Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
http://ebooks.cambridge.org/
Sociolinguistics
The Study of Speakers' Choices
Florian Coulmas
Book DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815522
Online ISBN: 9780511815522
Hardback ISBN: 9780521836067
Paperback ISBN: 9780521543934
Chapter
8 - Diglossia and bilingualism: functional restrictions on language ch
oice pp. 126-145
Chapter DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815522.008
Cambridge University Press
Diglossia
Consider the description of code choices in Bengali presented in
table 8.1. Chatterjee (1986: 298) adds this comment to his description:
Ridiculous or sometimes comical will be the effect if the norms
of situational selection between the two are violated. It is not difficult
to recognize in ridiculous and sometimes comical a reaction to what
in the previous chapter was called a marked choice. Norms do not
determine a speakers choice, but they give it a markedness measure
relative to a particular speech event. The allocation of the two
varieties of Bengali to different functional domains is very strict, with
126
Downloaded from Cambridge Books Online by IP 193.198.18.111 on Thu Jan 03 16:17:23 WET 2013.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815522.008
Cambridge Books Online Cambridge University Press, 2013
HIGH
LOW
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Downloaded from Cambridge Books Online by IP 193.198.18.111 on Thu Jan 03 16:17:23 WET 2013.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815522.008
Cambridge Books Online Cambridge University Press, 2013
127
128
Sociolinguistics
Function
Context of use
Mode
Norm/standard
Lexicon
Acquisition
Prestige
intimacy, solidarity
informal
predominantly spoken
based on modern speech
purist; technical
home transmission
low
formality, power
formal
predominantly written
based on classical texts; archaic
mixed
schooling
high
Downloaded from Cambridge Books Online by IP 193.198.18.111 on Thu Jan 03 16:17:23 WET 2013.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815522.008
Cambridge Books Online Cambridge University Press, 2013
diglossia can be considered an independent variable in social development. The Swiss German diglossia, identified by Ferguson (1959) as one
of the clear cases, is a prominent counterexample. In the event, H is
Standard High German, which the Swiss call Schriftdeutsch written
German, and L is Swiss German. Diglossia has been upheld in
German-speaking Switzerland without social asymmetry in the range
of available choices by teaching H to everybody (Haas 2002). The Swiss
German diglossia shows little signs of weakening because it is supported
by the speech community, many of whose members try deliberately to
cultivate diglossia by making the distinction between standard and
dialect as clear as possible. It gets official backing, too, for the political
and educational authorities of Switzerland are interested in the preservation of the diglossic situation (Keller 1982: 77).
Individual speakers context-specific code choices solidify to form
a collective preference for maintaining the distinction between H
and L rather than bringing about convergence which, given that the
same standard language, German, is part of the common standardand-dialects configuration across the border, would be a realistic
option; it is, however, dispreferred. In the event, manifested preferences
are reflected in the official language policy which is designed to protect
not one variety or the other but their functional complementarity. The
idea that different functions and different contexts require different
varieties is characteristic of all diglossic situations. In some it is given
official endorsement. For example, it was reported about Greek diglossia, another of Fergusons original cases, that in 1941, the senate of
Athens University called on the Ministry of Education to discharge a
professor for publishing two articles in L rather than H. This was
considered provocative and the minister, accordingly, complied by
suspending the professor for two months from his post because he
used a linguistic idiom inappropriate for university teaching which
was harmful to the Greek language and consequently to the Greek
nation (Frangoudaki 2002: 106).
This incident is reminiscent of the punitive consequences of a marked
choice of address terms discussed in chapter 6 above (see pp.91f.). In
both cases it is clear that collective concerns are affected by individual
choices. Regulatory mechanisms to sustain norms do not necessarily
involve legal action. The point to note is that choices concerning H and
L in a diglossia situation like those of politeness expressions are always
subject to social sanctions.
