Concept of Language Standardization - Essay Example

?Concept of Language Standardization Standard language is regarded as the only viable and accurate form of languagewhereas other types are not considered accurate. This notion gives rise to the concept of equaling and understanding language with essentialism and Aristotelian two-valued orientation. Amongst the various varieties of the languages which are in existence, only one of them is deemed good and correct whereas the others are wrong. This ideology furthered and promoted the study of linguistics in the 18th and 19th century primarily on the study of languages in their classical or canonical types. Some languages such as Greek, Sanskrit and Spanish have been given greater importance compared to others because of their richness of expression, whereas other languages have been regarded as inferior to them because of their lacking in these elements. According to Wardhaugh (2006, p.1), language standardization is the process whereby the language is “codified”. This process of codification of the language can be done by a number of ways such as the development of language, spelling books, dictionaries and at times even literature too. Elaborating upon this view, standardization of language encompasses presenting and storing the language in an official way so that this variety of the language can be given the status of the preferred and most accurate variety. Each language manifests itself in an array of varieties, and is essentially regarded as an aggregate of all these different varieties (Wardhaugh 2009, p.23). Hudson (1996, p.22) refers to the variety of language as the “set of linguistic items with similar distribution”. He claims that Canadian English, London English and the English that is spoken in football commentaries are all a variety of the language English. This means that all the languages spoken by a multilingual speaker, or a community, need to be treated as one, single variety of the language, owing largely to the fact that these have a common social distribution. However, the meaning of variety is interpreted differently from one theorist to the other. Some theorists argue that variety has a greater status than language, whereas their opponents are supportive of the view that variety is ranked below a dialect on the linguistic hierarchy. For instance, for Ferguson (1971, p.30) a variety is a body compromising of human speech patterns and a large collection of elements and their organization which is able to function in any formal context of conversation and is adequately identical to be evaluated by the available methods of synchronic explanation. This follows that a complete homogeneity is not needed and there is always some variation on existence at which ever level language is interpreted, be it a dialect of the language or a group or the language as a whole. Language, when subjected to the process of standardization, starts to undergo a continuous progress with respect to this process. Standardization is not an ideology that has an impact on language in a particular era and then finishes to further have any effects on it as time progresses. On the contrary, the process of standardization is never a universal and complete process; rather it is in state of being enhanced and improved in the populations (Stein & Ostade 1994, p.19). Standardization does not necessarily have the same impact on every language. It affects those languages more which are not only in use by the majority of the population but also encompass a sense of nationhood or the notion of a shared identity. Observing the standardization of language from the vantage point of a student of linguistic change, it can be seen that standardization entails the creation and promotion of non-localized norms of language usage. Analyzing the variations in language from a sociolinguistic perspective, it can be established that it is not easy to fathom the process of language standardization (Stein & Ostade 1994, p.19). Duranti (1997, p.45) furthers upon the concept of language standardization, buttressing the view that the documentation and registration of a particular variety of the language is integral in giving a certain dialect authority over other dialects that are in use with respect to a language. He observes that this practice is important not only for fate that is reserved for the dialects that are not given standard status but also for becoming the basis for idealization for students of linguistics and language. When standardization of language is occurring, the question arises who has the authority to declare that a particular variety of the language is to be regarded as standard. According to several theorists, it is the large number of people speaking a certain variety that is the determining factor for making that language the standard (Language Standardization: A Necessary Evil, p.1). However, Duranti (1997, p.45) is of the perspective that it is the development of national states which are responsible for making a language standard. He stated that it is the development of a state that gives rise to the situation for a unified linguistic market; under such conditions one variety of the language automatically gains precedence over another. Another social theorist, Bourdieu, supported the view that a standard language is a product of sociopolitical processes which encompass bureaucratic institutions like schools (Duranti 1997, p.45). In the literate contemporary world, there is no escape from the standardization of language (Language Standardization: A Necessary Evil, p.1). There can be both positive and negative impacts of the standardization of language. A standard language can prove to be an effective means