The elaboration of an emerging standard

The Elaboration of an Emerging Standard

J o h n J o s e p h

Oklahoma State University

ABSTRACT

Research on the rise of standard languages has shown that the phenomenon generally occurs as part of a developing society's overall acculturation to some superposed model, via imitation of this "high" culture's already standardized tongue. The "low" language does not readily adjust to functional spheres formerly reserved for the "high," and its speakers tend to develop feelings of inferiority and ineloquence which hamper the progress of standardization, often engendering active resistance within the native speech community. Gradually, however, a cultural avant-garde within the "low" community brings about the elaboration of their dialect, with new structural and lexical elements drawn from the superposed tongue(s). Elaboration begins with simple transference of elements, which later undergo nativization by adjustment either of the borrowing system or of the elements themselves. As the process continues and the effects of elaboration become more widely visible and audible, resistance fades, the public mood shifts, and the newly elaborated standard may soon find itself superposed and serving as model for some other dialect's "acculturation."

INTRODUCTION

The dialect which, for whatever reason, attains "standard" status within a

linguistic community undergoes an elaboration - new structfiral and lexical elements

enter correlate with its functioning in the domains appropriate to standard

languages. 1

Linguists do not deem the non-elaborated emerging standard dialect "inferior"

to the established standard language. "Any vernacular is presumably adequate at a

given moment for the needs o f the group that uses i t" (Haugen 1966a: 931). But

when that group is in the throes o f acculturation (see below) and attempts to use the

native tongue as medium for all its new needs, the language may be found inadequate

40 Language Sciences, Volume 6, Number 1 (1984)

until adjustments can be made, " . . . this inadequacy increasing in direct proportion with the degree of difference between the culture to which the language belongs, and the one which it is expected to express" (Wurm 1968: 359). Such adjustments constitute elaboration.

Though it cannot be shown empirical'Iv that all dialects are equal in communica- tive efficiency (cf. Tauli 1968: 14), they do have equal potential for undergoing elaboration and being made into a fully "adequate" standard. What is more, every standard language was originally "underdeveloped" (cf. Haugen 1966a: 927), and every culture, even the most advanced, is ceaselessly shifting, progressing (cf. Fishman 1968: 10). All languages are characterized by perpetual change and all standard languages, by perpetual elaboration. The rate of linguistic elaboration must be proportional to the rate of cultural development for expressive equilibrium to be maintained.

SUPERPOSITION

The emerging standard is associated with an acculturating society, that is, a "low" culture passing to a more advanced level of civilization through imitation of some "high" model. The corresponding linguistic condition, superposition, may be represented graphically as in Figure 1. If specific sociolinguistic criteria are met, the situation may qualify as a diglossia (see Joseph 1983a; Ferguson 1959). In any case, the "low" (hereafter L) community's attitude toward the "high" (hereafter H) will influence the course of its dialect's elaboration.

The earliest well-documented standardization is that of Latin. Literary texts dating from the third century B.C. reveal " . . . a language of concrete character, suited for expressing aspects of life and nature, indigent when it comes to rendering modalities of thought; oriented toward the real, unfit for the abstract" (tr. from Marouzeau 1949: 138). Over the succeeding years, a superposition developed in the usage of literary men, with Alexandrian Greek as H, Latin as L. This situation would persist for centuries (see Friedlander 1944; Kahane and Kahane 1979: 183-84, 193; Marouzeau 1949: 125-41; Palmer 1954: 95-147;Pulgram 1975:31 (n. 11), 32, 40-1, 77, 88, 119, 122 (n. 96), 287, 289-90). In the Greek modes of thought imported by the bilinguals, the inadequacies of their native Latin were revealed.

The Hellenized Romans constituted a cultural avant-garde. Such a group forms within every acculturating L community, its first task being to show itself capable of performing the constituent functions of the H culture (intra- and international communication, codified law and religion, education, grammar publishing, broad- casting, etc.) - in the H language. Only after the functions themselves have been assimilated do sentiments of local, regional, tribal, ethnic, or national pride impel the avant-gardistes to put their native vernacular to use in these prestigious spheres

The Elaboration of an Emerging Standard 41

where, heretofore, nothing but H has been considered appropriate.

high = superposed dialect I

~ low = vernacular

0 0

Figure 1. Superposition

The relationship between H and L in a given superposition varies with the social- political climate, and may well affect the course and outcome of elaboration. For example, it was in reaction to the vast influence of H Danish on Boksmaal, the original standard dialect of Norwegian, that a new "Danish-free" standard, Landsmaal, was created and promoted (see Haugen 1966b).

