We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The standardization of minority languages has little room in language policy and language planning because models of nation-state building are generally not designed to accommodate minority languages, while standardized minority languages often lead to challenges for the state. This chapter reviews how various ideologies, such as nationalism, nationism and patriotism, interact with nation-state building and globalization in shaping approaches to the standardization of minority languages. As a case study, it examines how China, adopting the Soviet model of multinational state building, technically standardized minority languages in a two-track multilingual system where standardized Chinese functioned as the main track and standardized minority languages functioned as the satellites of an eventual linguistic integration. Since the failure of this model in the 1990s, globalization has created opportunities in China through transnational institutions, such as UNESCO and ISO, and technical revolutions, such as the Internet, for bottom-up efforts at the standardization of minority languages. The case shows a trajectory from the state monopoly of the agency of standardization to the diversity of the agency among the state, local communities and the global community. This development appears to be the future of the standardization of minority languages in multilingual nation-states in an age of globalization.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.