scholarly journals Introduction - language planning: where have we been? where might we be going?

2012 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 233-248 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard B. Baldauf Jr
Keyword(s):  
Language Policy ◽  
Language Planning ◽  
Language Policy And Planning ◽  
Policy And Planning

This paper provides a brief overview of the development and state of language policy and planning and examines some of the directions that language planners have been taking to engage with issues of importance to their discipline. The papers in this volume of RBLA are linked to the overview and the directions being taken by scholars in the field.

An Overview of Language Policy and Planning

1981 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 2-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Braj B. Kachru
Keyword(s):  
Language Policy ◽  
Empirical Data ◽  
Language Planning ◽  
Language Policy And Planning ◽  
Language Engineering ◽  
Western Countries ◽  
Pluralistic Societies ◽  
Policy And Planning ◽  
New Phase

The 1970s have ushered in a new phase in approaches to language planning; the preference for a less provocative term such as language policy is indicative of this. There is now a decline in the use of terms such as language planning and language engineering: this is as it should be. For almost tow decades, language planning was presented as a cure-all for culturally and lingustically pluralistic societies in the developing Asian, African, and other non-Western countries. The term was overused, and its applications exaggerated. But this enthusiasm was not shared by all; serious practitioners were conscious of the limitations of the claims and the complexities of the task. This changed attitude has naturally contributed to a reassessment and re-evaluation of these earlier claims. There is now a much better understanding of the linguistic, political, sociological, and attitudinal constraints on language policy formation. The availability of greater cross-linguistic empirical data makes comparative observations more meaningful. As a consequence, the term language planning is now used with caution, with restricted generalization, and with an appreciation of the complexity of each situation. It has rightly been recognized that the task is more complex than linguists can handle within the traditionally conceived boundaries of their discipline, for example, in the work of the venerable Einar Haugen, or more recently, in the work of Charles Ferguson, Joshua Fishman, and others.

Community Languages in Late Modernity

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Li Wei
Keyword(s):  
Language Policy ◽  
Language Planning ◽  
Language Policy And Planning ◽  
Language Policies ◽  
Minority Communities ◽  
Late Modernity ◽  
New Challenges ◽  
Policy And Planning

This chapter aims to reconceptualise the notions of community and community languages in late modernity and to recontextualise the discussion of language policy and planning (LPP) with reference to diaspora. The chapter consists of six sections: (1) a critique of the notion of community in late modernity; (2) an analysis of the renewed interest in the notion of diaspora; (3) an examination of the role of language and multilingualism; (4) a discussion of the possibilities and constraints of language policies and planning with regard to mobile and minority communities; (5) consideration of the importance of grassroots language planning actions, especially those that are carried out beyond institutionalised settings; (6) a discussion of the new challenges facing community languages in late modernity, highlighting the dilemmas of post-multilingualism and suggesting translanguaging as a possible solution.

scholarly journals Language Policy and Planning

Linguistics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suzanne Romaine
Keyword(s):  
Language Policy ◽  
Multinational Corporations ◽  
Language Planning ◽  
National Level ◽  
Developing Nations ◽  
Unintended Consequences ◽  
Language Policy And Planning ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Top Down ◽  
Policy And Planning

Language policy and planning (hereafter LPLP) is a relatively new multi- and interdisciplinary field, but by no means a new phenomenon. The term ‘language planning’ (preceded by the term ‘language engineering’) emerged in the late 1950s and then developed as part of and in tandem with sociolinguistics and the sociology of language in the 1960s and 1970s. LPLP was initially preoccupied with language problems of developing nations emerging from the breakup of European colonial empires after World War II (see Foundational Works). Multilingualism in newly independent states posed problems to which planners believed they had solutions in the form of deliberate interventions into language, typically imposed top-down by governments and government-authorized agencies and institutions. Although regulation of languages—their status, functions, and linguistic form on a national level—still forms a central part of LPLP (see Areal Studies), its scope has increasingly widened. Scholars recognized that similar problems and issues applied not just to developing nations and were not confined to the nation state, or other macro-level polity, but were also relevant at the supranational as well as meso- and micro-level of individuals, families, multinational corporations, and other organizations. The 1980s and 1990s witnessed a more critical turn. LPLP underwent a series of paradigmatic shifts as the association of language planning with westernized notions of modernization, progress, and democratization was regarded as simplistic and overoptimistic. After having developed one or more ‘official’ languages, some emerging nations realized that their plan not only did not solve political and social problems but instead created new ones. The idea that language could be planned and imposed top-down became increasingly unworkable and ethically questionable. Even in totalitarian regimes LPLP has been less than fully effective or successful. Researchers began to scrutinize some of the hidden or covert agendas and unintended consequences of LPLP, particularly the ways in which top-down LPLP serves the interest of elite groups and marginalizes others. With the collapse of communism and the end of the Cold War, a resurgence of interest in LPLP has occurred amidst a new world order characterized by reemergence of small nations and minority and regional languages, along with development of supranational political frameworks, like the European Union, and the increasing influence of corporations and limitations in the autonomy of nation states. In the 21st century LPLP has been increasingly concerned with internationalization and globalization, especially the role of English as a world language, language endangerment, and migration. A perennial challenge is how to make connections between macro- and micro- levels.

