Diglossia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In linguistics, diglossia is a situation where, in a given society, there are two (often) closely-related languages, one of high prestige, which is generally used by the government and in formal texts, and one of low prestige, which is usually the spoken vernacular tongue. The high-prestige language tends to be the more formalised, and its forms and vocabulary often 'filter down' into the vernacular, though often in a changed form.

The French term diglossie was first coined (as a translation of Greek διγλωσσία, 'bilingualism') by the Greek linguist and demoticist Ioannis Psycharis. The Arabist William Marçais used the term in 1930 to describe the linguistic situation in Arabic-speaking countries. In Charles A. Ferguson's article "Diglossia" in the journal Word (1959), diglossia was described as a kind of bilingualism in a given society in which one of the languages is (H), i.e. has high prestige, and another of the languages is (L), i.e. has low prestige. In Ferguson's definition, (H) and (L) are always closely related. Fishman also talks about diglossia with unrelated languages: "extended diglossia" (Fishman 1967), for example Sanskrit as (H) and Kannada as (L) or Alsatian (Elsässisch) in Alsace as (L) and French as (H). Kloss calls the (H) variant exoglossia and the (L) variant endoglossia.

In some cases, the nature of the connection between (H) and (L) is disputed; for example, Jamaican Creole as (L) and Standard English as (H) in Jamaica.

(H) is usually the written language whereas (L) is the spoken language. In formal situations, (H) is used; in informal situations, (L) is used. One of the earliest examples is Latin, being formal Latin the (H) language, and vulgar Latin, the (L) language. The latter is the tongue Romance languages come from.

The (L) variants are not just simplifications of the (H) variants. Many (L) languages have certain features that are more complex than the corresponding (H) languages: some Swiss German dialects have /e/, /ɛ/ and /æ/ while Standard German only has /ɛ/. Jamaican Creole has fewer vowel phonemes than standard Englishes, but it has additional palatal /kʲ/ and /ɡʲ/ phonemes.

Especially in endoglossia the (L) form may also be called "basilect", the (H) form "acrolect", and an intermediate form "mesolect". Note however that there is no "mesolect" in German-speaking Switzerland and in Luxembourg. Whether Paraguay has a form of diglossia is controversial. Guaraní and Spanish are both official languages of Paraguay. Some scholars argue that there are Paraguayans who actually don't speak Guaraní. The Chinese language also offers an interesting case.

Ferguson's classic examples include Standard German/Swiss German, Standard Arabic/vernacular Arabic, Standard French/Kréyòl in Haiti, Katharevousa/Dhimotiki in Greece, and Bokmål/Nynorsk in Norway. . However, Kréyòl is now recognised as a standard language in Haiti. Swiss German dialects are hardly languages with low prestige in Switzerland; and colloquial Arabic has more prestige in some respects than standard Arabic nowadays (see Chambers, Sociolinguistic Theory). And after the end of the military regime in 1974, Dhimotiki was made into Greece's only standard language (1976). Nowadays, Katharevousa is no longer used. Harold Schiffman writes about Swiss German: "it seems to be the case that Swiss German was once consensually agreed to be in a diglossic hierarchy with Standard German, but that this consensus is now breaking." There is also a lot of code-switching especially in the Arabic world; according to Andrew Freeman this is "different from Ferguson's description of diglossia which states that the two forms are in complementary distribution." To a certain extent, there is code switching and overlap in all diglossic societies, even German-speaking Switzerland. Furthermore, in Ferguson's definition, diglossia is not bilingualism; however this depends on the scholar's definition of language. For example, different kinds of Arabic are not mutually intelligible; even though many are, but this may also be due to exposure to different varieties rather than inherent linguistic properties.

Examples where the High/Low dichotomy is justified in terms of social prestige include Italian dialects as (L) and Standard Italian as (H) in Italy and German dialects and standard German in Germany. In Italy and Germany, those speakers who still speak dialects typically use dialect in informal situations, especially in the family. In German-speaking Switzerland, on the other hand, Swiss German dialects are to a certain extent even used in schools and to a larger extent in churches. Ramseier calls German-speaking Switzerland's diglossia a "medial diglossia", whereas Felicity Rash prefers "functional diglossia". Paradoxically, Swiss German offers both the best example for diglossia (all speakers are native speakers of Swiss German and thus diglossic) and the worst, because there is no clear-cut hierarchy.

[edit] Catalan

This article has been nominated to be checked for its neutrality. Discussion of this nomination can be found on the talk page.