Frequently, the emerging vernacular is the modern reflex of a classical H; the Romance languages which began standardization in the late Middle Ages, when Latin fulfilled all prestige functions, are a familiar case (see Blatt 1957; Joseph 1983b). As renaissance inquiry (under Arab tutors) brought to light the importance of Greek thought and language in the formation of the Roman, Greek too became a source for elaboration, resulting in a double H stratum, and demonstrating that L need not be the "daughter" of its classical model. Indeed, they may be wholly unrelated: Latin also served as superposed language in the development of Hungarian (see Deme 1972). Other noteworthy situations:

Table 1 Comparison of L and H

LOW HIGH REFERENCE

Mod. Greek CI. Greek Browning 1969

Indian colloq, stds. C1. Sanskrit Deshpande 1979:34

Arabic colloq, stds. C1. Arabic Beeston 1970

Mod. Hebrew C1. Hebrew pp. 6-7 below

Mod. Chinese Cl. Chinese Kratochvfl 1968

Japanese C1. Chinese Passin 1968:450-451

Croatian Latin Franolic 1972:26-27


Swahili

German

Finnish

Rumanian

CI. Arabic Harries 1968;

Whiteley 1969

Latin/French Blackall 1978

Swedish/Latin/German Sauvageot 1973

Turkish/Cl. Greek/Mod. Grk/Latin/ Close 1974

Italian• Russian• German• French

When the vernacular is put to use in spheres and functions to which it is

unaccustomed, the inadequacies come to light - rather, come into existence, for the

language suffers from no lacuna until speakers perceive one. Besides gaps which

emerge from comparison with H, others may result from invention within the culture of an original object or idea whose uniqueness could not be conveyed by the

language's current resources. Inadequacies are created by the cultural avant-garde

o f inventors, philosophers, and translators.

"INELOQUENCE"

Attitudes toward the emerging vernacular follow certain regular patterns.

Comparison with the elaborated H gives rise to the opinion that the vernacular is

ineloquent. English authors of the fourteenth through sixteenth centuries ritually

lamented not only the ineloquence, but the "barbarity" of their tongue, calling it

inferior not just to Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, but also to the modern Romance

idioms. Nicholas Haward writes in the preface to his translation o f Eutropius (A

briefe chronicle, 1564):

And where as some theyr be whyche obiecte that throughe these translatyons, the affectynge and desym of the attaynynge of the Greeke, Latyne, Italian and other tounges dooth decay, and is the lesse soughte after, who seeth not howe friuolous and vaine that theyr saying is. For as it is very absonant that anye one who hath the perfect vse of corn and grain, and tasted the pleasauntnesse there of, would refuse the same to be fed with Acornes, so is it no lesse dissonant to say, that anye man hauing ones tasted the pleasaunte purity of the Greke and Latine tounges, would (forsaking the same) fal to the barbarousnesse (in respect) of thys our Englyshe tounge.

Such feelings tend to be exaggerated in the case o f English, with its highly reduced

inflectional system (taken as a sign of primitiveness) and mixed lexicon (Germanic

with thorough Romance "bastardization"). But Haward's comment is representative

of the reaction provoked by every emerging standard. The persons destined to elaborate their native vernacular must first be educated, and education can only be

carried out in a previously elaborated language (the H pole). The resultant sense o f

inferiority toward the native vernacular is, then (and for all its logicality it is


paradoxical), a necessary concomitant to elaboration. If excessive, however, such sentiments can effectively block standardization of

the vernacular. Creoles are frequently superposed by the original "target" language which contributed to formation of the parent pidgin, and L is seen as a "corrupt" form of H Dutch, English, French, Portuguese, or Spanish. Attempts at elevation meet with ridicule, and progress comes very slowly, perhaps only after corresponding socioeconomic changes (see Joseph 1982). Still, the situation is not hopeless: the Romance languages and the colloquial Arabic standards had to overcome similar reputations of "corruption."

