Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Language Standardization
- cambridge handbooks in language and linguistics
- The Cambridge Handbook of Language Standardization
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Introduction
- Part I Revisiting Models and Theories of Language Standardization
- Part II Legitimacy, Authority and the Written Form
- Part III Norms, Literacy and Education
- Part IV Beyond the National
- Part V Standardization in Late Modernity
- Name Index
- Subject Index
- References
Part I - Revisiting Models and Theories of Language Standardization
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 July 2021
Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Language Standardization
- cambridge handbooks in language and linguistics
- The Cambridge Handbook of Language Standardization
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Introduction
- Part I Revisiting Models and Theories of Language Standardization
- Part II Legitimacy, Authority and the Written Form
- Part III Norms, Literacy and Education
- Part IV Beyond the National
- Part V Standardization in Late Modernity
- Name Index
- Subject Index
- References
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Handbook of Language Standardization , pp. 25 - 198Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2021
References
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.CrossRefGoogle 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
Armstrong, N. & Mackenzie, I. E. (2013). Standardization, Ideology and Linguistics. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle 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.Google 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.Google 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.Google 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
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.CrossRefGoogle 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.CrossRefGoogle 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.Google 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.Google 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.CrossRefGoogle 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. (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.CrossRefGoogle 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.Google 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.CrossRefGoogle 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. (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.Google 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.Google 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
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.Google 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.Google Scholar
Schieffelin, B., Woolard, K. & Kroskrity, P., eds. (1998). Language Ideologies: Practice and Theory. New York: Oxford University PressGoogle 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
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
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
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
References
Anderwald, L. (2016). Language between Description and Prescription: Verbs and Verb Categories in Nineteenth-Century Grammars of English. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Auer, A. (2009). The Subjunctive in the Age of Prescriptivism: English and German Developments in the Eighteenth Century. Basingstoke: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Auer, A. (2014). Nineteenth-century English: norms and usage. In Rutten, G., Vosters, R. & Vandenbussche, W., eds., Norms and Usage in Language History, 1600–1900: A Historical-Sociolinguistic and Comparative Perspective. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 151–70.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. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 7–42.Google Scholar
Ayres-Bennett, W. (2014). From l’usage to le bon usage and back: norms and usage in seventeenth-century France. In Rutten, G., Vosters, R. & Vandenbussche, W., eds., Norms and Usage in Language History, 1600–1900: A Historical-Sociolinguistic and Comparative Perspective. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 173–200.Google Scholar
Ayres-Bennett, W. & Seijido, M., eds. (2013). Bon Usage et variation sociolinguistique: Perspectives diachroniques et traditions nationales. Lyon: Éditions de l’École Normale Supérieure (ENS).Google Scholar
Brewer, C. (2005). Authority and personality in the Oxford English Dictionary. Transactions of the Philological Society, 103(3), 261–301.Google Scholar
Burke, P. (2004). Languages and Communities in Early Modern Europe. Cambridge, UK/New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Certeau, M. de, Julia, D. & Revel, J. (1975). Une politique de la langue: La Révolution franc¸aise et les patois, l’enqueˆte Grégoire. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Cooper, R. L. (1989). Language Planning and Social Change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
de Jonghe, A. (1967). De taalpolitiek van Koning Willem I in de Zuidelijke Nederlanden (1824–1830). Sint-Andries-bij-Brugge: Darthet.Google Scholar
de Rooij, J. (1990). Over hun en hen, en hun: vorm en functie van de niet-gereduceerde voorwerpsvormen van het persoonlijk voornaamwoord in de derde persoon meervoud, in standaardtaal, ouder Nederlands en dialect. Taal en Tongval, 42(2), 107–47.Google Scholar
Deumert, A. & Vandenbussche, W. (2003). Research directions in the study of language standardization. In Deumert, A. & Vandenbussche, W., eds., Germanic Standardizations: Past to Present. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 455–69.Google Scholar
Dons, U. (2004). Descriptive Adequacy of Early Modern English Grammars. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Elspaß, S. (2005). Sprachgeschichte von unten: Untersuchungen zum geschriebenen Alltagsdeutsch im 19. Jahrhundert. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Elspaß, S. (2007a). 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’ (1700–1900). Berlin/New York: De Gruyter, pp. 3–9.Google Scholar
Elspaß, S. (2007b). Everyday language in emigrant letters and its implications on language historiography: the German case. Multilingua, 26, 151–65.Google Scholar
Elspaß, S. (2014). Prescriptive norms and norms of usage in nineteenth-century German. In Rutten, G., Vosters, R. & Vandenbussche, W., eds., Norms and Usage in Language History, 1600–1900: A Historical-Sociolinguistic and Comparative Perspective. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 303–20.Google Scholar
Elspaß, S. & Langer, N. (2012). Jespersen’s cycle and the history of German negation: challenges from a sociolinguistic perspective. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen, 113(3), 275–92.Google Scholar
Estival, D. & Pennycook, A. (2011). L’Académie française and Anglophone language ideologies. Language Policy, 10(4), 325–41.Google Scholar
Fairman, T. (2007). Writing and ‘the Standard’: England, 1795–1834. Multilingua, 26(2–3), 167–201.Google Scholar
Fishman, J. A. (1965). Who speaks what language to whom and when? La Linguistique, 1(2), 67–88.Google Scholar
Gal, S. & Woolard, K. (2001). Constructing languages and publics: authority and representation. In Woolard, K. & Gal, S., eds., Language and Publics: The Making of Authority. Manchester: St Jerome, pp. 1–12.Google Scholar
Goeman, T., van Oostendorp, M., van Reenen, P., Koornwinder, O. & van den Berg, B. (2009). Morfologische Atlas van de Nederlandse Dialecten: Deel II. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
Haugen, E. (1987). Blessings of Babel: Bilingualism and Language Planning. Problems and Pleasures. Berlin/New York/Amsterdam: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Henckel, F. L. N. (1815). Nieuwe Vlaemsche spraek-konst. Gent: P. F. de Goesin-Verhaege.Google 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: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 24–41.Google Scholar
Irvine, J. T. & Gal, S. (2000). Language ideology and linguistic differentiation. In Kroskrity, P. V., ed., Regimes of Language: Ideologies, Polities, and Identities. Santa Fe, NM: School of American Research Press, pp. 35–83.Google Scholar
Janssens, G. (2014). Tweehonderd jaar neerlandistiek aan de Université de Lie`ge: een geschiedenis van de oudste extramurale leerstoel Nederlands. Leuven/Den Haag: Acco.Google Scholar
Kloss, H. (1969). Research Possibilities on Group Bilingualism: A Report. Quebec: International Center for Research on Bilingualism.Google Scholar
Konopka, M. (1996). Strittige Erscheinungen der deutschen Syntax im 18. Jahrhundert. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Krogull, A., Rutten, G. & van der Wal, M. (2017). Relativisation in Dutch diaries, private letters and newspapers (1770–1840): a genre-specific national language? In Säily, T., Nurmi, A., Palander-Collin, M. & Auer, A., eds., Exploring Future Paths for Historical Sociolinguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 157–86.Google Scholar
Labov, W. (1994). Principles of Linguistic Change. Vol I: Internal factors. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Langer, N. (2001). Linguistic Purism in Action: How Auxiliary Tun Was Stigmatized in Early New High German. Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Langer, N. (2011). Historical sociolinguistics in nineteenth-century Schleswig-Holstein. German Life and Letters, 64(2), 169–87.Google Scholar
Langer, N. (2014). Standard German in the eighteenth century: norms and use. In Rutten, G., Vosters, R. & Vandenbussche, W., eds., Norms and Usage in Language History, 1600–1900: A Historical-Sociolinguistic and Comparative Perspective. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 277–302.Google Scholar
Langer, N. & Havinga, A. E. (2015). Invisible languages in historical sociolinguistics: a conceptual outline, with examples from the German-Danish borderlands. In Havinga, A. E. & Langer, N., eds., Invisible Languages in the Nineteenth Century. Frankfurt am Main, etc.: Peter Lang, pp. 1–34.Google Scholar
Langhanke, R. & Langer, N. (2013). How to deal with non-dominant languages – metalinguistic discourses on Low German in the nineteenth century. Linguistik Online, 59(1), 77–97.Google Scholar