Diglossia is part of a linguistic tradition which in the cases that have
been studied has proved to be very stable. Greek diglossia goes back to
the Atticist movement around the first century BCE which preached
the doctrine that language must not be allowed to change (Browning
1969: 49f.). The Byzantine Middle Ages saw the development of a
Downloaded from Cambridge Books Online by IP 193.198.18.111 on Thu Jan 03 16:17:23 WET 2013.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815522.008
Cambridge Books Online Cambridge University Press, 2013
129
130
Sociolinguistics
Demotic
Lexical differences
water
fish
bread
cup
house
hearth
door
eye
nose
flower
bird
dhor
opsarion
psom on
k pelon
kos
est a
th ra
ofthalmos
r s
anthos
ptinon
nero
psari
psom
fidzani
ik a
dzaki
porta
mati
m ti
louloudi
poul
Lexical innovation
calques
foreign loanwords
Syntactic differences
theli
he wants
K
af hth
arriveaor. Subjunct.
avrion
tomorrow
j
j
j
tha
fut. particle
D
ftasi
he comes
D
no final /-n/
fixed accent in adjectives
Morphological differences
Different declensions, conjugations and derivations
Downloaded from Cambridge Books Online by IP 193.198.18.111 on Thu Jan 03 16:17:23 WET 2013.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815522.008
Cambridge Books Online Cambridge University Press, 2013
avrio
tomorrow
Downloaded from Cambridge Books Online by IP 193.198.18.111 on Thu Jan 03 16:17:23 WET 2013.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815522.008
Cambridge Books Online Cambridge University Press, 2013
131
132
Sociolinguistics
generally more highly standardized than L.4 The main reason is that the
basis for standardization is a body of literature; sacred texts, such as the
Koran which was instrumental in preserving the standard of Classical
Arabic; or literary works, such as the rich body of Tamil epic, bardic
and didactic texts which serves as a reference point of Tamil H.
Standardization and writing go hand-in-hand. H is a literate variety,
L is oral. The monopoly of H on writing can be undermined, of course,
or altogether abolished, as happened when the Romance vernaculars in
medieval Europe started to be used in writing. As a result, the vernaculars gained the status of independent languages with standards of their
own. The diglossia of Latin-H versus Romance vernaculars L thus
broke down (Wright 1991; Adams 2003).5 The newly established standards were once again based on writing, often on a vernacular translation of the Bible. A standard does not come about naturally. In all
speech communities of any size it is based on writing which lends it a
discernible form and hence stability.6 Wurm (1994: 257) sees in a
standard the artificial unification of several dialects. The creation
and preservation of a linguistic standard involve deliberate acts of
choice which must be justified. Providing such justification is the task
of linguistic ideology.
Linguistic ideology nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn
Downloaded from Cambridge Books Online by IP 193.198.18.111 on Thu Jan 03 16:17:23 WET 2013.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815522.008
Cambridge Books Online Cambridge University Press, 2013
standard variety set in writing is clear testimony to deliberate canalization of the natural development of language.
The genetic question nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn
Downloaded from Cambridge Books Online by IP 193.198.18.111 on Thu Jan 03 16:17:23 WET 2013.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815522.008
Cambridge Books Online Cambridge University Press, 2013
133
134
Sociolinguistics
exogenetic
bicultural
Classical Arabic H
Vernacular Arabic L
French H
Haitian Creole L
Hebrew H
Yiddish L
Spanish H
Guarani L
Downloaded from Cambridge Books Online by IP 193.198.18.111 on Thu Jan 03 16:17:23 WET 2013.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815522.008
Cambridge Books Online Cambridge University Press, 2013
Bilingualism
The matrix in table 8.4 is designed for just two coexisting codes.
In many cases, however, H and L are part of a more complex arrangement of varieties and languages. Consider, as an example, Arabic
diglossia as it manifests itself in Morocco. The seemingly simple dichotomy of Literary Arabic, H, and Moroccan Arabic, L, is embedded in a
situation that involves another variety of Arabic, called Middle
Moroccan Arabic, as well as two other languages, Berber, called
Tamazight in Morocco, and French. All of these codes serve different
functions in Moroccan society dependent on demographic strength,
historical and socioeconomic dynamics, and power. Figure 8.1 captures
some of the relationships between them. Since the percentage numbers
given in the boxes add up to 200, it follows that there is a high degree of
bilingualism in Morocco. With the exception of some monolingual
rural Berbers, virtually the entire population has the ability to choose
between several varieties. Most choices are based on conventional
domain allocations, but by no means all; for in Morocco, as in most
other parts of the world, speakers negotiate the functional roles of the
various codes of their linguistic repertoire.
