Here's a chalenge:

Define Standard English according to the following image:

(http://www.talkingpeople.net/tp/languages/worldeng.html)

Nationalism and language standardisation

Processes of standardization seem to have benefited the powerful in society, but were not developed with a linguistic, ideological, or state target in mind. Communities were unified by language, also creating an awareness of “others”, but this was not ideologically manipulated. The advent of nationalism changed this.

Nationalism has clear roots in the development of printcapitalism, but takes them one step further. Emerging in the 17 th century and lasting through to the present day, the idea of nations and nationhood highlights difference, using it to create what Anderson calls “imagined communities”.

Ethnic groups (nations) become the focus of legitimacy, controlling their own destiny by governing themselves in their own unique territory. Nations thus become the most effective unit of international politics, and can act at their most efficient if they have internal cohesion. Clearly many factors contribute to this sense of nation the development of a national character, a national culture, a history, and often a national language. national languages are often used consciously as tools, facilitators, and weapons in creating internal unity and external differentiation.

Standard Language is primarily a national symbol, one that can be linked to a permanent past much more easily than often changing geographical boundaries, especially for newer nations. It can also be used as a symbol of formality and solemnity. It replaces the older administrative dialects to provide a more general lingua franca function, helping the internal cohesion of the state, and performs various nationforming functions such as in literature, broadcasting, education, etc. 

Anderson, B. (1991): Imagined Communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. Verso, London. (Revised and extended edition)

Haugen, E. (1966/1972): “Dialect,Language, Nation” reprinted in Pride and Holmes, J.(eds.) Sociolinguistics. Penguin, London.

Joseph, J.E.(1987): Eloquence and Power: the rise of language standards and standard languages. Frances Pinter, London.

Milroy, J. and Milroy, L.(1991): Authority in Language: investigating language standardization and prescription. Routledge, London.

Nairn, T. (1977): The BreakUp of Britain. NLB, London.

Understanding Language Standardization

Nows that we have already discussed background, in order to understand Language Standardization, it will be presented the definition of language stardardization, the initial effects of printing in it and a theory based on language standardisation.

• What is Language Standardization?

It is the process by which a vernacular in a community becomes the standard language (SL) form. This carries implicit elements of prestige (whereby the SL vernacular is valued more highly than others), stability, and common usage. Alternative variations are either eliminated and/or stigmatized.

• What are the effects of Printing?

The arrival of print capitalism and widespread written language revolutionized both language use, and eventually ideas of nation and nationality. Print capitalism supported the necessary development of writing in society, producing what Milroy and Milroy (1991) call a “quantum leap” in language standardization, certainly for European languages. (This discussion concentrates on Europe where most writers have focused. Elsewhere, absolutism and/or the absence of technological development during these years probably prevented the processes described).

Printing presses were in use in Europe by the mid15th century. Printing enabled planned utterances to be devised and circulated. Communication was no longer limited to formulaic administration, religious tracts, or spontaneous speech. Ideas and theories were propagated, especially concerning religion. With the invention of the printing press, written ideas could be reproduced on a massive scale, not only in the Church Latin that was the traditional language of European religion, but in vernaculars that could be more widely understood. Printers saw an opportunity to both establish the success of their trade and make money, whilst those involved in the religious arguments could enlarge their appeal. Thus, it is no surprise that Luther “became the first bestselling author...in the coalition between Protestantism and printcapitalism” (Anderson, 1991:39), authoring onethird of all books sold in the German vernacular between 1518 and 1535.

Print languages affected the variety of vernaculars used in a particular community. Massproduced written texts started to provide fixed language forms, giving a degree of permanence to new norms and preventing extreme language change and diversity. Print languages were inclusive for those who could read them, whilst excluding those who could not; and they were delimited geographically, initializing a geographical sense of “us” and “other” for people and places.

• Language Standardisation Theory

Haugen (1964) suggests a fourstage model for the development of language standardization. The initial selection of a single vernacular was important so that printers could ensure that their texts were comprehensible to all readers at all times in all places within the community. This enabled a broad market to develop, and the cutting of costs (i.e. maximise profits) by facilitating mass production.

However, which vernacular to choose? For those producing the texts, it was reasonable to use the language they spoke (or was spoken in their geographical and social community). For example, in the case of England, the vernacular chosen as the vehicle of print capitalism was the language used by the Londonbased, emergent entrepreneurial and merchant class. Printed materials spread this vernacular into areas where it was previously unknown and unused. The original choice of the print vernacular/language might have been free from a conscious consideration of powerrelations; however, not only did the print language gain prestige from being selected and spread, but it was also the language of those with money, power, and influence within the community as a whole, and could be seen to be so. Thus, those whose vernacular was adopted were placed at a considerable advantage in both practical usage and prestige terms in the wider print community.

The selected language then required codification and elaboration, aiming at a minimal variation and stability in linguistic form (e.g. one spelling for each word). This was undermined by nonstandard vernaculars. Meanwhile, elaboration required the language to perform all the functions of the lower prestige vernaculars it was starting to overwhelm. To achieve this, it

could borrow from them.

Finally, Haugen says, the key to the overall process of successful language standardization was, and in areas where it is a continuing process today is, acceptance whereby the standardized form can be easily implemented and maintained without challenge from another vernacular.

Milroy, J. and Milroy, L.(1991): Authority in Language: investigating language standardization and prescription. Routledge, London.

Anderson, B. (1991): Imagined Communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. Verso, London. (Revised and extended edition)

Haugen, E. (1966/1972): “Dialect,Language, Nation” reprinted in Pride and Holmes, J.(eds.) Sociolinguistics. Penguin, London.

Printing Revolution x Vernacular

More and more books began to be published in local languages, rather than Latin. Before the year 1500, three quarters of all books were written in Latin. This figure would quickly be reversed. English editions of Chaucer's Canterbury Tales and Italian editions of Dante's Divine Comedy were some of the early successes. Printing in the local language made reading available to people who did not know Latin, including many women. Moreover, spelling started to become standardized. Local languages were strengthened, and translations became common, leading to a decline in the use of Latin, apart from in the Church and universities.

(http://tinyurl.com/29n7qvb)

Printing "preserved and codified, sometimes even created" certain

vernaculars. Its absence during the sixteenth century among small

linguistic groups "demonstrably led" to the disappearance or exclusion

of their vernaculars from the realm of literature.

Having fortified language walls between one group and another, printers homogenized what was within them, breaking down minor differences, standardizing idioms for millions of writers and readers, assigning a new peripheral role to provincial dialects.

A "mother's tongue" learned "naturally" at home would be reinforced

by inculcation of a homogenized print-made language mastered while still young, when learning to read.

(http://tinyurl.com/2c9pqzh)

Standard Language and Standardization - What is a language? What is a dialect?

It is difficult to provide clearcut definitions for language and dialect. Languages are social phenomenon and do not necessarily have clear edges that would make them easy to identify and define. We can make generalizations about language (e.g. language is a dialect with an army, language is always superior to the dialects it encapsulates), but these refer to social, political, and cultural factors, rather than any intrinsic concrete and rational evaluation of the linguistic features of the “language” itself. One possible definition of language which recognizes these difficulties is:

• a [linguistic] system of elements and rules conceived broadly enough to admit variant ways of using it. A dialect is understood as one of these variant ways. (Joseph, 1987:1)

However, this still leaves language as an inexact term as dialects too can be systems, and it seems that the perceived importance to the user of a language/dialect is what actually resolves whether a language or dialect is being spoken.

Source: Joseph, J.E.(1987): Eloquence and Power: the rise of language standards and standard

languages. Frances Pinter, London.