scholarly journals [Unplanned] Language Policy and Planning

1994 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 82-89 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard B. Baldauf
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Language Development ◽  
Language Policy ◽  
Language Change ◽  
Applied Linguistics ◽  
Language Planning ◽  
Change Strategies ◽  
Language Policy And Planning ◽  
Language Needs ◽  
Policy And Planning

Naturally enough, the field of language planning, as its name suggests, has concentrated its efforts on the description and practice of planned language development. This is after all its raison d'être, to provide future oriented, problem-solving language-change strategies to meet particular language needs. This orientation means that language planning is one of the key descriptive topics in applied linguistics, bringing together as it does theory from a variety of disciplines and putting that into practice. Grabe and Kaplan (1992) estimate that the applied linguistics aspects of language policy and planning make up one of four categories that accounts for about 45 percent of the items published in this field.

Research Methods in Language Policy and Planning

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Cassells Johnson
Keyword(s):  
Language Policy ◽  
Research Methods ◽  
Language Planning ◽  
Language Policy And Planning ◽  
Disciplinary Boundaries ◽  
Emerging Trends ◽  
History Of ◽  
Policy And Planning ◽  
The Impact

Interdisciplinarity is a hallmark of language policy and planning (LPP) research and reveals how the impact of language plans and policies transcends disciplinary boundaries. Interdisciplinarity also means that clear LPP-specific methods have been slow to develop, if at all. This chapter reviews the methodological history of the field, highlighting major shifts engendered by particular research approaches, and ends with some predictions about where the field might be headed as evidenced by emerging trends. First, epistemological foundations are discussed, which help clarify methodological directions and perspectives. Then, a chronological history of LPP research methods is considered, with particular attention to language planning foundations, the critical and empirical turns, and emerging trends.

Language Policy and Planning in Mexico: Indigenous Language Policy

1994 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 200-219 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. G. Patthey-Chavez
Keyword(s):  
Language Policy ◽  
Language Planning ◽  
Indigenous Language ◽  
Language Policy And Planning ◽  
Policy Issues ◽  
Language Planning And Policy ◽  
European Contact ◽  
Policy And Planning

Mexico's multilingual and multicultural character predates European contact. In its long history, it has generated many communicative challenges as well as interesting language planning efforts to deal with them (Heath 1972). Most recently, official acknowledgments of Mexico's multicultural and multilingual character are raising a series of complex language planning and policy issues even as they are leading to important constitutional and material gains on the part of indigenous Mexicans.

Language policy and language planning in mainland Southeast Asia: Myanmar and Lisu

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
David Bradley
Keyword(s):  
Southeast Asia ◽  
Language Policy ◽  
Minority Groups ◽  
Minority Group ◽  
National Language ◽  
Minority Languages ◽  
Language Policy And Planning ◽  
Educational Strategies ◽  
Policy And Planning ◽  
Mainland Southeast Asia

AbstractMost nations in mainland Southeast Asia and elsewhere have one national language as a focus of national identity and unity, supported by a language policy which promotes and develops this language. Indigenous and immigrant minority groups within each nation may be marginalized; their languages may become endangered. Some of the official national language policies and ethnic policies of mainland Southeast Asian nations aim to support both a national language and indigenous minority languages, but usually the real policy is less positive. It is possible to use sociolinguistic and educational strategies to maintain the linguistic heritage and diversity of a nation, develop bilingual skills among minority groups, and integrate minorities successfully into the nations where they live, but this requires commitment and effort from the minorities themselves and from government and other authorities. The main focus of this paper is two case studies: one of language policy and planning in Myanmar, whose language policy and planning has rarely been discussed before. The other is on the Lisu, a minority group in Myanmar and surrounding countries, who have been relatively successful in maintaining their language.

Language Policy and Planning in Independent Namibia

1994 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 240-253 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wilfrid Haacke
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Language Policy ◽  
Sub Saharan Africa ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Language Policy And Planning ◽  
African Countries ◽  
Policy Document ◽  
Sub Saharan ◽  
Policy And Planning ◽  
Local Languages

An advantage of Namibia's late attainment of independence is that it can benefit from the experience of other African countries that achieved independence some thirty years earlier. Hence Namibia is unique in that it is the only country in sub-Saharan Africa that at the time of attaining independence already provided for constitutional rights for its local languages. The major policy document of the then liberation movement SWAPO, Toward a language policy for an independent Namibia (United Nations Institute for Namibia 1981), which was published in Lusaka by the institute (UNIN) as proceedings of a seminar held in 1980, essentially set the trend for the policies pursued since independence in 1990.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document