Areal language policies

Areal language policies


Kasimov R.Kh.,

Tyumen Industrial University, Tyumen, Russia, rhkasimov@mail.ru


elibrary_id: 680127 | ORCID: 0000-0001-8632-3860 | RESEARCHER_ID: ABE-8347-2021

Akoulich M.M.,

Tyumen Industrial University, Tyumen, Russia, m.m.akulich@utmn.ru


elibrary_id: 249790 |


DOI: 10.17976/jpps/2022.01.08
Rubric: Russia Today

For citation:

Kasimov R.Kh., Akoulich M.M. Areal language policies. – Polis. Political Studies. 2022. No. 1. P. 86-101. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2022.01.08



Abstract

Regardless of current globalization and localization processes, national languages are still regarded in political and linguistic discourses as occupying a place of choice in the language hierarchy. Globalization as a process is generating new levels of language scaling, opening a new horizon for language policies. It is considered that “global languages” correspond to the postnational language level. A global language is one used for global communications. English is currently the only global language. Other languages with a considerable influence are called areal languages. The latter are languages of certain regional powers and civilization spaces. Areal languages are defined on the basis of D. Crystal, A. de Swaan and B. Kachru’s theoretical models. Findings are reached by applying comparative methods to supranational languages, which became the material of the study. Actual language areal policy is studied through the example of French language policy. Areal languages include a special form of language policy distinct from the national one. Areal language policies functionally (but not substantially) reproduce the strategy of ancient sacred languages. Their task is to include or “convert” new speakers beyond the pivot states. Areal languages mostly challenge the world language and to a lesser degree they compete with each other. Areal language policies are carried out on status, corpus and language acquisition levels of planning. Status planning is fundamental in an areal language policy and its goal is prestige and attractiveness leading to an extension of a language and its culture. Corpus planning means preservation of the language space and it is realized in the forms of mono- and pluricentrism. Acquisition planning implies creating international communities, educational networks and significant content in mass media. 

Keywords
language policies, language hierarchy, globalization, national language, postnational language, areal language, global language, regional power, civilization.


References

Aronova, E. (2017). Russian and the making of world languages during the Cold War. Isis, 108(3), 643-650. https://doi.org/10.1086/694163

Bhatia, Tej K. (2008). Major regional languages. In B.B. Kachru, Y. Kachru, S.N. Sridhar. (Ed.) Language in South Asia (pp. 121-132). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Crystal, D. (2009). English as a global language. Cambridge University Press. 212 p.

Dabѐne, O. (2009). The politics of regional integration in Latin America theoretical and comparative explorations. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Darquennes, J., & Soler, J. (2019). ‘New speakers’ and language policy research: thematic and theoretical contributions to the field. Language Policy, 18, 475-491.

De Swaan, A. (2001). Words of the world: the global language system. Malden: Blackwell publ.

Dinçer, O.B., & Kutlay, M. (2012). Turkey’s Power Capacity in the Middle East: Limits of the Possible. In Turkey’s Power Capacity in the Middle East. Limits of the Possible (pp. 7-12)International Strategic Research Organization (USAK). https://www.pomed.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Turkeys-Power-Capacity-in-the-Middle-East.pdf

Graddol, D. (2000). The future of English? The British Council.

Konings, P., & Nyamnjoh, F.B. (2003). Negotiating an anglophone identity: a study of the politics of recognition and representation in CameroonLeiden: Brill.

Phillipson, R. (2008). L Lingua franca or lingua frankensteinia? English in European integration and globalization. World Englishes, 27(2), 250-267. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971X.2008.00555.x

Sharma, B.K. (2018). Chinese as a global language: Negotiating ideologies and identities. Global Chinese, 4(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1515/glochi-2018-0001

Spolsky, B., & Shohamy, E. (2001). The penetration of english as language of science and technology into the israeli linguistic repertoire: a preliminary inquiry. In U. Ammon (Ed.) The dominance of English as a language of science: effects on other languages and language communities (pp. 167-176). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Wright, S. (2004). Language policy and language planning: from nationalism to globalisationLondon: Palgrave Macmillan. 

 

Aronova, E. (2017). Russian and the making of world languages during the Cold War. Isis, 108(3), 643-650. https://doi.org/10.1086/694163

Bhatia, Tej K. (2008). Major regional languages. In B.B. Kachru, Y. Kachru, S.N. Sridhar. (Ed.) Language in South Asia (pp. 121-132). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Crystal, D. (2009). English as a global language. Cambridge University Press. 212 p.

Dabѐne, O. (2009). The politics of regional integration in Latin America theoretical and comparative explorations. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Darquennes, J., & Soler, J. (2019). ‘New speakers’ and language policy research: thematic and theoretical contributions to the field. Language Policy, 18, 475-491.

De Swaan, A. (2001). Words of the world: the global language system. Malden: Blackwell publ.

Dinçer, O.B., & Kutlay, M. (2012). Turkey’s Power Capacity in the Middle East: Limits of the Possible. In Turkey’s Power Capacity in the Middle East. Limits of the Possible (pp. 7-12). International Strategic Research Organization (USAK). https://www.pomed.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Turkeys-Power-Capacity-in-the-Middle-East.pdf

Graddol, D. (2000). The future of English? The British Council.

Konings, P., & Nyamnjoh, F.B. (2003). Negotiating an anglophone identity: a study of the politics of recognition and representation in Cameroon. Leiden: Brill.

Phillipson, R. (2008). L Lingua franca or lingua frankensteinia? English in European integration and globalization. World Englishes, 27(2), 250-267. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971X.2008.00555.x

Sharma, B.K. (2018). Chinese as a global language: Negotiating ideologies and identities. Global Chinese, 4(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1515/glochi-2018-0001

Spolsky, B., & Shohamy, E. (2001). The penetration of english as language of science and technology into the israeli linguistic repertoire: a preliminary inquiry. In U. Ammon (Ed.) The dominance of English as a language of science: effects on other languages and language communities (pp. 167-176). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Wright, S. (2004). Language policy and language planning: from nationalism to globalisation. London: Palgrave Macmillan.  

Content No. 1, 2022

See also:


Tishkov V.A.,
Language Situation and Language Policy in Russia (Revising Categories and Practices). – Polis. Political Studies. 2019. No3

Ilyin M.V.,
Language of revolution – language of the street. – Polis. Political Studies. 2010. No6

Zakharova O.V.,
Human rights discourse and the russian-european relations. – Polis. Political Studies. 2013. No4

Weber M.,
Russia's Transition to Pseudoconstitutionalism. – Polis. Political Studies. 2006. No2

Musikhin G.I.,
Ideology and culture. – Polis. Political Studies. 2012. No1

 

   

Introducing an article



Polis. Political Studies
2 2002


Nechayev D.N.
FRG: from a “Parties State” to a “Public Associations State”?

 The article text (Электронная версия)
 

Archive

   2024      2023      2022      2021   
   2020      2019      2018      2017      2016   
   2015      2014      2013      2012      2011   
   2010      2009      2008      2007      2006   
   2005      2004      2003      2002      2001   
   2000      1999      1998      1997      1996   
   1995      1994      1993      1992      1991