With the possible exception of Andorra, where there is strong pressure from Castilian ("Español", referred to as Castellano by The Constitution of 1978) and French, Catalan is in a situation of diglossia in most of the Catalan-speaking territories. This is not only because other languages (Castilian, French, Italian) are used, to a large extent, by the corresponding official organizations. Immigration has also, in the case of speakers of the Castilian language, been so strong in the 20th century that one could speak of external diglossia, produced by the relative increase of Castilian speakers. Historically, successive Spanish and French governments did not provide education in Catalan during many years, but only in their respective official languages. In Alghero, the Catalan language is in severe danger of disappearing from use, as has been recognized by UNESCO. It could be said that historically the Catalan language was in this danger everywhere, due to the pressure of the official languages of the different states. However currently, it is considered by far the most sucessfully re-introduced minority language within Europe.

[edit] Chinese

[edit] Classical Chinese

For over two thousand years, Chinese maintained Classical Chinese as an acrolect and standard written language while its colloquial spoken language varieties evolved further and further away to become their own basilects. The gulf became so wide between the formal and colloquial languages that it was blamed for hindering education and literacy, and some even went so far as to blame it in part for the political turmoil that occurred in China during the 19th and early 20th centuries. This eventually culminated into the adoption of Vernacular Chinese, which was based on modern spoken Mandarin, for all formal communication.

[edit] Modern Chinese

After the adoption of Vernacular Chinese as the standard written language in the early 20th century, diglossia was no longer a big issue among the majority Mandarin Chinese speakers. However, Vernacular Chinese and its associated spoken language, Standard Mandarin, continue to be acrolects where Mandarin is not the primary spoken variety of Chinese.

For instance in Hong Kong, Standard Cantonese is the primary language of spoken communication, although all formal written communication is done in Vernacular Chinese. Unique among the other Chinese dialects, Cantonese has its own written form, but it is only used in informal contexts and is often inconsistent due to the absence of standardization.

Chinese is an interesting case due to its quasi-phonetic writing system. Even though a Cantonese speaker will read and write in the Mandarin-based written language, when the characters are read aloud, they will generally be read using the Cantonese pronunciation of the characters. The result is Mandarin grammar and vocabulary spoken as if it were Cantonese, even though if the same sentence were to be spoken using regular colloquial Cantonese, it might be quite different. Here is an example (note the switching of the direct and indirect objects and the use of different vocabulary for certain words in the standard and colloquial renditions):

Note: Mandarin romanized using Hanyu Pinyin. Cantonese romanized using Yale.

Cantonese pronunciation of standard written Chinese is generally understandable to Cantonese speakers. It is most often used in newscasts, albeit with certain substitutions of colloquial Cantonese vocabulary so as to make it not sound as stilted. This form of spoken Cantonese is a higher register and can be considered the acrolect (or perhaps the mesolect if spoken Mandarin is considered the acrolect) to the colloquial Cantonese basilect.

This situation was also the case when Classical Chinese was the standard written language, but the comprehensibility of classical text spoken in the native dialects was much lower, if not nonexistent. This is was one of the reasons why Classical Chinese fell into disuse as the standard written language.

[edit] Brazilian Portuguese

The neutrality of this section is disputed. Please see the discussion on the talk page.

It has been suggested that this article or section be merged into Brazilian Portuguese. (Discuss)

According to many Brazilian linguists (Bortoni, Kato, Mattos e Silva, Bagno, Perini and more recently, with great impact, Marcos Bagno), Brazilian Portuguese is a highly diglossic language. L-variant (hereafter termed "Brazilian Vernacular") is the mother tongue of all Brazilians, and H-variant (standard Brazilian Portuguese) is acquired through schooling. L-variant is a simplified language (in terms of grammar, but not of phonetics) that has evolved from XVI-Century Portuguese, influenced by Amerindian (mostly Tupi) and African languages, while H-variant is based on 19th century European Portuguese (and it is still very similar to Standard European Portuguese, with only minor differences in spelling and grammar usage). Mário A. Perini, a Brazilian linguist, compares the depth of the differences between L- and H- variants of Brazilian Portuguese with those between Standard Spanish and Standard Portuguese.

[edit] Usage

The L-variant is the spoken form of Brazilian Portuguese, which should be avoided only in very formal speech (court interrogation, political debate) while the H-variant is the written form of Brazilian Portuguese, avoided only in informal writing (such as songs lyrics, love letters, intimate friends correspondence). Even language professors many times use the L-variant while explaining students the structure and usage of the H-variant; in essays, nevertheless, all students are expected to use H-variant.

While the L-variant is used in songs, movies, soap operas, sitcoms and other television shows, although, at times, the H-variant is used in historic films or soap operas to make the language used sound more ‘elegant’ and/or ‘archaic’. The H-variant used to be preferred when dubbing foreign films and series into Brazilian Portuguese, but nowadays the L-variant is preferred. Movie subtitles normally use a mixture of L- and H-variants, but remain closer to the H-variant.