Modern Hebrew benefited from quite the opposite condition. Standardization was supported by an intense nationalism which simply disallowed the usual cultural self-deprecation. The Israeli avant-garde plunged headlong into an immense task of elaboration: an ancient Semitic tongue, not used natively for centuries (cf. Fellman 1973: 11-3), was to become the living, day-to-day idiom of a linguistically heterogeneous population, mostly speakers of non-standard German and Spanish dialects, in a land of native Arabic speech.

Why, one wonders, do those who have learned H commonly react with disparagement rather than defensiveness toward their native L? Haward hints at the

answer. The H language is not intrinsically better than the vernacular, in the way that grain may be shown to constitute a better diet for humans than acorns; but the two tongues, like the two foodstuffs, differ in prestige. The educated avant-garde, now able to feast on "grain," find that because of this ability they are socially a cut above the glandivorous herd which spawned them. Belittling of the vernacular brings the schooled person's achievement into sharper relief.

But it comes to be recognized that the vernacular, despite its supposed ineloquence, must be elaborated. The motives are both nationalistic and democratic: translation into L is held to be necessary for the instruction (religious, usually) of the masses. A book published in H requires of its potential reader not only literacy, but mastery of a tongue which is not native to him. A vernacular book is accessible to all speakers who have gained literacy - no small task, but the more feasible alternative. Elaboration of the vernacular will lead to an exponential expansion of the reading public.

TRANSFERENCE

The problem: how to transfer ideas from domains traditionally reserved for standardized dialects into a vernacular which has not yet served in standard-language functions. A great many notions and phrases in H will have no counterpart in L ~and vice versa). Those undertaking the initial translation have little choice but to borrow the element directly. Knowledge of Greek created the inadeauacies in


Latin, and simultaneously supplied the source for remedying them. Lexicon is the most obvious locus for elaboration, since imported objects

and ideas require names. Yet, every area of language structure is susceptible. Syntactic features are taken over from the H model, especially in such realms as law, philosophy, teaching of the physical sciences and medicine, religious rites. Phonological examples include the addition of the front rounded vowel series /y ~b oe/ to the urban standard variety of Haitian Creole; these vowels had previously become unrounded and merged with /i e e/, but the distinction has been restored through superpositional contact with French (see Ferguson 1959: 336; Valdman 1968: 316-7, 321). The Roman avant-garde took over from Greek almost the entire metrical system of Latin poetry (Pulgram 1975: 88), countless lexical items (Marouzeau 1949: 128-32, 136-39), numerous syntactic formations (Palmer 1954: 286,288, 289, 291-92, 298, 300, 307-08, 315, 318, 320, 322, 323,326, 341), and even the (admittedly hypothetical) pitch accent of certain upper-class dialects (Pulgram 1975:119, 289-90).

During the first stage of elaboration, the period of transference, the L avant- gardistes continue to pepper their vernacular discourse with H elements in spheres where L is deficient. In due course, sentiments of national or ethnic pride take precedence, and restrain them from such overt dependence on the dominant tongue - at which point the second stage, navitization, begins. Here, the assimilated elements are made part of the vernacular system. Nativization can come about in one of three ways:

I. The System Adjusts

The assimilation of phonological, morphological, prosodic, and basic syntactic patterns from the superposed H can mean changes in the system of the emerging standard (whereas lexical, semantic, and phrase-level syntactic imports merely add to the "stock"). A phonological elaboration either becomes part of the language, like Haitian /y/, or is replaced by a "native" element. (But morphological elaborations, if retained, may be wholly or partly nativized on the phonological level; lexical elaborations on the phonological and morphological, syntactic elaborations on the phonological, morphological, and lexical.) Use of the Greek pitch accent in some varieties of Standard Latin represented a major change in structure.

II. The Element Adjusts

A. Adaption. An element above the phonological level may undergo such alterations as are necessary to bring it within the structural limits of the borrowing vernacular. The Romans, overwhelmed by their discovery of Greek literature, could

The Elaboration o f an Emerging Standard 45

scarcely discuss it without having recourse to fundamental Greek terms like ~r o l n'r fi s

(poi~t~s) 'poe t ' and 7to ( h a l s (poiesis) 'poetry , ' blantantly foreign because of un-

Latin accentual and morphological patterns, and lacking exact Latin equivalents.

