2022Sociolinguistica - International Yearbook of European Sociolinguistics / Internationales Jahrbuch für europäische SoziolinguistikRequires access

Language policy research directions embedded in the sociolinguistic enterprise

Ari Páll Kristinsson

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

Abstract While language policy and planning studies are a separate research field in sociolinguistics, they must develop in line with empirical and theoretical findings presented in the other branches of sociolinguistics. The distinctiveness of language policy and planning research lies in its interest in language management, while language practices and language attitudes, beliefs, and ideologies are also objects of study in sociolinguistics in general, as well as in other disciplines in the humanities and social sciences. Language policy and planning studies benefit from work carried out in other research traditions, and this relationship can be mutually beneficial if there is mutual will to exchange ideas, models and approaches. The position argued for in the present contribution is that it can be wise for language policy and planning researchers to take Spolsky’s work on language policy still further, particularly his fundamental assumption that language policy has three interrelated yet independent components, namely language practices, language beliefs, and language management. In doing so, language policy and planning studies can be sure to be at once firmly rooted in a wider research context, while their distinctiveness as a separate sub-field of sociolinguistics is underscored.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Abstract While language policy and planning studies are a separate research field in sociolinguistics, they must develop in line with empirical and theoretical findings presented in the other branches of sociolinguistics. The distinctiveness of language policy and planning research lies in its interest in language management, while language practices and language attitudes, beliefs, and ideologies are also objects of study in sociolinguistics in general, as well as in other disciplines in the humanities and social sciences. Language policy and planning studies benefit from work carried out in other research traditions, and this relationship can be mutually beneficial if there is mutual will to exchange ideas, models and approaches. The position argued for in the present contribution is that it can be wise for language policy and planning researchers to take Spolsky’s work on language policy still further, particularly his fundamental assumption that language policy has three interrelated yet independent components, namely language practices, language beliefs, and language management. In doing so, language policy and planning studies can be sure to be at once firmly rooted in a wider research context, while their distinctiveness as a separate sub-field of sociolinguistics is underscored.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Abstract While language policy and planning studies are a separate research field in sociolinguistics, they must develop in line with empirical and theoretical findings presented in the other branches of sociolinguistics. The distinctiveness of language policy and planning research lies in its interest in language management, while language practices and language attitudes, beliefs, and ideologies are also objects of study in sociolinguistics in general, as well as in other disciplines in the humanities and social sciences. Language policy and planning studies benefit from work carried out in other research traditions, and this relationship can be mutually beneficial if there is mutual will to exchange ideas, models and approaches. The position argued for in the present contribution is that it can be wise for language policy and planning researchers to take Spolsky’s work on language policy still further, particularly his fundamental assumption that language policy has three interrelated yet independent components, namely language practices, language beliefs, and language management. In doing so, language policy and planning studies can be sure to be at once firmly rooted in a wider research context, while their distinctiveness as a separate sub-field of sociolinguistics is underscored.

Key concepts: Sociolinguistics, Language policy, Sociology of language, Optimal distinctiveness theory, Language planning, Sociocultural linguistics, Linguistics, Language industry

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Language policy research directions embedded in the sociolinguistic enterprise — Research Paper | ScholarLens