of communications. The members of the community have a common, standard language to converse in. Moreover it also allows the members to develop a shared sense of belonging and identity by following a single, standard language. Standardization allows students to be taught the language in a more organized way, the importance of which is appreciated more in higher classes. This follows that it would not be rational or reasonable for states to promote a dialect which most of the universities in the region do not understand. The various varieties of the language are regarded as the dialects of the language group but the standard language is actually one of the members of this group; it is a dialect favored above other dialects. Although all the dialects and varieties of the language are considered to be effective, regular and logical by linguistics, it is the standard language which is given the status of the power dialect. This power dialect makes it the preferred dialect and all forms of official communication, such as the print media, televisions and institutions, become increasingly dependent on the usage of this commonly-spoken standard language. In fact, Bourdieu observe that standard language is the basis for the success of the society by playing the role of the society’s valid linguistic currency (Behrens & Sperling 2009, p.17). However, the advantages that can be acquired from standardization of language are coupled with certain drawbacks too. Wardhaugh (2006, p.34) claims that preferring one dialect or form of language over another contributes greatly in the development of elitism and bias amongst the population. When one variety of the language is chosen over another, it naturally comes to entail the preferential favor of the segment of the population who speaks that language. This is coupled by a decrease in the norms and traditions of other variations of the language and of the people who are fluent in these variations only. The speakers who use the standard language develop a sense of superiority over those who do not, leading the rest of the population to feel inferior. However despite the negative impacts of the standardization of language, there is a need for a common language that is widely spoken and understood. It may have adverse effects on the cultures and segments of populations who converse in the non-standard form of language, but standardization of language is a necessary evil and is the consequence of the “reality that we have created” (Language Standardization: A Necessary Evil, p.4). Taking the example of English, one can see that it has grown into a standard language over the period of time. English originally was derived from Anlgo-Saxon, a dialect attributable to the West Germanic (Kern 2006, p.60). More specifically English is the member of the Indo-European family of languages, which compromises majority of the European languages that are spoken today. The impact of the original Indo-European languages reverberates in the modern standard form of English language. Along with being West-Germanic in nature, English has gathered more vocabulary from a number of other languages such as Chinese, Hebrew and Russian. The origin of the common root words in English goes as far as the Anglo-Saxon language; however many of the root words are also derived from French or happen to have a French cognate. Words that are primarily scientific in nature are traced to Greek or Latin origin. Even the Spanish language is also seen to have contributed to the English vocabulary. While studying the history and development of the English language, it is necessary to study in detail the aspect of etymology. Etymology refers to the study of the history and origin of words (Kern 2006, 60). Coulmas asserted that in the past, most of the languages have been studied from the point of view of standard languages and the same technique has been applied to English as well. Wright (2006, p.11) observes that this standardization has manipulated the development and historical study of the English language in such a way that more importance is ascribed to the development of the standardization aspect of the English as compared to its different varieties. The development of the standard form of English has a strong relation with national and cultural identity. In this process, the standardized national language dons the symbol of that identity. As English started to accrue importance and started to replace French and Latin, it became important that a single standard language be decided upon. A close and detailed study of the development of the English language shows that its standard variety underwent changes more due to the social and political reasons than linguistic ones. For example that the variety of language selected for the purpose of promotion was the dialect of the South-east Midland region (Book Club 2011). This dialect was not chosen on linguistic grounds; rather it was the growing social prominence of the region as a result of it becoming a centre for politics, commerce and learning which made it more suitable for its dialect to be promoted as the standard language. Had the commercial and learning centre of England been in some other region, the language that would have been standardized would have been selected from it instead (Thomas, Singh & Peccei 2004, p.177). Despite the standard form of English throughout the world, there are a number of variations in the language. Apart from the Standard English, there are other regional and ethnic dialects that are spoken in English-speaking nations (Algeo & Pyles 2010, p.195). The history of the language requires an appreciation of the speakers’ attitudes on the development (Horan, Langer & Watts 