Leerssen, J., ed. (2018). Encyclopedia of Romantic Nationalism in Europe, Vols. I–II. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
Lippi-Green, R. (2012). English with an Accent: Language, Ideology and Discrimination in the United States, 2nd edn. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lodge, R. A. (2013). A lady-in-waiting’s begging letter to her former employer (Paris, mid-sixteenth century). In van der Wal, M. & Rutten, G., eds., Touching the Past: Studies in the Historical Sociolinguistics of Ego-Documents. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 19–43.Google Scholar
Lodge, R. A. (2014). Jacques-Louis Ménétra and his experience of the langue d’oc. In Rutten, G., Vosters, R. & Vandenbussche, W., eds., Norms and Usage in Language History, 1600–1900: A Historical-Sociolinguistic and Comparative Perspective. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 201–22.Google Scholar
Martineau, F. (2007). Variation in Canadian French usage from the 18th to the 19th century. Multilingua, 26(2/3), 201–25.Google Scholar
Martineau, F. (2013). Written documents: what they tell us about linguistic usage. In van der Wal, M. & Rutten, G., eds., Touching the Past: Studies in the Historical Sociolinguistics of Ego-Documents. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 129–48.Google Scholar
McLelland, N. (2014). Language description, prescription and usage in seventeenth-century German. In Rutten, G., Vosters, R. & Vandenbussche, W., eds., Norms and Usage in Language History, 1600–1900: A Historical-Sociolinguistic and Comparative Perspective. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 251–76.Google Scholar
Meyerhoff, M. (2011). Introducing Sociolinguistics, 2nd edn. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Milroy, J. (2000). Historical description and the ideology of the standard language. In Wright, L., ed., The Development of Standard English, 1300–1800. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 11–28.Google Scholar
Milroy, J. (2001). Language ideologies and the consequences of standardization. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 5(4), 530–55.Google Scholar
Milroy, J. & Milroy, L. (2012). Authority in Language: Investigating Standard English, 4th edn. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Nevalainen, T. (2014). Norms and usage in seventeenth-century English. In Vosters, R. & Vandenbussche, W., eds., Norms and Usage in Language History, 1600–1900: A Historical-Sociolinguistic and Comparative Perspective. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 103–28.Google Scholar
Nevalainen, T. & Raumolin-Brunberg, H. (2017). Historical Sociolinguistics: Language Change in Tudor and Stuart England, 2nd edn. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Nobels, J. & Rutten, G. (2014). Language norms and language use in seventeenth-century Dutch: negation and the genitive. In Rutten, G., Vosters, R. & Vandenbussche, W., eds., Norms and Usage in Language History, 1600–1900: A Historical-Sociolinguistic and Comparative Perspective. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 21–48.Google Scholar
Paffey, D. (2007). Policing the Spanish language debate: verbal hygiene and the Spanish language academy (Real Academia Española). Language Policy, 6(3–4), 313–32.Google Scholar
Poplack, S. & Dion, N. (2009). Prescription vs. praxis. The evolution of future temporal reference in French. Language, 85(3), 557–87.Google Scholar
Poplack, S., Jarmasz, L.-G., Dion, N. & Rosen, N. (2015). Searching for standard French: the construction and mining of the Recueil historique des grammaires du français. Journal of Historical Sociolinguistics, 1(1), 13–55.Google Scholar
Rutten, G. (2007). Remark and remember: cultivating Dutch in Early Modern Europe. Henry Sweet Society for the History of Linguistic Ideas Bulletin, 49(1), 39–52.Google Scholar
Rutten, G. (2009). Grammar to the people: the Dutch language and the public sphere in the 18th century with special reference to Kornelis van der Palm. Beitra¨ge zur Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaft, 19, 55–86.Google Scholar
Rutten, G. (2010). Vroegmoderne relativa: naar een diachrone constructiegrammatica. Nederlandse Taalkunde, 15(1), 1–32.Google Scholar
Rutten, G. (2013). Waarom verscheen de Twe-spraack in 1584? In Van Hal, T., Isebaert, L., & Swiggers, P., eds., De tuin der talen: taalstudie en taalcultuur in de Lage Landen, 1450–1750. Leuven: Peeters, pp. 254–78.Google Scholar
Rutten, G. (2016a). Diaglossia, individual variation and the limits of standardization: evidence from Dutch. In Russi, C., ed., Current Trends in Historical Sociolinguistics. Warsaw: De Gruyter Open, pp. 194–218.Google Scholar
Rutten, G. (2016b). Historicizing diaglossia. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 20(1), 6–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rutten, G. (2016c). Standardization and the myth of neutrality in language history. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 242, 25–57.Google Scholar
Rutten, G. (2018). Matthijs Siegenbeek in defense of Dutch. In Honings, R., Rutten, G. & Kalmthout, T., van, eds., Language, Literature and the Construction of a Dutch National Identity (1780–1830). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, pp. 25–48.Google Scholar
Rutten, G. & van der Wal, M. (2011). Local dialects, supralocal writing systems. The degree of orality of Dutch private letters from the seventeenth century. Written Language & Literacy, 14, 251–74.Google Scholar
Rutten, G. & van der Wal, M. (2014). Letters as Loot: A Sociolinguistic Approach to Seventeenth- and Eighteenth-Century Dutch. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Rutten, G. & Vosters, R. (2010). Chaos and standards: orthography in the Southern Netherlands (1720–1830). Multilingua, 29(3/4), 417–38.Google Scholar
Rutten, G. & Vosters, R. (2013). Une tradition néerlandaise ? Du bon usage aux Pays-Bas (1686–1830). In Ayres-Bennett, W. & Seijido, M., eds., Bon Usage et variation sociolinguistique: Perspectives diachroniques et traditions nationales. Lyon: Éditions de l’École Normale Supérieure, pp. 233–43.Google Scholar
Rutten, G., Vosters, R. & Vandenbussche, W., eds. (2014a). Norms and Usage in Language History, 1600–1900: A Historical-Sociolinguistic and Comparative Perspective. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Rutten, G., Vosters, R., & Vandenbussche, W. (2014b). The interplay of language norms and usage patterns: comparing the history of Dutch, English, French and German. In Norms and Usage in Language History, 1600–1900: A Historical-Sociolinguistic and Comparative Perspective. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 1–18.Google Scholar
Schoemaker, B. & Rutten, G. (2017). Standard language ideology and Dutch school inspection reports (1801–1854). Sociolinguistica, 31(1) 101–16.Google Scholar
Siegenbeek, M. (1804). Verhandeling over de Nederduitsche spelling, ter bevordering van eenparigheid in dezelve (Gebruikte editie: Amsterdam, 1805). Amsterdam: Allart.Google Scholar
Simons, T. & Rutten, G. (2014). Language norms and language use in eighteenth-century Dutch: final n and the genitive. In Rutten, G., Vosters, R. & Vandenbussche, W., eds., Norms and Usage in Language History, 1600–1900: A Historical-Sociolinguistic and Comparative Perspective. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 49–72.Google Scholar
Takada, H. (1998). Grammatik und Sprachwirklichkeit von 1640–1700: Zur Rolle deutscher Grammatiker im schriftsprachlichen Ausgleichsprozess. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Tieken-Boon van Ostade, I. (2010). The usage guide: its birth and popularity. English Today, 26(2), 14–23.Google Scholar
Tieken-Boon van Ostade, I., ed. (2018). English Usage Guides: History, Advice, Attitudes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tosi, A. (2011). The Accademia della Crusca in Italy: past and present. Language Policy, 10(4), 289–303.Google Scholar
van der Horst, J. & Marschall, F. (1989). Korte geschiedenis van de Nederlandse taal. Amsterdam: Nijgh & Van Ditmar.Google Scholar
van der Ploeg, H. W. (1800). Het belang der waare volksverlichting. Amsterdam: Wed. Harm. Keijzer, Corns. de Vries & Hendrik van Munster.Google Scholar
van der Wal, M. (2018). Johannes Kinker: a Kantian philosopher teaching Dutch language, literature, and eloquence. In Honings, R., Rutten, G. & Kalmthout, T., van, eds., Language, Literature and the Construction of a Dutch National Identity (1780–1830). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, pp. 97–118.Google Scholar
van Heule, C. (1625). De Nederduytsche Grammatica ofte Spraec-konst. Leyden: Roels. (Reissue of the text by W. J. H. Caron, Groningen: Wolters, 1953.)Google Scholar
Villa, L. (2011). ‘Because when governments speak, they are not always right’: national construction and orthographic conflicts in mid-nineteenth century Spain. In Langer, N., Davies, S. & Vandenbussche, W., eds., Language and History, Linguistics and Historiography. Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter, pp. 209–28.Google Scholar
Villa, L. (2015). Official orthographies, spelling debates and nation-building projects after the fall of the Spanish Empire. Written Language & Literacy, 18(2), 228–47.Google Scholar
Voeste, A. (2015). Proficiency and efficiency: why German spelling changed in Early Modern times. Written Language & Literacy, 18(2), 248–59.Google Scholar
Vosters, R., Belsack, E., Puttaert, J. & Vandenbussche, W. (2014). Norms and usage in nineteenth-century Southern Dutch. In Rutten, G., Vosters, R. & Vandenbussche, W., eds., Norms and Usage in Language History, 1600–1900: A Historical-Sociolinguistic and Comparative Perspective. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 73–100.Google Scholar
Vosters, R. & Rutten, G. (2015). Three Southern shibboleths: spelling features as conflicting identity markers in the Low Countries. Written Language & Literacy, 18(2), 260–74.Google Scholar
Vosters, R. & Vandenbussche, W. (2012). Bipartite negation in 18th and early 19th century Southern Dutch: sociolinguistic aspects of norms and variation. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen, 113(3), 343–64.Google Scholar