Nativization required adjustment at several points in the paradigm. ~ ro ln ' r f i s

became poeta, and retained its status as one of the rare masculine nouns of the -a

declension; in the transfer it endured a severe change of form in the nominative and

genitive singular. 2 While ~ r o i ' n o l s saw some o f its forms radically altered, the

accusative singular kept its distinctly Greek inflection -in (rather than changing to

Latin -em or the rarer -ira), a peculiar privilege it shared with a few other Greek

loans, a As these examples show, adaptat ion need not be complete. Elaborative

elements contrast in their degree o f adjustment to the vernacular system.

B. Replacement (calquing). A substitute for the elaborative transfer may be

found within the vernacular's own resources - possibly among the rare or archaic

elements, or in a dialect related to the emerging standard. With proper ideological

backing, caiques will drive H elements out of the language. Several at tempts might

be necessary before the mot juste is found. Marouzeau (1949: 139-40) writes of

C'.'cero's experience in nativizing certain Greek concepts:

We see him try out four successive equivalents for the key term ot~poodvn (sophros~'n~) 'discretion' (Tusc. III, 8, 16-18): "which I usually call temperantia or moderatio, and sometimes modestia; but I am not at all sure that it is proper to term this virtue frugalitas. " To render Kolvtoufct (ko~nSnia) 'fellowship,' he first uses societas mortalium, humana societas, then looks for a single word: communitas, consortio, consocatio, before finding that Latin possesses an approximate equivalent: human#as, which, endowed with a new sense, becomes in his work one of the noblest concepts of ancient thought. (My translation).

Sometimes the search took centuries. To express Greek ~6.eos (phthos) 'emotion, '

Cicero tried motus animi, commotio, morbus, and finally settled on perturbatio.

Aulius Gellus proposed affectus or affectio. But it was Augustine, translating and

expounding upon the Christian mysteries, who finally created an ideal and enduring

Latin caique: passio (Marouzeau 1949:140) .

Semantic replacments were suggested for no l n~fis as well: conditor, with the

same literal meaning as behind the Greek term ( 'one who puts together, makes'),

hence a "direct" caique; auctor, literally 'one who makes increase'; even scriptor

'writer ' . But each was too closely tied to its broader sense. Conditor could refer to

any number of professions, nor was auctor confined to the literary domain. Scriptor

was narrower, but the distinction between verse and prose dated at least from

Herodotus, and Latin had opted to restrict no l n~fis to verse. To avoid the Greek loan, one had to say carminum conditor, carminum auctor, carminum scriptor,

cumbersome appellations all. In Greek, ~ro l n ' r f i s had retained its original literal meaning side by side with the new figurative one, apparently without engendering


serious confusion. Latin, less blessed with this genius - but having in recompense a model to follow - chose the simplest solution: poeta and poesis were accepted with little resistance.

ELABORATION VS. BORROWING

How are "avant-garde" elaborations to be distinguished from normal linguistic

borrowing? When Hellenism swept the Roman upper classes, the Italian peninsula (being

part of Magna Graecia) had long been dotted with Greek settlements. Certain elements, probably restricted to lexicon, entered the Latin dialects from Greek at the vernacular level through the common processes of linguistic borrowing. Often the accentual pattern of the Latin adaptation or the Romance reflexes reveals the source. Avant-garde elaborations retained the quantity of the Greek vowels and adjusted the accent according to the Latin pattern (a long vowel in the antepenult was always

stressed): k&/ar/kos (k~me-los) ~ cam~lus 'camel'. Vernacular borrowings kept the Greek accent intact, and vowel quantity is not distinguished in Romance: e f ~t0)~ o ~o

(elidolon) ~ *1dolu > Italian Idolo 'idol' (but C1. Latin id~lum). The Romance languages even contain doublets resulting from the borrowing of a single Greek word through both channels: ×o) ,~pa(k h oldra) entered at the standard level as cholera ( > Italian clollera 'anger') and at the vernacular level as *col~ra ( > Italian col~ra 'cholera') (Pulgram 1965 ; 1975:131-34).

