin-Brunberg, H. & Mannila, H. (2011). The diffusion of language change in real time: progressive and conservative individuals and the time depth of change. Language Variation and Change, 23(1), 1–43.Google Scholar
Pahta, P, Skaffari, J. & Wright, L., eds. (2017). Multilingual Practices in Language History: English and Beyond. Berlin/Boston, MA: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Penny, R. (2000). Variation and Change in Spanish. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Quintilian (1920). The Institutio oratoria of Quintilian with an English Translation by H. E. Butler, Vol. I. Cambridge, MA/London: Harvard University Press (1989 printing).Google Scholar
Ricento, T. (2000). Historical and theoretical perspectives in language policy and planning. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 4(2), 196–213.Google Scholar
Ricento, T., ed. (2006). An Introduction to Language Policy: Theory and Method. Malden MA: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Ruszkowski, M. (1995). Teoretyczne i praktyczne zagadnienia je˛zykoznawstwa normatywnego. Kielce: Wyższa Szkoła Pedagogiczna im. Jana Kochanowskiego.Google Scholar
Rutten, G. & Vosters, R., eds. (2020). Revisiting Haugen: Historical-Sociolinguistic Perspectives on Standardization. Language Policy, 19(2), Special Issue.Google Scholar
Rutten, G., Krogull, A. & Schoemaker, B. (2020). Implementation and acceptance of national language policy: the case of Dutch (1750–1850). Language Policy, 19(2), 259–79.Google Scholar
Rutten, G., Vosters, R. & Vandenbussche, W., eds. (2014). Norms and Usage in Language History, 1600–1900: A Sociolinguistic and Comparative Perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schieffelin, B., Woolard, K. & Kroskrity, P., eds. (1998). Language Ideologies: Practice and Theory. New York: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Siegel, J. (1985). Koines and koineization. Language in Society, 14(3), 357–78.CrossRefGoogle 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
Smakman, D. & Nekasa Barasa, S. (2017). Defining ‘standard’: towards a cross-cultural definition of the language norm. In Tieken-Boon van Ostade, I. & Percy, C., eds., Prescription and Tradition in Language: Establishing Standards across Time and Space. Bristol: Multilingual Matters, pp. 23–38.Google Scholar
Spolsky, B., ed. (2012). The Cambridge Handbook of Language Policy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Stewart, W. A. (1968). A sociolinguistic typology for describing national multilingualism. In Fishman, J. A., ed., Readings in the Sociology of Language. The Hague/Paris: Mouton, pp. 531–45.Google Scholar
Stillwell, K. & Hetrovicz, L. (2013). The standardizations of Catalan: Latin to present day. Studies in the Linguistic Sciences: Illinois Working Papers, 2013, 68–86.Google Scholar
Thomas, G. (1991). Linguistic Purism. London/New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Tieken-Boon van Ostade, I. (2011). The Bishop’s Grammar: Robert Lowth and the Rise of Prescriptivism in English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tieken-Boon van Ostade, I. & Percy, C., eds. (2017). Prescription and Tradition in Language: Establishing Standards across Time and Space. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Tollefson, J. (1991). Planning Language, Planning Inequality: Language Policy in the Community. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Trask, R. L. (1999). Key Concepts in Language and Linguistics. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Trudgill, P. (1986). Dialects in Contact. Oxford/New York: B. Blackwell.Google Scholar
van der Sijs, N., ed. (1999). Taaltrots: purisme in een veertigtal talen. Amsterdam: Uitgeverij Contact.Google Scholar
Vandenbussche, W. (2006). Shared standardization factors in the history of sixteen Germanic languages. In Fandrych, C. & Salverda, R., eds., Standard, Variation und Sprachwandel in germanischen Sprachen / Standard, Variation and Language Change in Germanic Languages. Tübingen: Gunter Narr, pp. 25–36.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
Walsh, O. (2016). Linguistic Purism: Language Attitudes in France and Quebec. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Watts, R. J. (2012). Language myths. In Hernández-Campoy, J. M. & Conde-Silvestre, J. C., eds., The Handbook of Historical Sociolinguistics. Chichester/Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 585–606.Google Scholar
Weinreich, U. (1953). Languages in Contact, Findings and Problems. New York: Linguistic Circle of New York.Google Scholar
Weinreich, U. (1954). Is a structural dialectology possible? Word, 10, 388–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woolard, K. (2008). Language and identity choice in Catalonia: the interplay of contrasting ideologies of linguistic authority. In Süselbeck, K., Mühlschlegel, U. & Masson, P., eds., Lengua, nación e identidad: la regulación del plurilingu¨ismo en Espan˜a y América Latina. Frankfurt am Main: Verveurt, pp. 303–23.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@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
×