Watts, R. J. (2000). Mythical strands in the ideology of prescriptivism. In Wright, L., ed., The Development of Standard English, 1300–1800: Theories, Descriptions, Conflicts. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 29–48.Google Scholar
Watts, R. J. (2011). Language Myths and the History of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Watts, R. J. (2012). Language myths. In Hernandez Campoy, J. M. & Conde Silvestre, J. C., eds., The Handbook of Historical Sociolinguistics. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 585–606.Google Scholar
Weijermars, J. (2009). Neerlandistiek als bindmiddel van de natie: Hoogleraar Schrant in Gent 1817–1830. De Negentiende Eeuw, 1, 4–19.Google Scholar
Weijermars, J. (2012). Stiefbroeders: Zuid-Nederlandse letteren en natievorming onder Willem. Hilversum: Verloren.Google Scholar
Willemyns, R. (1993). Integration vs. particularism: the undeclared issue at the first Dutch Congress in 1849. In Fishman, J. A., ed., The Earliest Stage of Language Planning. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 69–83.Google Scholar
Wright, S. (2012). Language policy, the nation and nationalism. In Spolsky, B., ed., The Cambridge Handbook of Language Policy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 59–78.Google Scholar
References
Adelung, J. C. (1781). Deutsche Sprachlehre: Zum Gebrauche der Schulen in den Ko¨nigl. Preuß. Landen. Berlin: Voß.Google Scholar
Auer, A. (2019). Die Stadtsprache Yorks im späten Mittelalter: ein Baustein zu einer alternativen Standardisierungsgeschichte des Englischen. In Pickl, S. & Elspaß, S., eds., Historische Soziolinguistik der Stadtsprachen: Kontakt – Variation – Wandel. Heidelberg: Winter, pp. 81–95.Google Scholar
Auer, P. (2006). Review of Deumert & Vandenbussche 2003. Zeitschrift fu¨r Dialektologie und Linguistik, 72(3), 338–9.Google Scholar
Auer, P. & Spiekermann, H. (2011). Demotisation of the standard variety or destandardisation? In Kristiansen, T. & Coupland, N., eds., Standard Languages and Language Standards in a Changing Europe. Oslo: Novus, pp. 161–76.Google Scholar
Ayres-Bennett, W. (1996). A History of the French Language through Texts. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ayres-Bennett, W. (2014). From l’usage to le bon usage and back: norms and usage in seventeenth-century France. In Rutten, G., Vosters, R. & Vandenbussche, W., eds., Norms and Usage in Language History, 1600–1900: A Sociolinguistic and Comparative Perspective. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 173–200.Google Scholar
Bergs, A. (2005). Social Networks and Historical Sociolinguistics: Studies in Morphosyntactic Variation in the Paston Letters (1421–1503). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
CLUL, ed. (2014). P.S. Post Scriptum: Arquivo Digital de Escrita Quotidiana em Portugal e Espanha na época Moderna. Retrieved 19 February 2019 from http://ps.clul.ul.ptGoogle Scholar
Conde-Silvestre, J. C. (2016), A ‘third-wave’ historical sociolinguistic approach to late Middle English correspondence: evidence from the Stonor Letters. In Russi, C., ed., Current Trends in Historical Sociolinguistics. Berlin/Boston, MA: De Gruyter, pp. 46–66.Google Scholar
Culpeper, J. & Kytö, M. (2010). Early Modern English Dialogues: Spoken Interaction as Writing. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Davies, W. V. & Langer, N. (2006). The Making of Bad Language. Lay Linguistic Stigmatisations in German: Past and Present. Frankfurt am Main, etc.: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Deumert, A. & Vandenbussche, W., eds. (2003). Germanic Standardizations: Past to Present. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Durrell, M. (2000). Standard language and the creation of national myths in nineteenth-century Germany. In Barkhoff, J., Carr, G. & Paulin, R., eds., Das schwierige neunzehnte Jahrhundert: Germanistische Tagung zum 65. Geburtstag von Eda Sagarra im August 1998. Mit einem Vorwort von Wolfgang Fru¨hwald. Tübingen: Niemeyer, pp. 15–26.Google Scholar
Durrell, M., Bennett, P., Scheible, S. & Whitt, R. J. (2012). The GerManC Corpus. Manchester: University of Manchester. Retrieved 19 February 2020 from www1.ids-mannheim.de/fileadmin/lexik/uwv/dateien/GerManC_Documentation.pdfGoogle Scholar
Dürscheid, C., Elspaß, S. & Ziegler, A. (2018). Variantengrammatik des Standarddeutschen. [A Grammar of Variation in Standard German]. An open access online reference work compiled by a team under the leadership of Christa Dürscheid, Stephan Elspaß & Arne Ziegler. Retrieved 19 February 2020 from http://mediawiki.ids-mannheim.de/VarGraGoogle Scholar
Edlund, A.-C., Ashplant, T. G. & Cuismin, A., eds. (2016). Reading and Writing from Below: Exploring the Margins of Modernity. Umeå: Umeå University and Royal Skyttean Society.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
Elspaß, S. (2012). The use of private letters and diaries in sociolinguistic investigation. In Hernández-Campoy, J. M. & Conde-Silvestre, J. C., eds., The Handbook of Historical Sociolinguistics. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 156–69.Google Scholar
Elspaß, S. (2015a). Private letters as a source for an alternative history of Late Modern German. In Auer, A., Schreier, D. & Watts, R. J., eds., Letter Writing and Language Change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 35–52.Google Scholar
Elspaß, S. (2015b). 下からの言語史 －19世紀ドイツの「庶民」のことばを中心にして / Shitakara no gengoshi. 19seiki doitsu no shomin no kotoba wo chushin nishite [Language history from below – illustrated by the language of ‘ordinary people’ in nineteenth-century Germany, transl. into Japanese by Sato, M. ]. In Takada, H., Shibuya, K. & Iyeiri, Y., eds., 歴史社会言語学入門 / Rekishi Shakaigengogaku Nyumon [Introduction to Historical Sociolinguistics]. Tokyo: Taishukan Publishing, pp. 55–69.Google Scholar
Elspaß, S. (2020). Alternative sources of data for standardisation histories. Language Policy, 19(2), 281–99.Google Scholar
Elspaß, S. & Möller, R. (2003–). Atlas zur deutschen Alltagssprache. Retrieved 19 February 2020 from www.atlas-alltagssprache.deGoogle Scholar
Elspaß, S. & Niehaus, K. (2014). The standardization of a modern pluriareal language: concepts and corpus designs for German and beyond. Orð og tunga, 16, 47–67.Google Scholar
Elspaß, S., Langer, N., Scharloth, J. & Vandenbussche, W., eds. (2007). Germanic Language Histories ‘from Below’ (1700–2000). Berlin/New York: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Fairman, T. (2007). ‘Lower-order’ letters, schooling and the English language, 1795–1834. In Elspaß, S., Langer, N., Scharloth, J. & Vandenbussche, W., eds., Germanic Language Histories ‘from Below’ (1700–2000). Berlin/New York: De Gruyter, pp. 31–43.Google Scholar
Fairman, T. (2012). Letters in mechanically-schooled language: theories and ideologies. In Dossena, M. & Del Lungo Camiciotti, G., eds., Letter Writing in Late Modern Europe. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 205–28.Google Scholar
Fairman, T. (2015). Language in print and handwriting. In Auer, A., Schreier, D. & Watts, R. J., eds., Letter Writing and Language Change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 53–71.Google Scholar
Graser, H. & Tlusty, B. A. (2009). Layers of literacy: non-professional versus professional writing in a sixteenth-century case of fraud. In Barnes, R. B. & Plummer, M. E., eds., Ideas and Cultural Margins in Early Modern Germany: Essays in Honor of H. C. Erik Midelfort. Farnham/Burlington, VT: Ashgate, pp. 31–47.Google Scholar
Graser, H. & Tlusty, B. A. (2012). Sixteenth century street songs and language history ‘from below’. In Langer, N., Davies, S. & Vandenbussche, W., eds., Language and History, Linguistics and Historiography: Interdisciplinary Approaches. Frankfurt am Main, etc.: Lang, pp. 362–88.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: De Gruyter, pp. 269–89.Google Scholar
Haugen, E. (1994). Standardization. In Asher, R. E., ed., The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics. Oxford: Pergamon, pp. 4340–2.Google Scholar
Havinga, A. & Langer, N., eds. (2015). Invisible Languages in the Nineteenth Century. Oxford, etc.: Lang.Google Scholar
Hennig, M., ed. (2016). Das Wo¨rterbuch der sprachlichen Zweifelsfa¨lle: Richtiges und gutes Deutsch, 8th, completely rev. edn. Berlin: Duden.Google Scholar
Hitchcock, T. (2004). A new history from below. History Workshop Journal, 57(1), 294–8.Google Scholar
Huber, M. (2007). The Old Bailey Proceedings, 1674–1834: evaluating and annotating a corpus of 18th- and 19th-century spoken English. In Meurman-Solin, A. & Nurmi, A., eds., Annotating Variation and Change. Retrieved 19 February 2020 from www.helsinki.fi/varieng/series/volumes/01/huberGoogle Scholar
Imo, W. (2008). Wenn mündliche Syntax zum schriftlichen Standard wird: Konsequenzen für den Normbegriff im Deutschunterricht. In Denkler, M., Günthner, S., Imo, W., Macha, J., Meer, D., Stoltenburg, B. & Topalović, E., eds., Frischwa¨rts und unkaputtbar: Sprachverfall oder Sprachwandel im Deutschen. Münster: Aschendorff, pp. 153–79.Google Scholar
Joseph, J. E. (1987). Eloquence and Power: The Rise of Language Standards and Standard Languages. London: Frances Pinter.Google Scholar
Knooihuizen, R. (2011). Demografisk press og språkskifte på Shetland. In Akselberg, G., & Bugge, E., eds., Vestnordisk spra˚kkontakt gjennom 1200 a˚r. Tórshavn: Fróðskapur (Faroe University Press), pp. 219–38.Google Scholar
Koch, P. & Oesterreicher, W. (2012). Language of immediacy – language of distance: orality and literacy from the perspective of language theory and linguistic history. In Lange, C., Weber, B. & Wolf, G., eds., Communicative Spaces: Variation, Contact, and Change. Papers in Honour of Ursula Schaefer. Frankfurt am Main, etc.: Lang, pp. 441–73.Google Scholar
Koch, P. & Oesterreicher, W. (1985). Sprache der Nähe – Sprache der Distanz: Mündlichkeit und Schriftlichkeit im Spannungsfeld von Sprachtheorie und Sprachgeschichte. Romanistisches Jahrbuch, 36, 15–43.Google Scholar
Labov, W. (1994). Principles of Linguistic Change. Vol. I: Internal Factors. Oxford/Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Lacassain-Lagoin, C. (2018). On the margins of perception – TO-clauses: a standard construction of perception verbs? E-rea. Revue électronique d’études sur le monde anglophone, 15(2). Retrieved 19 February 2020 from https://journals.openedition.org/erea/6283Google Scholar