Of course, all borrowing is "elaboration" of a sort, with little difference in process or result whether it occurs in salon or marketplace. An element which enters the language system through a dialect native to a low social stratum can, like any innovation, spread into geographically and socially neighboring varieties and become an accepted feature of the emerging standard. If its origin is not betrayed by some linguistic factor, one must determine by some other means whether the element was added to the dialect in the course of its performing the functions appropriate

to a standard language. Only then may the element be counted as contributing to avant-garde elaboration. Italian collera represents elaboration, colera does not. Similarly, of French fr~le (vernacular reflex of Latin fragilem) and fragile (learned form added in the Renaissance), only the latter constitutes an elaboration, as indeed does the subsequent borrowing of fragile from French into English. The earlier loan of frail occurred at the vernacular level before English had come to be used in

standard-language functions.

NEW SUPERPOSITION

Nativization cannot progress toward completion without severe changes taking


place in the superposition framework. Newly enriched on its superposed model, the vernacular can be employed in ever more of the standard-language functions once reserved for H. While the dominant tongue may not be abandoned altogether (in some ways, Latin remains H in European countries today), the elevating dialect, with each new context of usage it appropriates, gradually rises from L status toward H. Vernacular dialects other than the standard remain at L level, and so a new superposition is engendered (see Figure 2).

Original New superposition superposition

(Latin) ]

[ Latin ] ~ Standard French I

French I n°n'standard J dialects dialects

Figure 2. Evolution of Superposition Situation

RESISTANCE

Change of vernacular function does not occur without strong resistance. Prejudices die hard, and one inevitably encounters the belief that the vernacular is unsuitable for use in formal domains (cf. Shaffer 1978: 61). Much of the resistance

comes from the higher social strata, persons able to handle H (perhaps after having expended considerable effort). In effect, such opinions are a carry-over from the "ineloquent" and "barbarous" tags of the earliest days of acculturation. Resistance by the upper classes is not difficult to comprehend: why should they be less than reluctant to give up an important hallmark of their status? The new standard, even if based on their own native dialect, seems too similar to the jargon of the masses, too easily accessible. Moreover, change of vernacular function does not occur in vacua, but is usually accompanied by other facets of acculturation (possibly even the creation of a new middle class) that give the privileged good cause to feel wary.

Suprisingly, some resistance to change of vernacular function comes from the lower classes, those unable to speak or write the H of the original superposition. Nearly every society includes a faction of conservatives who support the prerogatives of the upper classes, and condone their own subservient condition. (They may be motivated by fear of the upper classes, or fear of change, or by the hope that they


themselves may one day be elevated to high rank.) Others recognize that function

change can be a barrier to social elevation• One motive for expanding the

vernacular's functional range is to promote instruction o f the public at large• But

change o f language function is inextricably bound with change of linguistic form,

and the lower classes cannot long employ their vernacular in prestige spheres before

it undergoes elaboration and ceases to be their vernacular• Looking again to the

history o f English:

. . . it was almost unanimously agreed, during the greater part of the sixteenth century

. . . that attempts to render an English style eloquent through the introduction of neologisms and rhetorical devices defeated the purposes for which the vernacular was used - the instruction and edification of the unlearned - by the obscurity and difficulty of understanding thus created (Jones 1953: 68).

Here was resistance coming from both ends of the superposition spectrum.

Ultimately, those concerned with popular instruction realized that elaboration

should not be halted, since the masses still had better prospects for education with a

Latinized English as H than with Latin or Norman French.

CONCLUSION

Once underway, elaboration can be achieved in a relatively short time if pursued

consistently and efficiently• German provides a good example:

• . . it was between 1700 and 1775 that the German language developed into a literary language of infinite richness and subtlety. . , if one looks at the way German was written in 1700 one can easily understand the general discontent with it as a medium of literary expression at that time. What is not so easy to understand is how the German language of 1700 could ever have developed into that of 1770.•. It was a process of steady and often quite conscious development in which widely differing forces took part (Blackall 1978: 2).

The elaborat ion o f German that was accomplished in seventy-five years had been

labored at for the preceding three centuries, yet comparatively little headway had

been made. Resistance from neither H nor L pole was unusually strong. True, a

severe questione della lingua on the vernacular end, with dialectal factions opposing

one another, had hampered progress after the beginnings made by Luther. 4 Can it be

that until the time of Leibniz, Germany was bereft o f citizens interested in and

capable o f undertaking the elaboration? Surely she had many such; one must assume

that their combined force (weakened by continued factionalism) was not enough

to combat the feeling of German ineloquence and the various types o f resistance to

elaboration• Nationalism had not yet attained sufficient strength (contrast the case

of Mod. Hebrew described above).