The codes in figure 8.1, the functional roles they fulfil, and the
conditions under which they are used reflect significant aspects of
Moroccan society, both on the level of macro-structure, with regard
to social stratification, and on that of micro-structure, with regard to
possible forms of social interaction. Generalizing from this example
and rephrasing Fishman (1965), the following question encapsulates
what a theory of societal bilingualism should explain: Who chooses to
speak what language to whom and when?
Downloaded from Cambridge Books Online by IP 193.198.18.111 on Thu Jan 03 16:17:23 WET 2013.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815522.008
Cambridge Books Online Cambridge University Press, 2013
135
136
Sociolinguistics
Figure 8.1 Relationships between the languages and dialects of Morocco (adapted from Youssi
1995: 31). Tamazight is the term used by native speakers of Berber for their language.
Downloaded from Cambridge Books Online by IP 193.198.18.111 on Thu Jan 03 16:17:23 WET 2013.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815522.008
Cambridge Books Online Cambridge University Press, 2013
interaction is a micro-sociolinguistic process. Both levels are interrelated, since individual choices are subject to social norms and, to
some degree, institutionalized restrictions. For the analysis of communication practices in multilingual societies based on the observation of
actual language choices, two questions must be asked:
What are the intentions of an individual when making a
particular choice?
What are the external factors influencing the specific decision?
Downloaded from Cambridge Books Online by IP 193.198.18.111 on Thu Jan 03 16:17:23 WET 2013.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815522.008
Cambridge Books Online Cambridge University Press, 2013
137
138
Sociolinguistics
(A)
(B)
Majority
Janta
(C)
(D)
Elite
Minority
+
Quantum
The chart in figure 8.2 is an abstraction suggesting a unidirectional process with a definite outcome. It has a certain predictive
Downloaded from Cambridge Books Online by IP 193.198.18.111 on Thu Jan 03 16:17:23 WET 2013.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815522.008
Cambridge Books Online Cambridge University Press, 2013
Non-rural
Formality
Formal:
Spanish
Non-formal
Intimacy
Non-intimate:
Spanish
Intimate
Seriousness of discourse
Non-serious:
Guarani
Serious
First language learned
Predicted language proficiency
Speakers linguistic preference
Downloaded from Cambridge Books Online by IP 193.198.18.111 on Thu Jan 03 16:17:23 WET 2013.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815522.008
Cambridge Books Online Cambridge University Press, 2013
139
140
Sociolinguistics
Networks nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn
Downloaded from Cambridge Books Online by IP 193.198.18.111 on Thu Jan 03 16:17:23 WET 2013.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815522.008
Cambridge Books Online Cambridge University Press, 2013
Downloaded from Cambridge Books Online by IP 193.198.18.111 on Thu Jan 03 16:17:23 WET 2013.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815522.008
Cambridge Books Online Cambridge University Press, 2013
141
142
Sociolinguistics
repertoire is not necessarily stable over a lifespan, that is, ones first
language does not always remain ones dominant language. Notice that
this observation concurs with the lifetime changes of monolingual speakers discussed in chapter 5 (pp.75f.). Measuring the bilingual competence
of individuals is a research field in its own right at the crossroads of
psycholinguistics, neurolinguistics and language teaching.
Measuring bilingualism and multilingualism at the group level is
more complex, because it can refer to very diverse entities, as discussed
above. A bilingual community is not necessarily composed of bilingual
individuals only; rather, it is the percentage of bilingual speakers with
variable degrees of competence in the languages involved that distinguishes multilingual communities from one another. In situations of
stable grassroot bilingualism as are common in India, virtually all
members are competent in two languages, the ideal case represented
graphically in figure 8.3(a). But like individuals, communities are rarely
fully balanced. Intersections of two groups of variable size made up of
bilinguals as depicted in 8.3(b) are more common. Arrangements of this
sort are more stable in some societies than in others. This issue will be
discussed in the next chapter. The imbalanced nature of bilingualism
also manifests itself in the fact that L1/L2 bilinguals are usually distributed very unevenly in the groups of L1 and L2 primary speakers,
the socially weaker group having a higher incidence of bilingualism.