Langer, N. (2001). Linguistic Purism in Action: How Auxiliary tun Was Stigmatized in Early New High German. Berlin/New York: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Langer, N. (2003). Low German. In Deumert, A. & Vandenbussche, W., eds., Germanic Standardizations: Past to Present. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 281–301.Google Scholar
Lyons, M. (2012). The Writing Culture of Ordinary People in Europe, c. 1860–1920. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
Macha, J., Topalović, E., Hille, I., Nolting, U. & Wilke, A. (2005). Deutsche Kanzleisprache in Hexenverho¨rprotokollen der Fru¨hen Neuzeit. Vol I: Auswahledition. Vol II: Kommentierte Bibliographie zur regionalen Hexenforschung. Berlin/Boston, MA: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Marquilhas, R. (2012). A historical digital archive of Portuguese letters. In Dossena, M. & Del Lungo Camiciotti, G., eds., Letter Writing in Late Modern Europe. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 31–43.Google Scholar
Martineau, F. (2004). Corpus du franc¸ais familier ancien, Université d’Ottawa. Retrieved 19 February 2020 from http://polyphonies.uottawa.ca/corpus/i-corpus-de-francais-familier-ancienGoogle Scholar
Martineau, F. (2007). Variation in Canadian French usage from the 18th to the 19th century. Multilingua, 26, 203–27.Google Scholar
Martineau, F. & Tailleur, S. (2014). From local to supra-local: hybridity in French written documents from the nineteenth century. In Rutten, G., Vosters, R. & Vandenbussche, W., eds., Norms and Usage in Language History, 1600–1900: A Sociolinguistic and Comparative Perspective. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 223–47.Google Scholar
Messerli, A. (2000). Das Lesen von Gedrucktem und das Lesen von Handschriften – zwei verschiedene Kulturtechniken? In Messerli, A. & Chartier, R., eds., Lesen und Schreiben in Europa 1500–1900: Vergleichende Perspektiven. Basel: Schwabe, pp. 235–46.Google Scholar
Milroy, J. (1992). Linguistic Variation and Change: On the Historical Sociolinguistics of English. Oxford/Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Milroy, J. & Milroy, J. (1991). Authority in Language: Investigating Language Prescription and Standardisation, 2nd edn. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Nevalainen, T. (2003). English. In Deumert, A.. & Vandenbussche, W, eds., Germanic Standardizations: Past to Present. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 127–56.Google Scholar
Nevalainen, T. (2014). Norms and usage in seventeenth-century English. In Rutten, G., Vosters, R. & Vandenbussche, W., eds., Norms and Usage in Language History, 1600–1900: A Sociolinguistic and Comparative Perspective. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 103–28.Google Scholar
Nevalainen, T. & Raumolin-Brunberg, H. (2003). Historical Sociolinguistics: Language Change in Tudor and Stuart England. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Nevalainen, T. & Raumolin-Brunberg, H. (2012). Historical sociolinguistics: origins, motivations, and paradigms. In Hernández-Campoy, J. M. & Conde-Silvestre, J. C., eds., The Handbook of Historical Sociolinguistics. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 22–40.Google Scholar
Niehaus, K. & Elspaß, S. (2018). ‘From above’, ‘from below’ and regionally balanced: towards a new corpus of nineteenth-century German. In Whitt, R. J., ed., Diachronic Corpora, Genre, and Language Change. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 17–40.Google Scholar
Nobels, J. (2013). (Extra)Ordinary Letters: A View from Below on Seventeenth-Century Dutch. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar
Pillière, L. & Lewis, D. (2018). Revisiting standardisation and variation. E-rea. Revue électronique d’études sur le monde anglophone, 15(2). Retrieved 19 February 2020 from https://journals.openedition.org/erea/6391Google Scholar
Pöll, B. (2020). Orthography and orthoepy. In Lebsanft, F. & Tacke, F., eds., Manual of Standardization in the Romance Languages. Berlin: De Gruyter, pp. 399–416.Google Scholar
Poplack, S., Jarmasz, L.-G., Dion, N. & Rosen, N. (2015). Searching for standard French: the construction and mining of the Recueil historique des grammaires du franc¸ais. Journal of Historical Sociolinguistics, 1(1), 13–55.Google Scholar
Puttaert, J, Van de Voorde, I., & Vosters, R. (2019). Forgotten voices from below: historical sociolinguistic research in Flanders. In Pickl, S. & Elspaß, S., eds., Historische Soziolinguistik der Stadtsprachen. Heidelberg: Winter, pp. 191–212.Google Scholar
Rutten, G. & van der Wal, M. J. (2013). Change, contact and conventions in the history of Dutch. Taal en Tongval, 65(1), 97–123.Google Scholar
Rutten, G. & van der Wal, M. J. (2014). Letters as Loot: A Sociolinguistic Approach to Seventeenth- and Eighteenth-Century Dutch. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Rutten, G. & Vosters, R. & Vandenbussche, W., eds. (2014). Norms and Usage in Language History, 1600–1900: A Sociolinguistic and Comparative Perspective. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Sato, M. (2015). ‘Wegen dem Clavier’: die Beethovens und der Rektionswandel der Präpositionen wegen, statt und wa¨hrend im Zeitraum von 1520–1870. Muttersprache. Vierteljahrsschrift fu¨r deutsche Sprache, 125, 23–56.Google Scholar
Schiegg, M. (2017–). CoPaDocs – Corpus of Patient Documents. Retrieved 19 February 2020 from http://copadocs.deGoogle Scholar
Schneider, E. W. (2002). Investigating variation and change in written documents. In Chambers, J. K., Trudgill, P. & Schilling-Estes, N., eds., The Handbook of Language Variation and Change. Malden, MA/Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 67–96.Google Scholar
Schneider, J. G., Butterworth, J. & Hahn, N. (2018). Gesprochener Standard in syntaktischer Perspektive: Theoretische Grundlagen – Empirie – didaktische Konsequenzen. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar
Schulte, M. (2008). Om å skrive språkhistorie ‘nedenfra’: tanker om en ny norsk språkhistorie for tiden 700–1050. Maal og Minne, 100(2), 167–88.Google Scholar
Sević, R. B. (1999). Early collections of private documents: the missing link in the diachronic corpora. In Beedham, C., ed., Langue and Parole in Synchronic and Diachronic Perspective: Selected Proceedings of the XXXIst Annual Meeting of the Societas Linguistica Europaea, St Andrews 1998, Amsterdam, etc.: Pergamon, pp. 337–47.Google Scholar
Siegenbeek, M. (1804). Verhandeling over de Nederduitsche spelling. Amsterdam: Allart.Google Scholar
Takada, H. (1998). Grammatik und Sprachwirklichkeit von 1640–1700: Zur Rolle deutscher Grammatiker im schriftsprachlichen Ausgleichsprozeß. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Van Pottelberge, J. (2004). Der am-Progressiv: Struktur und parallele Entwicklungen in den kontinentalgermanischen Sprachen. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
van der Wal, M. (2006). Onvoltooid verleden tijd: witte vlekken in de taalgeschiedenis. Amsterdam: Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen.Google Scholar
Watts, R. (2011). Language Myths and the History of English. Oxford, etc.: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Watts, R. (2012). Language myths. In Hernández-Campoy, J. M. & Conde-Silvestre, J. C., eds., The Handbook of Historical Sociolinguistics. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 585–606.Google Scholar
Watts, R. & Trudgill, P., eds. (2002). Alternative Histories of English. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Weinreich, U., Labov, W. & Herzog, M. I. (1968). Empirical foundations for a theory of language change. In Lehmann, W. P. & Malkiel, Y., eds., Directions for Historical Linguistics. Austin: University of Texas Press, pp. 97–195.Google Scholar
References
Abbi, A. (1995). Morphological change in tribal languages of central India. PILC Journal of Dravidic Studies, 5(1), 1–9.Google Scholar
Abbi, A. (1996). Don’t kill my mother (tongue) against excessive standardization. In Verma, S. K. & Singh, D., eds., Perspectives on Language and Society: Papers in Memory of Prof. R. N. Srivastava, Vol. I. Delhi: Kalinga Publications, pp. 155–67.Google Scholar
Abbi, A. (1997). Languages in-contact in Jharkhand: a case of language conflation, language change and language convergence. In Abbi, A., ed., Languages of Tribal and Indigenous Peoples of India: The Ethnic Space. Delhi: Motilal Benarsidass, pp. 131–48.Google Scholar
Abbi, A. (2009). Vanishing diversities and submerging identities: an Indian case. In Sarangi, A., ed., Language and Politics in India (Themes in Politics). New Delhi: Oxford University Press, pp. 299–311.Google Scholar
Abbi, A. (2017). Human cognitive abilities and safeguarding linguistic diversity. IIC Quarterly, 44(2), 83–100.Google Scholar
Abbi, A. & Sharma, M. (2014). Hindi as a contact language of India. In Kuczkiewicz-Fraś, A., ed., Defining the Indefinable: Delimiting Hindi. Frankfurt am Main, etc.: Peter Lang Academic Research, pp. 107–24.Google Scholar
Abbi, A., Gupta, R. S. & Gargesh, R. (1998–2000). A Sociolinguistic Enquiry into the Acceptance Level of Hindi as a Pan Indian Language. New Delhi: ICSSR Report.Google Scholar
Armstrong, N. & Mackenzie, I. E. (2013). Standardization, Ideology, and Linguistics. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Benedikter, T. (2009). Language Policy and Linguistic Minorities in India: An Appraisal of the Linguistic Rights of Minorities in India. Berlin: LitVerlag.Google Scholar
Burling, R. (2007). The lingua franca cycle: implications for language shift, language change and language classification. Anthropological Linguistics, 49(3/4), 207–34.Google Scholar
Foley, W. (1997). Standard language and linguistic engineering. In Anthropological Linguistics. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 398–416.Google Scholar
Garvin, P. L. (1991). A conceptual framework for the study of language standardization. Indian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 17(1), 1–20.Google Scholar
Gumperz, J. (1960). Linguistic diversity in South Asia, Introduction (with Charles Ferguson). International Journal of American Linguistics, 26(3), vii–18. (Reprinted in Ferguson, C., ed. (1972). Language Structure and Language Use. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.)Google Scholar
