Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T00:06:29.464Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Linguistic Purism, Protectionism, and Nationalism in the Germanic Languages Today

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2009

Nicola McLelland
Nicola McLelland*
Affiliation:
University of Nottingham
*
Department of German, Room C32, Trent Building, Department of German, University of Nottingham NG7 2RD, UK, [nicola.mclelland@nottingham.ac.uk]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper re-examines the notions of “linguistic purism” and “linguistic nationalism” with respect to public discourses of language cultivation in recent years in a number of Germanic-speaking countries (Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden, Denmark, and, briefly, Norway). In particular, the paper considers domain protection and attitudes to spelling variability and spelling reform. While in Germany linguistic nationalism and linguistic purism meet in speaker attitudes towards loanwords and spelling reform, in other Germanic-speaking countries linguistic nationalism may also take different forms, and linguistic purism may have other targets and motivations.

Type
ARTICLES
Information
Journal of Germanic Linguistics , Volume 21 , Issue 2: Special Issue in Honour of Martin Durrell , June 2009 , pp. 93 - 112
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Germanic Linguistics 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Árnason, Kristján. 2003. Icelandic. Germanic standardizations. Past to present, ed. by Deumert, Ana & Vandenbussche, Wim, 245–279. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bedst på nettet. http://www.bedstpaamettet.dk/. Accessed October 2008.Google Scholar
Bermel, Neil. 2007. Linguistic authority, language ideology, and metaphor. The Czech orthography wars. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blanke, Detlev, & Scharnhorst, Jürgen (eds.). 2007. Sprachenpolitik und Sprachkultur. Frankfurt: Lang.Google Scholar
Boldmann, Marcus. 2006. Alfabetet består inte längre av 28 bokstäver, utan 29. Svenska Dagbladet (April 20, 2006). http://www.svd.se/. Accessed October 2008.Google Scholar
Deumert, Ana, & Vandenbussche, Wim (eds.). 2003. Germanic standardizations. Past to present. (IMPACT Studies in Language and Society 18.) Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durrell, Martin. 2001. Nationalism and the history of the German national language. Theodor Frings's theories on the origins of standard German. Proper words in proper places—Studies in lexicography and lexicology in honour of Professor William Jervis Jones, ed. by Davies, Máire C., Flood, John L., & Yeandle, David, 195–212. Stuttgart: Heinz.Google Scholar
Durrell, Martin. 2007. Language, nation and identity in the German-speaking countries. Standard, Variation und Sprachwandel in germanischen Sprachen, ed. by Fandrych, Christian, & Salverda, Reinier, 37–58. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Gardt, Andreas. 1999. Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaft in Deutschland vom Mittelalter bis ins 20. Jahrhundert. Berlin: de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gardt, Andreas. 2000. Sprachnationalismus zwischen 1850 und 1945. Nation und Sprache. Die Diskussion ihres Verhältnisses in Geschichte und Gegenwart, ed. by Gardt, Andreas, 247–271. Berlin: de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Genootschap Onze Taal. 2006. Het Witte Boekje. http://www.onzetaal.nl/advies/index.php. Accessed October 2008.Google Scholar
Grünbaum, Catharina. 2004. Schyst, sjyst, schysst eller juste? Dagens Nyheter (June 1, 2004). http://www.dn.se/.Google Scholar
Huber, Christoph. 1984. Kulturpatriotismus und Sprachbewußtsein. Studien zur deutschen Philologie des 17. Jahrhunderts. Frankfurt: Lang.Google Scholar
Jansen, Wim. 2007. Das Niederländische im Kontext der europäischen Sprachenpolitik. Sprachenpolitik und Sprachkultur, ed. by Blanke, Detlev & Scharnhorst, Jürgen, 121–137. Frankfurt: Lang.Google Scholar
Johnson, Sally. 2000. The cultural politics of the 1998 reform of German orthography. German Life and Letters 53.106–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, Sally. 2002. On the origin of linguistic norms: Orthography, ideology, and the constitutional challenge to the 1996 reform of German. Language in Society 31.549–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, Sally. 2005a. Spelling trouble? Language, ideology, and the reform of German orthography. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, Sally. 2005b. Introduction: After 2005? After 2005: Re-visiting German Orthography (Special issue of German Life and Letters 58/4), ed. by Sally Johnson & Oliver Stenschke, 373–380.Google Scholar
Keel, Klaus Ulrik. 2005. Stop Dansk Sprognævn. Politiken. (June 9, 2005). http://politiken.dk/.Google Scholar
Klarspråk. ('Plain language'). http://www.regeringen.se/sb/d/2518. Accessed October, 2008.Google Scholar
Kulturministeriet. 2008. Sprog til tiden. Rapport fra Sprogudvalget. http://www.kum.dk/sw69649.asp. Accessed October 2008.Google Scholar