At some point in the course of elaboration the tide of sentiment turns and expressions of the language's ineloquence become the exception rather than the custom. This change, like the elaboration itself, can come about abruptly or step by step. With English, the shift was quick enough; the "acorns" of 1564 completed their metamorphosis into "grain" by the cenutry's end:

No longer was the vernacular only a practical instrument, the efficacy of which depended upon simple clarity and humble plainess; it was, instead, a free medium of expression, in which brave new words and elaborate figures could puzzle or displease whom they w o u l d . . . The rude, gross, base, and barbarous mother tongue recedes into the past, and its place is taken by an eloquent language, confidence in which mounts higher and higher until it yields nothing even to Latin and Greek (Jones 1953: 1 6 9 - 7 0 ) .

The speed of such reactions may be increased or reduced by trends of nationalistic or

ethnic chauvinism, quality of literary output, strength of resistance, and so forth. But proclamations of the vernacular's eloquence are a good sign that it has "arrived" - has risen, by virtue of function and form, to the H end of the superposition scale. The intense elaboration of the preceding period will slacken to the "maintenance" level that must be continued in perpetuum.

N O T E S

1. This sense of the term "elaboration," current at least since Haugen 1966a, is related, though not identical, to the synonymous process of structural expansion of pidgins in creolization. No connection has been established with Bernstein's (1966) concept of "elaborated code" (which involves social-psychological measurements of individual speakers, universalistic vs. particularistic meanings,

the predictability of syntactic and lexical elements in the utterance, etc.), though some very reliable linguists have erred in offhandedly equating them.

2. The paradigms including only the cases and numbers Greek and Latin had in common:

Sg. PI.

Nom. ~rotrlrfis (-~s) po~ta rrol~'rc~f (-h/) po~tae Gen. 7rolrl ' to0 (-ou) po~tae rrolrl't-@v (-bn) poEt~rum

.t Dat. "nolrrrfi (-~) poetae ~rolq~cafs (-~s) po~tis' - Acc. ~ro I rl'tfi'o (-~n) 1 poetam ~r o t rlz6s (-~s) po~t~s Voc. ~olqz6 ('~) pobta fro t qTctf (-a/,O po~tae

One wonders whether the nominative singular was changed by analogy with other first declension nouns, or was replaced by the vocative; or indeed whether


.

4.

the vocative was substituted precisely because it made for a better fit with the

general pattern. Sg. PI.

Nom. ~ r o l ~ o l s .,(-is) ±" ± - poests ~r o ~ ~c~¢ l s (-e/~) poeses

Gen. ~ro l ficr~o3s" (-e6s) po~sis fro l ~cretox) (-eon) poesium

Dat. 7 ro l~o¢ l ( -e~) p o e X s i rrol~creCrl (-esi) ~'" poeslbus

Ace. 1to !. rio'!, v (-in) ± . . . . poesm ~r o l ~ ~ e l s (-eft) poeses/-ts I . . L _

Voc. ~r o l rio l (-i) poests ~ o l ~o e t s (-eis) poeses Other Greek-derived nouns retaining Greek inflectional forms in Latin include heros (acc. sg. heroa), lampas (acc. sg. lampada), basis (gen. sg. baseos, acc. sg. basin), ttgris (ace. sg. ngrin or tigrida), nais (ace. sg. naida). Many languages boast an historical or legendary "giant" who singlehandedly elevated it to greatness; yet no one person can perform the entire elaboration himself. Others must be involved in and continue his work. Italian was elaborated at an early date, thanks not only to the primum mobile effort of Dante, but equally to those who followed him - Petrarch, Boccaccio, and an unbroken line of successors. Luther's groundwork did not furnish similar results because historically he stood alone.

REFERENCE

Beeston, Alfred F.L.

1970 The Arabic Language Today. London: Hutchinson University Library.

Bernstein, Basil 1966 "Elaborated and Restricted Codes:

36.2.254-61.

Blackall, Eric A.

1978

Blatt, Franz

1957

An Outline," Sociological Inquiry

The Emergence o f German as a Literary Language, 1770-1775. 2nd ed. Ithaca and London: CorneU University Press.

"Latin Influence on European Syntax," Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Copenhague 11.33-69. (With postscript: "Influence latine sur la syntaxe europ6enne," in same volume, pp. 223-35.)