Most literary works are written in the H-variant. They have been attempts at writing in the L-variant (masterpiece Macunaíma, written by Brazilian modernist Mário de Andrade and Grande Sertão: Veredas, by João Guimarães Rosa), but, presently, the L-variant is used only in dialogue. Still, many contemporary writers like using the H-variant even in informal dialogue. This is also true of translated books, which never use the L-variant, only the H one. Childrens books seem to be more L-friendly, but, again, if they are translated from another language (The Little Prince, for instance) they will use the H-variant only.

[edit] Prestige

The matter of diglossia in Brazil is complicated by political and cultural bias. Language has been made, apparently, into a tool of social exclusion (or social choice).

Mário A. Perini, a famous Brazilian linguist, has said:

"There are two languages in Brazil. The one we write (and which is called "Portuguese"), and another one that we speak (which is so despised that there is not a name to call it). The latter is the mother tongue of Brazilians, the former has to be learned in school, and a majority of population does not manage to master it appropriately.... Personally, I do not object to us writing Portuguese, but I think it is important to make clear that Portuguese is (at least in Brazil) only a written language. Our mother tongue is not Portuguese, but Brazilian Vernacular. This is not a slogan, nor a political statement, it is simply recognition of a fact.... There are linguistic teams working hard in order to give the full description of the structure of the Vernacular. So, there are hopes, that within some years, we will have appropriate grammars of our mother tongue, the language that has been ignored, denied and despised for such a long time."

According to Milton M. Azevedo (Brazilian linguist):

"The relationship between Vernacular Brazilian Portuguese and the formal prescriptive variety fulfills the basic conditions of Ferguson's definition [of diglossia]...[...] Considering the difficulty encountered by vernacular speakers to acquire the standard, an understanding of those relationships appears to have broad educational significance. The teaching of Portuguese has traditionally meant imparting a prescriptive formal standard based on a literary register (Cunha 1985: 24) that is often at variance with the language with which students are familiar. As in a diglossic situation, vernacular speakers must learn to read and write in a dialect they neither speak nor fully understand, a circumstance that may have a bearing on the high dropout rate in elementary schools..."

According to Bagno (1999) the two variants coexist and intermingle quite seamlessly, but their status is not clear-cut. Brazilian Vernacular is still frowned by most grammarians and language teachers, with only a few linguists championing its cause. Detrators of the Brazilian Vernacular call it a "corrupt" form of the "pure" standard, usually because it is more permeable to foreign influence (nowadays mostly English) and because it simplifies some of the intricacies of standard Portuguese (verbal conjugation, pronoun handling, plural forms, etc.).

Bagno sums the prejudice against the vernacular in what he terms the "8 Myths":

1. There is a striking uniformity in Brazilian Portuguese
2. Nearly all Brazilians speak very poor Portuguese while in Portugal people speak it very well
3. Portuguese is extremely difficult
4. People that have had poor education can't speak anything correctly
5. In the state of Maranhão people speak a better Portuguese than elsewhere in Brazil
6. We should speak as closely as possible to the written language
7. The knowledge of Grammar is essential to the correct and proper use of a language
8. To master Standard Portuguese is path to social promotion

In opposition to the "myths", Bagno counters that:

1. The uniformity of Brazilian Portuguese is just about what linguistics predicts for such a large country whose population has not generally been literate for centuries and which has experienced considerable foreign influence, that is, this uniformity is more apparent than real.
2. Brazilians speak Standard Portuguese poorly because, in fact, they speak a language that is sufficiently different from SP so that the latter sounds almost "foreign" to them. In terms of comparison, it is easier for many Brazilians to understand someone from a Spanish-speaking South American country than someone from Portugal because the spoken varieties of Portuguese on either side of the Atlantic have diverged to point of nearly being mutually unintelligible.
3. No language is difficult for those who speak it. Difficulty appears when two conditions are met: the standard language diverges from the vernacular and a speaker of the vernacular tries to learn the standard version. This divergence is the precise reason why spelling and grammar reforms happen every now and then.
4. People with less education can speak the vernacular or often several varieties of the vernacular, and they speak it well. They might, however, have trouble in speaking SP, but this is due to lack of experience rather than to any inherent deficiency in their linguistic mastery.
5. The people of Maranhão are not generally better than fellow Brazilians from other states in speaking SP, especially because that state is one of the poorest and has one of the lowest literacy rates.
6. It is the written language that must reflect the spoken and not vice versa: it is not the tail that wags the dog.
7. The knowledge of grammar is intuitive for those who speak their native languages. Problems arise when they begin to study the grammar of a foreign language.
8. Rich and influential people themselves often do not follow the grammatical rules of SP. SP is mostly a jewel for powerless middle-class careers (journalists, teachers, writers, actors, etc.).