Gumperz, J. & Naim, C. M. (1960). Formal and informal standards in the Hindi regional language area. In Gumperz, J. & Ferguson, C., eds., Linguistic Diversity in South Asia. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, pp. 92–118.Google Scholar
Hagen, T. & Vallen, T. (1974). Dialect, Standaardtaal en school: de Nederlandse literatuur van heemtaalkunde tot sociolinguїstiek II [Dialect, Standard Language and School: Dutch Literature from Local Historical Linguistics to Sociolinguistics, Vol. II]. Nijmegen: Nijmeegse Centrale voor Dialectkunde.Google Scholar
Harris, R. M. (1968). Colloquial deviations in urban Hindi. Anthropological Linguistics, 10(9), 25–34.Google Scholar
Hashami, S. (2015). Contact Hindi in Bihar and Jharkhand: Structure and Use. Doctoral thesis. Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.Google Scholar
Hasnain, S. I. & Gupta, R. S. (2002). From periphery to centre: towards dehegemonizing standard language. Indian Linguistics, 1 –4, 33–8.Google Scholar
Kristiansen, T. & Coupland, N., eds. (2011). Standard Languages and Language Standards in a Changing Europe. Oslo: Novus.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
Lippi-Green, R. (1997). English with an Accent: Language, Ideology, and Discrimination in the United States. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Modi, Y. (2005). Emergence and Impact of Hindi as a Lingua Franca in Arunachal Pradesh. MPhil thesis. Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.Google Scholar
Milroy, J. (2001). Language ideologies and the consequences of standardization. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 5(4), 530–55.Google Scholar
Milroy, J. & Milroy, L. (2012). Authority in Language: Investigating Standard English, 4th edn. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Satyanath, S. (2015). Language variation and change: the Indian experience. In Smakman, D. & Heinrich, P., eds., Globalizing Sociolinguistics. New York: Routledge, pp. 107–22.Google Scholar
Sharma, M. (2011–12). Field Data on Hindi as a Link Language in Arunachal Pradesh and Meghalaya. Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.Google Scholar
Sharma, M. (2013). Hindi as a Link Language in Arunachal Pradesh and Meghalaya. Doctoral thesis. Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.Google Scholar
Shiffman, H. F. (1998). Standardization or restandardization: the case for ‘standard’ spoken Tamil. Language in Society, 27, 259–85.Google Scholar
Siegel, J. (1988). Development of Fiji Hindustani. In Siegel, J. & Barz, R., eds., Language Transplanted: The Development of Overseas Hindi. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, pp. 121–49.Google Scholar
Smakman, D. (2012). The definition of the standard language: a survey in seven countries. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 218, 25–58.Google Scholar
References
Abdelhay, A. K. (2010). The politics of writing tribal identities in the Sudan: the case of the colonial Nuba Policy. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 31(2), 201–13.Google Scholar
Abdelhay, A., Makoni, B. & Makoni, S. (2018). When God is a linguist: missionary orthographies as a site of social differentiation and the technology of location. In Juffermans, K. & Weth, C., eds., The Tyranny of Writing Revisited: Ideologies of the Written Word. London: Bloomsbury, pp. 97–112.Google Scholar
Abdelhay, A., Makoni, B., Makoni, S. & Mugaddam, A. R. (2011). The sociolinguistics of nationalism in the Sudan: the politicisation of Arabic and the Arabicisation of politics. Current Issues in Language Planning, 12(4), 457–501.Google Scholar
Abdulaziz, M. H. & Osinde, K. (1997). Sheng and Engsh: development of mixed codes among the urban youth in Kenya. International Journal for the Sociology of Language, 125, 43–63.Google Scholar
Adejunmobi, M. (2004). Vernacular Palaver: Imaginations of the Local and Non-Native Languages in West Africa. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Agha, A. (2005). Voice, footing, enregisterment. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 15, 38–59.Google Scholar
Agha, A. (2007). Language and Social Relations. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Amselle, J. (1990). Logiques métisses: Anthropologie de l’identité en Afrique et ailleurs. Paris: Payot.Google Scholar
Amselle, J. & M’Bokolo, E., eds. (1985). Au cœur de l’ethnie: Ethnies, tribalisme et état en Afrique. Paris: La Découverte/Poche.Google Scholar
Anderson, J. A. & Gladys, N. A. (2015). A sociolinguistic mosaic of West Africa: challenges and prospects. In Smakman, D. & Heinrich, P., eds., Globalising Sociolinguistics: Challenging and Expanding Theory. London/New York: Routledge, pp. 54–65.Google Scholar
Auer, P. (2007). The monolingual bias in bilingualism research, or: why bilingual talk is (still) a challenge for linguistics. In Heller, M., ed., Bilingualism: A Social Approach. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 319–39.Google Scholar
Barasa, S. N. (2015). Ala! Kumbe? ‘Oh my! Ist it so?’: multilingualism controversies in East Africa. In Smakman, D. & Heinrich, P., eds., Globalising Sociolinguistics: Challenging and Expanding Theory. London/New York: Routledge, pp. 39–65.Google Scholar
Barasa, S. N. & Mous, M. (2017). Engsh, a Kenyan middle class youth language parallel to Sheng. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages, 32(1), 48–74.Google Scholar
Bazin, J. (1985). À chacun son bambara. In Amselle, J. & M’Bokolo, E., eds., Au cœur de l’ethnie: Ethnies, tribalisme et état en Afrique. Paris: La Découverte/Poche, pp. 87–125.Google Scholar
Blommaert, J. (2008). Artefactual ideologies and the textual production of African languages. Language & Communication, 28(4), 291–307.Google Scholar
Bondarev, D. (2019). Introduction: orthographic polyphony in Arabic script. In Bondarev, D., Gori, A. & Souag, L., eds., Creating Standards: Interactions with Arabic Script in 12 Manuscript Cultures. Berlin/Boston, MA: De Gruyter, pp. 1–38.Google Scholar
Bonfiglio, T. P. (2010). Mother Tongues and Nations: The Invention of the Native Speaker, Berlin/Boston, MA: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Calvet, L. (1994). Les voix de la ville: Introduction a` la sociolinguistique moderne. Paris: Payot.Google Scholar
Childs, M. (2016). Reflecting on translanguaging in multilingual classrooms: harnessing the power of poetry and photography. Educational Research for Social Change, 5(1), 22–40.Google Scholar
Cobbinah, A., Hantgan, A., Lüpke,, F. & Watson, R. (2016). Carrefour des langues, carrefour des paradigmes. In Auzanneau, M., Bento, M. & Leclère, M., eds., Pratiques plurilingues, mobilités et éducation: éclairages d’Afrique ou d’ailleurs. Paris: Édition des Archives Contemporaines, pp. 79–96.Google Scholar
Cummins, J. (2007). Rethinking monolingual instructional strategies in multilingual classrooms. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 10(2), 221–40.Google Scholar
Cummins, J. (2008). Teaching for transfer: challenging the two solitudes assumption in bilingual education. In Hornberger, N. H., ed., Encyclopedia of Language and Education. Boston, MA: Springer US, pp. 1528–38.Google Scholar
Delafosse, M. (1901). Essai de manuel pratique de la langue mandé ou mandingue: étude grammaticale du dialecte dyoula; vocabulaire franc¸ais-dyoula. Histoire de samori en mandé; étude comparée des principaux dialectes mandé. Paris: Geuthner.Google Scholar
Delafosse, M. (1904). Vocabulaires comparatifs de plus de 60 langues ou dialectes parlés a` la Coˆte d’Ivoire et dans les régions limitrophes. Paris: Ernest Leroux.Google Scholar
Delafosse, M. (1912). Haut-Sénégal-Niger (Soudan Francais). Premiére série: Le Pays, les peuples, les langues, l’histoire, la civilisation. Paris: Emile Larose.Google Scholar
Delafosse, M. (1929). La langue mandingue et ses dialectes (malinké, bambara, dioula). Paris: Paul Geuthner.Google Scholar
Deumert, A. & Lexander, K. V. (2013). Texting Africa: writing as performance. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 17, 522–46.Google Scholar
Deumert, A. & Mabandla, N. (2018). Beyond colonial Linguistics: the dialectic of control and resistance in the standardization of isiXhosa. In Lane, P., Costa, J. & de Korne, H., eds., Standardizing Minority Languages. New York/London: Routledge, pp. 200–21.Google Scholar
Di Carlo, P. (2018). Towards an understanding of African endogenous multilingualism: ethnography, language ideologies, and the supernatural. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 254, 139–63.Google Scholar
Djité, P. G. (2008). The Sociolinguistics of Development in Africa. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Djité, P. G. (2009). Multilingualism: the case for a new research focus. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 199, 1–7.Google Scholar
Donaldson, C. (2017). Clear Language: Script, Register and the N’ko Movement of Manding-Speaking West Africa. Doctoral thesis. University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Donaldson, C. (2018). Orthography, standardization and register: the case of Manding. In Lane, P., Costa, J. & de Korne, H., eds., Standardizing Minority Languages. New York/London: Routledge, pp. 175–99.Google Scholar
Donaldson, C. (2019). Linguistic and civic refinement in the N’ko movement of Manding-speaking West Africa. Signs and Society, 7(2), 156–85.Google Scholar
Fardon, R. & Furniss, G. (1994). African Languages, Development and the State. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Fishman, J. A. (1989). Language and Ethnicity in Minority Sociolinguistic Perspective. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Gafaranga, J. & Torras, M. (2016). Interactional otherness: towards a redefinition of codeswitching. International Journal of Bilingualism, 6(1), 1–22.Google Scholar
Gal, S. (2016). Scale-making: comparison and perspective as ideological projects. In Carr, E. S. & Lempert, M., eds., Scale: Discourse and Dimensions of Social Life. Oakland, CA: University of California Press, pp. 91–111.Google Scholar