2009, p.6). The origin of English dates back as far back as the 5th century. It was the invasion of three Germanic tribes, the Angles, the Saxons and the Jutes, into Britain from the region of Denmark and northern Germany. The British, who conversed in Celtic, were made to move towards the West, in the region which forms modern Ireland and Wales. Angles, coming from Englaland, spoke Englisc- the root word of England and English. The period of the Old English extends from 450 to 1100 AD. During this time, the form of English which is known today as Old English was spoken by the invading Germanic tribes, who used to talk in related languages. Although the Old English is hard to understand today, a lot of modern words are derived from it. The Old English was infringed upon by the invasion of the Duke of Normandy, a constituent of modern day France, in 1066 since the new rulers spoke a language alien to the natives (Susan 2006, p.55). The influx of these Normans brought French into the institutions of the region and is more observable on the vocabulary than other languages (Baugh & Cable 1993, p.163). The period is also marked by a certain class bias, with the lower classes speaking English and the upper classes French. The 14th century saw English regaining its authority as the main language again, but with a large number of French vocabulary added to it (Book Club 2011). This language came to be known as the Middle English and was spoken during 1100 to 1500 and is the language of the great poet Chaucer (Zapala-Kraj 2010, p.8). The next round of innovation in the English language was brought about by the Renaissance (A Brief History of the English Language). Classical scholarship helped to infuse many classical Latin and Greek words into the language. The period is marked by the Great Vowel Shift, a change in the pronunciation of the words. The pronunciation of the vowels shortened. Moreover, 16th century onwards, British increase and augmented their contacts with people all around the world. Thus foreign languages also influenced this Early Modern English, dating from 1500 to 1800. The Old English and Modern English differed in various aspects such as ‘be’ and ‘have’ perfect (Lee 2003, p.373). Another major contribution to the development of the language came from the invention of printing, decrease in the prices of the books and an increased segment of the population taking interest in reading. The period saw some conclusive changes to spelling and grammar, reflecting the standardization that was occurring. The dialect of London, housing a large number of publishing houses, was given the status of the standard dialect and in 1604, the first English dictionary came out the publishing houses. Late Modern English, from 1800 to present, is different from its Early counterpart basically due to its vocabulary (Book Club 2011). The Late Modern English has a much richer vocabulary because of the fact that the Industrial Revolution necessitated the development of new words and the extensive spread of the British Empire caused the English language to pick up a number of foreign words. In the modern world, English has received a lot of promotion as a result of the American cinema, social mobility and technological innovations and advancements in English-speaking countries (Fennell 2001, p.171). References A Brief History of the English Language, Anglik, retrieved 13 February 2011, Algeo, J & Pyles, T 2010, The Origins and Development of the English Language, Volume 1, Cengage Learning, Boston, MA. Baugh, E & Cable, CC 1993, A history of the English language, 4th edn, Routledge, London. Behrens, SJ & Sperling, RL 2009, ‘Language Variation’, in SJ Behrens & JA Parker (eds), Language in the Real World: An Introduction to Linguistics, Taylor & Francis, Oxon. Duranti, A 1997, Linguistic anthropology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. English Club, History of the English Language, EnglishClub.com, retrieved 13 February 2011, Fennell, BA 2001, A history of English: a sociolinguistic approach, Wiley-Blackwell, Massachusetts. Ferguson, CA 1971, Language structure and language use: essays, Stanford University Press, California. Horan, G, Langer, N & Watts, S 2009, Landmarks in the History of the German Language, Peter Lang, Bern. Hudson, RA 1996, Sociolinguistics, 2nd edn, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Kern, De 2006, CliffsTestPrep Praxis II: English Subject Area Assessments (0041, 0042, 0043, 0048, 0049), John Wiley and Sons, New Jersey, NJ. Language Standardization: A Necessary Evil, University of Arizona, retrieved 13 February 2011, Lee, JH 2003, ‘The “have” perfect in Old English: How close was it to the Modern English Perfect?’, in D Minkova & RP Stockwell (eds), Studies in the History of the English Language: A Millennial Perspective, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin. Stein, D & Ostade, IT 1994, Towards a standard English, 1600-1800, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin. Susan, I 2006, ‘Beginnings and Transitions: Old English’, in L Mugglestone (ed.), The Oxford history of English, Oxford University Press, Oxford. Thomas, L, Singh, I & Peccei, JS 2004, Language, society and power: an introduction, Routledge, Oxon. Wardhaugh, R 2006, An introduction to sociolinguistics, Blackwell Publishing, Malden, MA. Wardhaugh, R 2009, An Introduction to Sociolinguistics, 6th edn, John Wiley and Sons, West Sussex. Wright, L 2006, The Development of Standard English, 1300-1800: Theories, Descriptions, Conflicts, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Zapala-Kraj, M 2010, The Development of Early Modern English: The Influence of Shakespeare on EModE, GRIN Verlag, Norderstedt, Germany. Read More