Browning, Robert

1969 Medieval and Modern Greek. London: Hutchinson University Library.

Close, Elizabeth

1974 The Development o f Modern Rumaniatt London, New York: Oxford University Press.


Deme, LAsl6 1972 "Standard Hungarian," tr. by Imre Gombos, in The Hungarian

Language, pp. 255-97, Lor~nd Benko and Samu Imre (eds.). The Hague, Paris: Mouton.

Deshpande, Madhav 1979 Sociolinguistic Attitudes in India: A Historical ReconstructiorL

(Linguistica extranea studia, 5.) Ann Arbor: Karoma.

Fellman, Jack 1973 The Revival of a Classical Tongue: Eliezer Ben Yehuda and the Modem

Hebrew Language. (Contributions to the Sociology of Language, 6.) The Hague, Paris: Mouton.

Ferguson, Charles A. 1959 "Diglossia," Word 15.325-40.

Fishman, Joshua A. 1968 "Sociolinguistics and the Language Problems of Developing Countries,"

in Language Problems of Developing Nations pp. 3-16, Joshua A. Fishman, Charles A. Ferguson, and Jyotirindra Das Gupta (eds.), New York: John Wiley.

Franolic, Branko 1972 La language littkraire croate: Apercu historique. (Colloquia

Parisiensia, 1.) Paris: Nouvelles Editions Latines. Friedlander, Paul

1944 "The Greek behind Latin," Classical Journal 39.270-77. Harries, Lyndon

1968 "Swahili in Modern East Africa," in Fishman et al (eds.) pp. 415-29. Haugen, Einar

1966a "Dialect, Language, Nation," American Anthropologist 68. 922-35. 1966b Language Conflict and Language Planning: The Case of Modem

NorwegiarL Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Jones, Richard F.

1953 The Triumph of the English Language. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Joseph, John 1981 The Standard Language: Theory, Dogma, and Sociocultural Reality,

Ann Arbor: University Microfilms. 1982 "Model-rejection as an Impediment to Creole Standardization,"

Proceedings of the Mid-A merica Linguistics Conference 17. 308-16. 1983a " 'Superposed' Languages and the Standardization Process," presented

at 1983 MLA, New York.


1983b "Interferences of Standardization on the Transition from Middle to Modern French," Journal o f Historical Linguistics and Philology. 1.1.

Kahane, Henry and Ren6e Kahane 1979 "Decline and Survival of Western Prestige Languages," Language 55.

183-98. Kratochvil, Paul

1968 The Chinese Language Today: Features of an Emerging Standard. London: Hutchinson University Library.

Marouzeau, J. 1949 Quelques aspects de la formation du latin litt~raire. (Collection

Linguistique publi6e par la Soci6t6 de Linguistique de Paris, 53.) Paris: Klincksieck.

Palmer, Leonard R. 1954 The Latin Language. London: Faber and Faber.

Passin, Herbert 1968 "Writer and Journalist in the Transitional Society," in Fishman et aL

(eds.), pp. 443.-57. Pulgram, Ernst

1965 "The Accentuation of Greek Loans in Spoken and Written Latin," American Journal o f Philology 86. 138-58.

1975 Latin-RomancePhonology: Prosodics and Metrics. Miinchen: Wilhelm Fink Verlag.

Sauvageot, Aur61ien 1973 L'klaboration de la langue finnoise. (Collection Linguistique publi6e

par la Soci6t6 de Linguistique de Paris, 67.) Paris: Klincksieck. Shaffer, Douglas

1978 "Afrikaans as a Case Study in Vernacular Elevation and Standardiza- tion," Linguistics 213.51-64.

Tauli, Valter 1968 Introduction to a Theory o f Language Planning Acta Universitatis

Upsaliensis (Studia Philologiae Scandinavicae Upsaliensia, 6.) Uppsala: Almqvist and Wiksell.

Valdman, Albert 1968 "Language Standardization in a Diglossia Situation: Haiti," in Fishman

etal. (eds.), pp. 313-26. Whiteley, Wilfred

1969 Swahili: The Rise o f a National Language. London: Methuen. Wurm, Stephen A.

1968 "Papua-New Guinea Nationhood: The Problem of a National Language," in Fishman et al. (eds.), pp. 345-63.

The elaboration of an emerging standard

Documents

Transcript of The elaboration of an emerging standard