García, O. (2009). Education, multilingualism and translanguaging in the 21st century. In Mohanty, A., Panda, M., Phillipson, R. & Skutnabb-Kangas, T., eds., Education, Multilingualism and Multilingual Education for Social Justice: Globalising the Local. New Delhi: Orient Blackswan, pp. 128–45.Google Scholar
García, O. & Wei, L. (2014). Translanguaging: Language, Bilingualism and Education. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Githiora, C. (2018). Sheng: Rise of a Kenyan Swahili Vernacular. Woodbridge: James Currey.Google Scholar
Good, J., Di Carlo, P. & Ojong, R. (2019). Multilingualism in rural Africa. Oxford Research Encyclopedias. Retrieved from https://oxfordre.com/linguistics/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.001.0001/acrefore-9780199384655-e-227Google Scholar
Goodchild, S. (2019). Sociolinguistic Spaces and Multilingual Repertoires: Practices and Perceptions in Essyl, Senegal. Doctoral thesis. SOAS University of London.Google Scholar
Goodchild, S. (forthcoming). Multilingual people with monolingual perceptions: patterns of multilingualism in Essyl, Basse Casamance, Senegal. In Lüpke, F., ed., The Oxford Guide to the Atlantic Languages of West Africa. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Heugh, K. (2015). Epistemologies in multilingual education: translanguaging and genre – companions in conversation with policy and practice. Language and Education, 29(3), 280–5.Google Scholar
Houis, M. (1978). Comptes rendus. Revue franc¸aise d’histoire d’outre-mer, 65(238), 128.Google Scholar
Humery, M.-E. (2010). Multilinguisme et plurigraphie dans le Fuuta Sénégalais: quelques outils d’analyse. Journal of Language Contact THEMA, 3, 205–27.Google Scholar
Hunswick, J. & O’Fahey, R. S., eds. (2003). Arabic Literature of Africa. Leiden/Boston, MA: Brill.Google Scholar
Irvine, J. T. (2016). Going upscale: scales and scale-climbing as ideological projects. In Carr, E. S. & Lempert, M., eds., Scale: Discourse and Dimensions of Social Life. Oakland, CA: University of California Press, pp. 213–31.Google Scholar
Irvine, J. T. & Gal, S. (2000). Language ideology and linguistic differentiation. In Kroskrity, P. V., ed., Regimes of Language. Santa Fe, NM: School of American Research Press, pp. 35–83.Google Scholar
Jaffe, A. (2005). La polynomie dans une école bilingue corse : bilan et défis. Marges Linguistiques, 10, 282–300.Google Scholar
Kießling, R. & Mous, M. (2004). Urban youth languages in Africa. Anthropological Linguistics, 46(3), 303–41.Google Scholar
Kopytoff, I. (1987). The internal African frontier: the making of African political culture. In Kopytoff, I., ed., The African Frontier: The Reproduction of Traditional African Society. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, pp. 3–84.Google Scholar
Lane, P., Costa, J. & de Korne, H., eds. (2018). Standardizing Minority Languages. New York/London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Launay, R. & Miran, M. (2000). Beyond Mande Mory: Islam and ethnicity in Côte d’Ivoire. Paideuma, 46, 63–84.Google Scholar
Lentz, C. (1995). ‘Tribalism’ and ethnicity in Africa. Cahiers des Sciences Humaines, 31(2), 303–28.Google Scholar
Lexander, K. V. & Alcón, D. (forthcoming). Digital language and new configurations of multilingualism: language use in a Senegal-based discussion forum. In Lüpke, F., ed., The Oxford Guide to the Atlantic Languages of West Africa. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lüpke, F. (2004). Language planning in West Africa – who writes the script? Language Documentation and Description, 2, 90–107.Google Scholar
Lüpke, F. (2016a). Pure fiction – the interplay of indexical and essentialist ideologies and heterogeneous practices: a view from Agnack. Language Documentation and Conservation, 10, 8–39.Google Scholar
Lüpke, F. (2016b). Uncovering small-scale multilingualism. Critical Multilingualism Studies, 4(2), 35–74.Google Scholar
Lüpke, F. (2018a). Escaping the tyranny of writing: West African regimes of writing as a model for multilingual literacy. In Juffermans, K. & Weth, C., eds., The Tyranny of Writing Revisited: Ideologies of the Written Word. London: Bloomsbury, pp. 129–48.Google Scholar
Lüpke, F. (2018b). Multiple choice: language use and cultural practice in rural Casamance between convergence and divergence. In Knörr, J. & Filho, W. T., eds., Creolization and Pidginization in Contexts of Postcolonial Diversity: Language, Culture, Identity. Leiden: Brill, pp. 181–208.Google Scholar
Lüpke, F. (2020). The writing’s on the wall: spaces for language-independent and language-based literacies. International Journal of Multilingualism, 17(3), 382–403.Google Scholar
Lüpke, F. (forthcoming). How a language is constructed: from objects of enquiry to new ways of thinking and linking language and languaging. In Aronoff, M., ed., Oxford Research Encyclopedia in Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lüpke, F. & Bao-Diop, S. (2014). Beneath the surface – contemporary Ajami writing in West Africa exemplified through Wolofal. In Asfaha, Y. M. & Juffermans, K., eds., African Literacies. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars, pp. 86–114.Google Scholar
Lüpke, F. & Storch, A. (2013). Repertoires and Choices in African Languages. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Lüpke, F., Biagui, A. C., Biai, L. & Diatta, J. (forthcoming). LILIEMA: language-independent literacies for inclusive education in multilingual areas. Language and Development Series of the British Council.Google Scholar
Makalela, L. (2015). Moving out of linguistic boxes: the effects of translanguaging strategies for multilingual classrooms. Language and Education, 29(3), 200–17.Google Scholar
Makalela, L., ed. (2018). Shifting Lenses: Multilanguaging, Decolonisation and Education in the Global South. Cape Town: CASAS.Google Scholar
Makoni, S. & Meinhof, U. (2004). Western perspectives in applied linguistics in Africa. AILA Review, 17(1), 77–104.Google Scholar
Makoni, S. B. (2013). An integrationist perspective on colonial linguistics. Language Sciences, 35, 87–96.Google Scholar
Makoni, S. & Pennycook, A. (2007). Disinventing and reconstituting languages. In Makoni, S. & Pennycook, A., eds., Disinventing and Reconstituting Languages. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, pp. 1–41.Google Scholar
Manfredi, S. (2015). One tribe, one language: ethno-linguistic identity and language revitalization among the Laggorí in the Nuba Mountains. In Cascarri, B., Ireton, F. & Assal, M., eds., Multidimensional Change in Sudan (1989–2011): Reshaping Livelihoods, Political Conflicts and Identities. New York: Berghahn, pp. 281–301.Google Scholar
Mazrui, A. (2007). Swahili beyond the Boundaries: Literature, Language, and Identity. Athens: Ohio University Press.Google Scholar
Mazrui, A. (2019). Sociocultural and political settings of language in Africa. In Wolff, E., ed., The Cambridge Handbook of African Linguistics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 419–41.Google Scholar
McLaughlin, F. (2001). Dakar Wolof and the configuration of an urban identity. Journal of African Cultural Studies, 14(2), 153–72.Google Scholar
McLaughlin, F. (2008a). On the origins of Urban Wolof: evidence from Louis Descemet’s 1864 phrase book. Language in Society, 37(5), 713–35.Google Scholar
McLaughlin, F. (2008b). The ascent of Wolof as an urban vernacular and national lingua franca in Senegal. In Vigouroux, C. & Mufwene, S. S., eds., Globalization and Language Vitality: Perspectives from Africa. London: Continuum, pp. 142–70.Google Scholar
McLaughlin, F. (2015). Linguistic warscapes of northern Mali. Linguistic Landscape, 1(3), 213–42.Google Scholar
McLaughlin, F. (forthcoming). Ajami writing practices in Atlantic-speaking Africa. In Lüpke, F., ed., The Oxford Guide to the Atlantic Languages of West Africa. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mesthrie, R. (2015). Towards a distributed sociolinguistics of postcolonial multilingual societies: the case of Southern Africa. In Smakman, D. & Heinrich, P., eds., Globalising Sociolinguistics: Challenging and Expanding Theory. London/New York: Routledge, pp. 80–91.Google Scholar
Mignolo, W. D. (1996). Linguistic maps, literary geographies, and cultural landscapes: languages, languaging, and (trans)nationalism. Modern Language Quarterly, 57(2), 181–96.Google Scholar
Mufwene, S. S. (2007). Population movements and contacts in language evolution. Journal of Language Contact, 1(1), 63–91.Google Scholar
Mumford, B. (1929). Education and the social adjustment of the primitive peoples of Africa to European culture. Africa, 2(2), 138–59.Google Scholar
Myers-Scotton, C. (1993). Social Motivations for Codeswitching: Evidence from Africa. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Ouane, A., ed. (2003). Towards a Multilingual Culture of Education. Hamburg: UNESCO Institute of Education.Google Scholar
Ouane, A. (2009). My journey to and through a multilingual landscape. In Brock-Utne, B. & Garbo, G., eds., Language and Power. Dar es-Salaam: Mkuki na Nyota, pp. 164–71.Google Scholar
Ouane, A. & Glanz, C. (2010). Why and How Africa Should Invest in African Languages and Multilingual Education. Hamburg: UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning.Google Scholar
Pasch, H. (2008). Competing scripts: the introduction of the Roman alphabet in Africa. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 191, 65–109.Google Scholar
Poplack, S. & Meechan, M. (1995). Patterns of language mixture: nominal structure in Wolof–French and Fongbe–French bilingual discourse. In Milroy, L. & Muysken, P., eds., One Speaker, Two Languages: Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives on Code-Switching. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 199–232.Google Scholar
Probyn, M. (2015). Pedagogical translanguaging: bridging discourses in South African science classrooms. Language and Education, 29(3), 218–34.Google Scholar
Ranger, T. (1983). The invention of tradition in colonial Africa. In Hobsbawm, E. J. & Ranger, T. O., eds., The Invention of Tradition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 211–62.Google Scholar
Schneider, B. (2018). Methodological nationalism in linguistics. Language Sciences, 76, 1–13.Google Scholar