(a)
(b)
(c)
L1 Speakers
L2 Speakers
Bilinguals
Downloaded from Cambridge Books Online by IP 193.198.18.111 on Thu Jan 03 16:17:23 WET 2013.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815522.008
Cambridge Books Online Cambridge University Press, 2013
This is very noticeable in immigrant groups under assimilation pressure. Because of the social inequality commonly associated with it,
bilingualism often becomes a political issue, a topic that will be dealt
with together with other language policy concerns in chapter 11.
Cooperation nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn
Downloaded from Cambridge Books Online by IP 193.198.18.111 on Thu Jan 03 16:17:23 WET 2013.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815522.008
Cambridge Books Online Cambridge University Press, 2013
143
144
Sociolinguistics
as such a result of innumerable acts of choice by individuals mutually accommodating each other in the interest of achieving comity
and understanding. Rather than resigning themselves to the silence
imposed upon them by the uncoordinated coexistence of two nonintercommunicable languages, their speakers, when they live in one
place, build a bridge enabling them to come together. Out of a situation
of abrupt contact of two language groups societal bilingualism without bilingual individuals, as it were a new language is thus born.
Notes
1. Both the recognition of the phenomenon and the term predated Ferguson (1959) by more
than half a century. Describing spoken and written varieties of Greek, Krumbacher
(1902) used the term Diglossie, as did Marcais (1930) in his work about Arabic.
However, it was Ferguson who saw the commonality of function-specific variety
differentiation and made diglossia a crucial concept of sociolinguistics.
2. The issue of diglossia and illiteracy is discussed by Britto (1986: 290f.) who argues
that diglossia does not deter the increase of literacy.
3. Holton (2002) sees in Standard Modern Greek a result of intralingual convergence,
but also notes that this process has not come to a conclusion.
4. Bi-modal standardization of H and L without mixing has occurred, for example, in
Bengali (Chatterjee 1986: 300) and Greek (Frangoudaki 2002: 102), but it is more
typical that a single standard evolves.
5. Another case of diglossia was resolved as the result of a new written standard being
introduced in Afrikaans which shed its L status vis-a`-vis Dutch H early in the
twentieth century. Cf. du Plessis (1990).
6. In many environments standardization makes languages as distinct from dialects
manageable and countable. See, for examples from Ghana and Indonesia, respectively Amonoo (1994) and Moelino (1994).
7. Although national census data have been exploited for multilingualism research,
detailed information about multilingualism requires more focused instruments.
Typically, multilingualism is not evenly distributed throughout a country.
Significant differences in the degree of multilingualism between urban and rural
areas are typical. One of the most extensive projects to date is the Multilingual Cities
Project undertaken at Tilburg University (http://babylon.kub.nl).
Downloaded from Cambridge Books Online by IP 193.198.18.111 on Thu Jan 03 16:17:23 WET 2013.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815522.008
Cambridge Books Online Cambridge University Press, 2013
Further reading
On diglossia nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn
Britto, Francis. 1986. Diglossia: A Study of the Theory with Application to Tamil.
Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Hudson, Alan. 2002. Outline of a theory of diglossia. International Journal of the
Sociology of Language 157: 148.
Krishnamurti, Bh. (ed.) 1986. South Asian Languages: Structure, Convergence and
Diglossia. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
Schiffman, Harold. 1996. Linguistic Culture and Language Policy. London and New
York: Routledge.
On bilingualism nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn
Clyne, Michael. 1991. Community Languages: The Australian Experience. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Edwards, John R. 1994. Multilingualism. London: Routledge.
Extra, Guus and Durk Gorter (eds.) 2001. The Other Languages of Europe. Clevedon:
Multilingual Matters.
Li, Wei, Jean-Marc Dewaele and Alex Housen (eds.) 2002. Opportunities and Challenges
of Bilingualism. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Nelde, Peter H., Miquel Strubell and Glyn Williams. 1996. The Production and
Reproduction of the Minority Language Groups in the European Union.
Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
Downloaded from Cambridge Books Online by IP 193.198.18.111 on Thu Jan 03 16:17:23 WET 2013.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815522.008
Cambridge Books Online Cambridge University Press, 2013
145