Langer, Nils. 2001. The Rechtschreibreform: A lesson in linguistic purism. German as a Foreign Language. GFL (on-line journal) URL http://www.gfl-journal.de 3.Google Scholar
Langer, Nils, & Davies, Winifred (eds.). 2005. Linguistic purism in the Germanic languages. Berlin: de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linn, Andrew, & Leigh, Oakes. 2007. Language policies for a global era: The changing face of language politics in Scandinavia. Standard, Variation und Sprachwandel in germanischen Sprachen, ed. by Fandrych, Christian & Salverda, Reinier, 59–90. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Löfvendahl, Bo. 2006. En tyst men stor revolution. Svenska Dagbladet (April 22, 2006). http://www.svd.se/. Accessed October 2008.Google Scholar
Milroy, James, & Lesley, Milroy. 1999[1985]. Authority in language. Investigating language prescription and standardization. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Oakes, Leigh. 2001. Language and national identity: Comparing France and Sweden. (IMPACT: Studies in Language and Society.) Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oakes, Leigh. 2005. From internationalisation to globalisation: Language and the nationalist revival in Sweden. Languge problems and language planning 29.151–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SAOL 13 = Svenska Akademien. 2006. Svenska Akademiens ordlista över svenska språket. http://www.saol.se/.Google Scholar
Sanders, Edwoud. 2005. Sleutelwoorden. NRC Handelsblad (October 31, 2005). http://www.nrc.nl/. Accessed October 2008.Google Scholar
Sand⊘y, Helge. 2006. Nordiske språkkulturar i m⊘te med globaliseringa. Den nye norsken? Nokre peilepunkt under globaliseringa, ed. by Sand⊘y, Helge & Tenfjord, Kari, 73–98. Oslo: Novus.Google Scholar
Schmitt, Christian. 2000. Nation und Sprache: Das Französische. Nation und Sprache. Die Diskussion ihres Verhältnisses in Geschichte und Gegenwart, ed. by Andreas, Gardt, 673–745. Berlin: de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schottelius, Justus Georg. 1663[1967]. Ausführliche Arbeit von der teutschen Haubtsprache. Braunschweig: Zilliger. Reprint, ed. by Hecht, Wolfgang. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Ševčik, Oldřich. 1974–1975. Český jazykový purismus z hlediska funkční teorie spisovného jazyka. Sborník pracíi Filosofické fakulty Brněnské university, Řady jazykovědné 22/23.49–58.Google Scholar
SOS Signalering Onjuist Spatiegebruik. http://www.spatiegebruik.nl/index.php. Accessed October 2008.Google Scholar
SOU = Statens offentliga utredningar. 2002. Mål i mun—Förslag till handlingsprogram för svenska språket. SOU 2002.27 [Speech —draft action programme for the Swedish language].Google Scholar
SOU = Statens offentliga utredningar. 2008. Värna Språken—förslag till språklag = SOU 2008.26. March 2008.Google Scholar
Sparschuh, Jens. 2005. Recht und schlecht—die “Rechtschreibreform:” Ein Augenzeugenbericht. German Life and Letters 58.432–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Språkrådet. 2005. Norsk i hundre! Norsk som nasjonalspråk i globaliseringens tidsalder. Et forlslag til strategi (October 2005).Google Scholar
Stenschke, Oliver. 2005. “Belämmerter Tollpatsch: ” Beispiele als Schlüsselwörter im Diskurs über die Rechtschreibreform. German Life and Letters 58.437–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steunpunt Nederlandstalige Terminologie. http://taalunieversum.org/taal/terminologie/. Accessed October 2008.Google Scholar
Strömqvist, Siv. 2008. Både sjyst och schyst är schysst att skriva. Svenska Dagbladet (March 29, 2008). http://www.svd.se/. Accessed October 2008.Google Scholar
Stukenbrock, Anja. 2005a. Sprachnationalismus. Sprachreflexion als Medium kollektiver Identitätsstiftung in Deutschland (1617–1945). Berlin: de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stukenbrock, Anja. 2005b. Aus Liebe zur Muttersprache? Der VDS und die fremdwortpuristische Diskurstradition. Aptum 3.220–247.Google Scholar
Taalunie, Nederlandse. 2005. Het Groene Boekje. http://www.taaluniversum.org/spellingGoogle Scholar
Taalunie, Nederlandse. 2007. Nederlands zonder drempels: Meerjarenbeleidsplan 2008–2012: http://taalunieversum.org/taalunie/publicaties/. Accessed October 2008.Google Scholar
Taalunie, Nederlandse. 2008. De Taalunie in 2006 en 2007: een tussenbalans. http://taalunieversum.org/taalunie/publicaties/. Accessed October 2008.Google Scholar
Thomas, George. 1991. Linguistic purism. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Thorsen, Lotte. 2005. Forslag: Skriv som vi taler. Politik (May 18, 2005). http://politiken.dk/. Accessed October 2008.Google Scholar
Tralau, Johan. 2004. Striden om ß delar Tyskland. Svenska Dagbladet (August 17, 2004). http://www.svd.se/. Accessed October 2008.Google Scholar
Verein Deutsche Sprache. http://www.vds-ev.de/. (“Argumente” at http://vds-ev.de/denglisch/argumente/index.php; “Sprachpolitische Leitlinien” at http://www.vds-ev.de/verein/leitlinien.php. Accessed October 2008.Google Scholar
WIR gegen die Rechtschreibreform. http://www.raytec.de/rechtschreibreform/index1.htm. Accessed October 2008.Google Scholar