Sebba, M. (2007). Spelling and Society: The Culture and Politics of Orthography around the World. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sefotho, M. P. & Makalela, L. (2017). Translanguaging and orthographic harmonisation: a cross-lingual reading literacy in a Johannesburg school. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies, 35(1), 41–51.Google Scholar
Simons, G. F. & Fennig, C. D., eds. (2018). Ethnologue: Languages of the World, 21st edn. Dallas, TX: SIL International.Google Scholar
Souag, L. (2010). Ajami in West Africa. Afrikanistik Online, 7. Retrieved from http://eprints.soas.ac.uk/13429/Google Scholar
Spivak, G. C. (1990). The Post-Colonial Critic: Interviews, Strategies, Dialogues. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Swigart, L. (1992). Two codes or one? The insiders’ view and the description of codeswitching in Dakar. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 13(1–2), 83–102.Google Scholar
Swigart, L. (1994). Cultural creolisation and language use in post-colonial Africa: the case of Senegal. Africa, 64(2), 175–89.Google Scholar
Tamari, T. (2009). The role of national languages in Mali’s modernising Islamic schools (Madrasa). In Brock-Utne, B. & Skattum, I., eds., Languages and Education in Africa: A Comparative and Transdisciplinary Analysis. Oxford: Symposium, pp. 163–74.Google Scholar
Travélé, M. (1913). Petit dictionnaire franc¸ais-bambara et bambara-franc¸ais. Paris: Geuthner.Google Scholar
van den Avenne, C. (2017). De la bouche meˆme des indige`nes: échanges linguistiques en Afrique coloniale. Paris: Éditions Vendémiaire.Google Scholar
van der Horst, J. (2018). The end of the standard language: the rise and fall of a European language culture. In Juffermans, K. & Weth, C., eds., The Tyranny of Writing Revisited: Ideologies of the Written Word. London: Bloomsbury, pp. 47–61.Google Scholar
Weidl, M. (2019). Nga ne!? [What did you say!?]: The Role of Wolof in Multilingual Conversations in the Casamance: Fluidity of Linguistic Repertoires. Doctoral thesis. SOAS University of London.Google Scholar
Vydrine, V. (2001). Souleymane Kante, un philosophe-innovateur traditionnaliste maninka, vu à travers ses écrits en N’ko. Mande Studies, 3, 99–131.Google Scholar
Vydrine, V. (2011). L’alternative du N’ko: une langue écrite mandingue commune, est-elle possible? In Vold Lexander, K., Moseng Knutsen, A. & Lyche, C., eds., Pluralité des langues, pluralité des cultures: Regards sur l’Afrique et au-dela`. Mélanges offerts a` Ingse Skattum a` l’occasion de son 70e`me anniversaire. Oslo: Novus, pp. 195–204.Google Scholar
References
Allerton, D. J. (1982). Orthography and dialect: how can different regional pronunciations be accommodated in a single orthography? In Hass, W., ed., Standard Languages: Spoken and Written. Manchester: Manchester University Press, pp. 57–69.Google Scholar
Anderson, J. & O’Dowd, L. (1999). Borders, border regions and territoriality: contradictory meanings, changing significance. Regional Studies, 33(7), 593–604.Google Scholar
Armstrong, N. & Mackenzie, I. E. (2013). Standardization, Ideology and Linguistics. London/New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Bellamy, R. (2008). Citizenship: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
China (1955). Quanguo wenzi gaige huiyi wenjian huibian [Collection of Documents from the National Script Reform Conference]. Beijing: Huiyi mishu chu [Secretariat of the Conference].China (1956). Hanzu de gongtong yu he biaozhun yin [The Common Language and Standard Pronunciation of the Han Chinese]. Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju [China Press].China (1958). Wei zhengque guanche zhixing dang de minzu yuwen gongguo fangzhen er fengdou [Strive to correctly implement the Party’s minority language and script polity], Minzu yanjiu [Nationalities Research], 3, 1–9.China (1981). Dang de minzu zhengce wenxian ziliao xuanbian [Selected Chinese Communist Party Documents on Nationalities]. Beijing: Minzu yanjiu suo [Institute of Ethnology & Anthropology]. China (1996). Guojia minwei wenjian xuanbian, 1985–1995 [Selected Documents of the State Commission on Ethnic Affairs, 1985–1995]. Beijing: China Minhang Press.Google Scholar
China (2010). China Democratic National Construction Association’s proposal on solutions to educational problems in minority area [Minjian zhongyang guanyu jiejue bianjing shaoshu minzu diqu jiaoyue wenti de ti’an]. Retrieved 23 May 2018 from http://minzu.people.com.cn/GB/169927/11106525.htmlGoogle Scholar
Coatsworth, J. (2004). Globalization, growth, welfare in history. In Suarez-Orozco, M. M. & Qin-Hilliard, D. B., eds., Globalization: Culture and Education in the New Millennium. Berkeley: University of California Press, pp. 38–55.Google Scholar
Coluzzi, P., Rget, P. N. & Wang, X. M. (2017). Language vitality among the Orang Asli of Malaysia: the case of the Mah Meri on Telo’ Gunjeng (Carey Island, Selangor). International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 244, 137–62.Google Scholar
Cooper, R. L. (1989). Language Planning and Social Change. New York: Cambridge University Press.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
Crystal, D. (1987). The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Crystal, D. (2003). English as a Global Language, 2nd edn. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cuadras-Morató, X., ed. (2016). Catalonia: A New Independent State in Europe? A Debate over Secession within the European Union. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Dai, Q. X., Ding, Q. S. & Li, B. Z. (1992). Hanyu yu shaoshu minzu yuyan guanxi gailun [An Introduction to the Relationship between Chinese and Minority Languages]. Beijing: Minzu University Press.Google Scholar
Dreyer, J. T. (1976). China’s Forty Million: Minority Nationalities and National Integration in the People’s Republic of China. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Encarnación, O. G. (2018). The Catalan Crisis, One Year Later. Retrieved 9 December 2018 from www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/spain/2018-10-08/catalan-crisis-one-year-laterGoogle Scholar
Fei, X. T. (1999). The Pattern of Diversity in Unity of the Chinese Nation. Beijing: Minzu University Press.Google Scholar
Ferguson, C. A. (1971). Language Structure and Language Use: Essays. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Fidrmuc, J., Ginsburgh, V. & Weber, S. (2009). Voting on the choice of core languages in the European Union. European Journal of Political Economy, 25(1), 56–62.Google Scholar
Fishman, J. A. (1966). Language Loyalty in the United States: The Maintenance and Perpetuation of Non-English Mother Tongues by American Ethnic and Religious Groups. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Fishman, J. A. (1968a). Nationality-nationalism and nation-nationism. In Fishman, J. A., Ferguson, C. A. & Das Gupta, J., eds., Language Problems of Developing Nations. New York: Wiley, pp. 39–54.Google Scholar
Fishman, J. A. (1968b). Sociolinguistics and the language problems of the developing countries. In Fishman, J. A., Ferguson, C. A. & Das Gupta, J., eds., Language Problems of Developing Nations. New York: Wiley, pp. 3–16.Google Scholar
Fishman, J. A. (1972a). Language and Nationalism: Two Integrative Essays. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Fishman, J. A. (1972b). National languages and languages of wider communication. In Fishman, J. A., ed., Advances in the Sociology of Language. Vol II: Selected Studies and Applications. The Hague: Mouton, pp. 191–223.Google Scholar
Fishman, J. A., Ferguson, C. A. & Das Gupta, J. (1968). Language Problems of Developing Nations. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Fu, M. J. (1995). Fu Maoji xiansheng minzu yuwen lunwen ji [Collection of Fu Maoji’s Papers on Minority Languages]. Beijing: China Social Science Press.Google Scholar
Garvin, P. L. (1959). The standard language problem: concepts and methods. Anthropological Linguistics, 1(3): 28–31.Google Scholar
Grenoble, L. A. (2003). Language Policy in the Soviet Union. New York: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Hassanpour, A. (1999). Language rights in the emerging world linguistic order: the state, market and communication technologies. In Kontra, M., Phillipson, R., Skutnabb-Kangas, T. & Várady, T., eds., Language: A Right and a Resource. Budapest: Central European University Press, pp. 223–41.Google Scholar
Haugen, E. (1959). Planning for a standard language in Norway. Anthropological Linguistics, 1(3), 8–21.Google Scholar
Heller, M. (2010). Language as resource in the globalized new economy. In Coupland, N., ed., The Handbook of Language and Globalization. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 349–65.Google 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. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 24–43.Google Scholar
Institut de Sociolinguistica Catalana (2018). Catalan in France. Retrieved 15 December 2018 from www.uoc.edu/euromosaic/web/document/catala/an/i5/i5.html#topGoogle Scholar
ISO (2018). Language Codes – ISO 639. Retrieved 12 February 2018 from www.iso.org/iso-639-language-codes.htmlGoogle Scholar
Judge, A. (2000). France: ‘one state, one nation, one language?’. In Barbour, S. & Carmichael, C., eds., Language and Nationalism in Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 44–82.Google Scholar
Kellner-Heinkele, B. & Landau, J. M. (2012). Language Politics in Contemporary Central Asia: National and Ethnic Identity and the Soviet Legacy. New York: I. B. Tauris.Google Scholar
Kennedy, K. J. (1997). Citizenship education in review: past perspectives and future needs. In Kennedy, K. J., ed., Citizenship Education and the Modern State. London: Falmer Press, pp. 1–5.Google Scholar
Kloss, H. (1969). Research Possibilities on Group Bilingualism: A Report. Quebec: International Center for Research on Bilingualism.Google Scholar
Lai, H. Y. (2016). Ethnic autonomous regions and the unitary multi-ethnic nation-state. In Zang, X. W., ed., Handbook on Ethnic Minorities in China. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 138–64.Google Scholar
Laporte, P. E. (1984). Status language planning in Quebec: an evaluation. In Bourhis, R. Y, ed., Conflict and Language Planning in Quebec. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, pp. 53–80.Google Scholar
Laurendeau, P. (2015). Office québécois de la langue française. Retrieved 1 December 2018 from www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/office-de-la-langue-francaiseGoogle Scholar
Leibold, J. (2012). Can China have a melting pot? Retrieved 12 August 2020 from https://thediplomat.com/2012/05/can-china-have-a-melting-potGoogle Scholar
Leibold, J. (2016). Preferential policies for ethnic minorities in China. In Zang, X. W., ed., Handbook on Ethnic Minorities in China. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 165–88.Google Scholar
Leng, R. (2013). Shenme shi zhongguo meng, zenme lijie zhongguo meng [What is the Chinese dream? And how it is understood?]. Retrieved 20 June 2018 from http://opinion.people.com.cn/n/2013/0426/c1003-21285328.htmlGoogle Scholar
Li, D. Z. (1999). Zhongyan disandai lingdao yu shaoshu minzu [The Third Generation of the Chinese Communist Party Leadership and Ethnic Minorities]. Beijing: Minzu University Press.Google Scholar
Li, L. S. & Xia, N. (2017). The linguistic landscape in a multiethnic region: the case of Lijiang’s old town. Chinese Journal of Language Policy and Planning, 2(2), 35–42.Google Scholar
Li, Y. M. (2015). Language Planning in China. Beijing: De Gruyter Mouton and Commercial Press.Google Scholar
Ma, R. (1998). Nation-building of China’s pluralist unity and the future perspectives. Journal of Indian Anthropological Society, 33, 47–57.Google Scholar
Ma, R. (2007). A new perspective in guiding ethnic relations in the twenty-first century: ‘depoliticization’ of ethnicity in China. Asian Ethnicity, 8(3), 199–217.Google Scholar
Mackerras, C. (1994). China’s Minorities: Integration and Modernization in the Twentieth Century. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mao, G. N. & Liu, W. Q. (2004). Minzu zhengce yanjiu wenxong disanji [The Third Collection of Minority Policy Studies]. Beijing: Minzu Press.Google Scholar
Marshall, D. F. (1996). A politics of language: language as a symbol in the dissolution of the Soviet Union and its aftermath. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 118, 7–41.Google Scholar
McCarty, T. L. (1998). Schooling, resistance, and American Indian languages. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 132, 27–41.Google Scholar
McCarty, T. L. & Watahomigie, L. J. (2010). Indigenous community-based language education in the USA. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 11(3), 309–24.Google Scholar
Milroy, J. (2001). Language ideologies and the consequences of standardization. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 5(4), 530–55.Google Scholar
Milroy, J. & Milroy, L. (1999). Authority in Language: Investigating Standard English, 3rd edn. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
MOE (2004). Minzu yuyan wenzi guifan biaozhun jianshe yu xinxihua keti zhinan [Guidelines on the development and informatization of standards for minority language scripts]. Retrieved 12 August 2020 from http://old.moe.gov.cn//publicfiles/business/htmlfiles/moe/A19_sjhj/201411/178095.htmlGoogle Scholar
Mullaney, T. S. (2011). Coming to Terms with the Nation: Ethnic Classification in Modern China. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Rees, E. L. (1996). Spain’s linguistic normalization laws: the Catalan controversy. Hispania, 79(2), 313–21.Google Scholar
Renminwang (2015). Xi Jinping de minzu guan [Xi Jinping’s views on ethnic minorities]. Retrieved 12 August 2020 from http://politics.people.com.cn/n/2015/0824/c1001-27508701.htmlGoogle Scholar
Rumford, C. (2006). Introduction: theorizing borders. European Journal of Social Theory, 9(2), 155–69.Google Scholar
Safran, W. (2010). Political science and politics. In Fishman, J. A. & García, O., eds., Handbook of Language and Ethnic Identities: Disciplinary and Regional Perspectives, 2nd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 48–69.Google Scholar
Serdyuchenko, G. P. (1956). Sulian chuangli wenzi he jianli biaozhun yu de jingnian [The Soviet experience in creating writing systems and establishing standard languages]. Yuyan Yanjiu [Language Research], 1, 129–67.Google Scholar
Simpson, A. (2007). Language and National Identity in Asia. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Smith, A. D. (1986). State-making and nation-building. In Hall, J. A., ed., States in History. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 228–63.Google Scholar
Smith, J. A. & Smith, K. J. (2017). Indigenous language development in East Malaysia. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 244, 119–35.Google Scholar
Sun, H. K., Hu, Z. Y. & Huang, X. (2007). The Languages of China. Beijing: Commercial Press.Google Scholar
Taras, R. (1998). Nations and language-building: old theories and contemporary cases. Nationalism and Ethnic Politics, 4(3), 79–101.Google Scholar
Tosi, A., ed. (2003). The Challenges of Multilingual Translation for the European Union. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Tsung, L. (2014). Language Power and Hierarchy: Multilingual Education in China. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
UNESCO (2018). Concept Note. Retrieved 21 December 2018 from https://en.unesco.org/sites/default/files/concept_note_19-21_september_2018_china.pdfGoogle Scholar
Viroli, M. (1995). For Love of Country: An Essay on Patriotism and Nationalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wiley, T. G. (2000). Continuity and change in the function of language ideologies in the United States. In Ricento, T., ed., Ideology, Politics, and Language Policies: Focus on English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 67–86.Google Scholar
Wiley, T. G. & García, O. (2016). Language policy and planning in language education: legacies, consequences, and possibilities. Modern Language Journal, 100(Supplement), 48–63.Google Scholar
Wright, S. (2004). Language Policy and Language Planning: From Nationalism to Globalization. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Xiao, Y. (2011). Chinese language in the United States: an ethnolinguistic perspective. In Tsung, L. & Cruickshank, K., eds., Teaching and Learning Chinese in Global Contexts. London: Continuum, pp. 181–96.Google Scholar
Xie, Q. F. & Hou, R. H. (2011). On utilizing outside internet media in the education of cross-border minority nationality university students: a case study of Kirgiz university students of Tarim University. Journal of Huaihua University, 30(12), 92–4.Google Scholar
Yang, H. Y. (2012). Naxi, Chinese and English: Multilingualism in Lijiang. Doctoral thesis. Macquarie University.Google Scholar
Yang, J. C. (1995). Mao Zedong minzu lilun yanjiu [A Study of Mao Zedong on Nationalities]. Beijing: Minzu Press.Google Scholar
Yang, S. D. & Zhang, S. S. (2018). Qiannan zhou renda changweihui renzhen shenyi shuishu shenbao ‘shijie jiyi yichan minglu’ [The Standing Committee of Qiannan Prefecture People’s Congress reviewed the Shui script’s application for the Memory of the World Register]. Retrieved 11 February 2018 from www.mzb.com.cn/html/report/180125066-1.htmGoogle Scholar
Yu, F. J. (2014). Wo guo kuajing minzu yujing zhong de kuajing chuanbo celue yanjiu [A study of transnational broadcasting policies for China’s transnational minorities]. Gansu shsui kexue [Gansu Social Sciences], 2, 224–7.Google Scholar
Yunnan (1998). Minzu wenzi de chuangzhi yu gaijin [The Creation and Improvement of Writing Systems for Minority Languages]. Kunming: Yunnan Minzu Press.Google Scholar
Yunnan (2016). Zai ‘zhiguo minzu’ Putonghua peixun gongzuo tuijin hui shang de jianghua [Speech at the conference on Putonghua training for direct transitional minority communities]. Retrieved 12 June 2018 from http://yn.people.com.cn/news/yunnan/n2/2016/1013/c372127-29138699.htmlGoogle Scholar
Zhang, Z. G. (2018). English-medium instruction policies in China: internationalization of higher education. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 39(6), 542–55.Google Scholar
Zhou, M. (2003). Multilingualism in China: The Politics of Writing Reforms for Minority Languages 1949–2002. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Zhou, M. (2010a). China: the mainland, Hong Kong, and Taiwan. In Fishman, J. A. & García, O., eds., Handbook of Language and Ethnic Identity: Disciplinary and Regional Perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 470–85.Google Scholar
Zhou, M. (2010b). The fate of the Soviet model of multinational state-building in the People’s Republic of China. In Bernstein, T. P. and Li, H.-Y., eds., China Learns from the Soviet Union, 1949–Present. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, pp. 477–503.Google Scholar
Zhou, M. (2012). Models of nation-state building and indigenous knowledge inheritance. Journal of Educational Science of Hunan Normal University, 11(6), 15–20.Google Scholar
Zhou, M. (2015). Nation-state building and rising China: PRC’s discourse on the Chinese language since the turn of the 21st century. In Tsung, L. & Wang, W., eds., Contemporary Chinese Discourse and Social Practice in China. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 59–80.Google Scholar
Zhou, M. (2016). Nation-state building and multiculturalism in China. In Zang, X. W., ed., Handbook on Ethnic Minorities in China. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 111–37.Google Scholar
Zhou, M. (2017). Language ideology and language order: conflicts and compromises in colonial and postcolonial Asia. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 243, 97–118.Google Scholar
Zhou, M. (2018). The evolution of language education policies in greater China in the last one hundred years. Chinese Journal of Language Policy and Planning, 3(5), 11–20.Google Scholar
Zhou, M. (2019). Language Ideology and Order in Rising China. London/New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Zhou, M. & Hill, A. M., eds. (2009). Affirmative Action in China and the U.S.: A Dialogue on Inequality and Minority Education. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Zhou, M. & Wang, X. M. (2017). Introduction: understanding language management and multilingualism in Malaysia. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 244, 1–16.Google Scholar
Zou, J. C. (2015). Beichuan wa kaikou xue Qiangyu [Kids in northern Sichuan begin to study Qiang]. Retrieved 11 February 2018 from http://news.sina.com.cn/c/2015-08-21/doc-ifxhehqr6125337.shtmlGoogle Scholar