Whether Bagno's points are valid or not is still open to debate (especially the solutions he recommends for the problems he identifies) but one must agree that he has captured the mood of the Brazilians about their own linguistic situation very well. His book (Linguistic Prejudice: What it Is, How To Do) is a must-read, even if you merely want to bash it.

[edit] Other Linguistic Considerations

Many linguists use the term "Brazilian Portuguese" to describe the mesolect of Brazilian Vernacular, not the Standard Brazilian Portuguese which is almost identical to Standard European Portuguese. That language is characterized by simplification in verbal and pronominal systems and many changes in prepositional system, but the most striking differences are those affecting syntax. Brazilian linguist Fernando Tarallo claims that "the Portuguese language variety used in Brazil has developed quite a reasonable number of syntactic features different from the European system. These differences are large enough to allow for a description of the Brazilian variety in the sense of a Brazilian grammar". The same was confirmed later by Brazilian-based French linguist Galves.

The mesolect form of Brazilian Vernacular (that is, the one used in the speech of middle class Brazilians) is the form of Brazilian Portuguese language taught at American universities. H-varieties are explained later after students have mastered the L-variants.

[edit] Malta

Malta is officially a bi-lingual country: both Maltese and English are official languages. Maltese is, uniquely for Europe, a Semitic dialect left over from Arab domination of the islands which ended some 900 years ago and English as Malta was a colony until 1964.

Maltese society is traditionally quite strongly politically divided between the working class and middle and upper classes and this is reflected in their language use. Although all Maltese can speak their native language, the extent to which one uses and is able to speak English often reflects one's background. This is most clearly illustrated by the different newspapers in Malta, the liberal/conservative ones are in English ( with names like the 'Times of Malta' and 'Malta Independent') and the more left-leaning ones are in Maltese. Maltese people of a middle and upper class background will often speak English or use code-switching ostensively in public. There have been warnings from several quarters including a linguistics professor from the university of Malta that the Maltese language could become endangered if the government (currently the right of centre Nationalists) doesn't do more to promote and proliferate it.

[edit] English during the Norman invasion

Historically, England had diglossia between a Romance-speaking ruling class and Germanic-speaking commoners. English was created through the merger of this divide. However, there is still evidence of a division, between "academic" words and "common" words. Many "power" words (such as bailiff) are "academic".

Where English has had doublets, one Germanic and one Romance, either a semantic shift has taken place (as in canine and wolfish), or one word has disappeared from everyday vocabulary.

[edit] Tamil

Tamil is a diglossic language. The classic form (sentamil) of the language is different from the colloquial (koduntamil) form. This difference in the language has existed since ancient times.

The classic form is preferred for writing, and is also used for public speaking. While written Tamil is mostly standard across various Tamil speaking regions, spoken form of the language differs widely from the written form.

Novels, even popular ones, will use (H) for all description and narration and use (L) only for dialogue, if they use it at all. The (L) variant is often only used for dialogue of rural or less educated speakers. Even though all Tamilians in ordinary conversation will use (L), novels often depict educated people speaking in an (H) form.

Singapore Tamil population represents a case of irredentism, showing diglossia, where the Singaporean Tamils speak Tamil (L), but all their official communications have to be in English (H). However, Tamil is one of the four official languages of Singapore.

The (L) spoken form is highly modified and mixed up with the (H) english used in the official documents and media, blurring the demarcation between L and H.

Regional and caste differences predominate in (L) variation. Tamil in the state capital Chennai (formerly Madras) is often quite distinct from that spoken elsewhere. Due to its proximity to Andhra Pradesh, there are often more Telugu words. Chennai (L) Tamil also often has more words of Urdu (or Deccani) than do varieties of Tamil from elsewhere in the state. Because of the larger role of English, Chennai Tamil also shows a great influence from this language. Of course, the Tamil spoken in Sri Lanka, while fully intelligible, also has clear differences in vocabulary and pronunciation. Throughout the state, a tripartite caste-based division is also common. Brahmins who have settled in Tamil Nadu speak Tamil (L) with modifications restricted to their caste. Similarly, Scheduled Castes (formerly called Untouchables) speak forms of (L) Tamil with clear grammatical differences from that of the members of other castes. However, besides, caste difference, regional differences are more interesting to note. The Tamil spoken by people in Northern districts of Tamil Nadu like Arcot, Chennai and Southern districts like Chidambaram, Tirunelveli, Madurai are different in their accents and sounds of words.

[edit] Ukrainian/Russian Diglossia

Using the Matched-Guise Test, Laada Bilaniuk (University of Michigan) administered surveys to 2,000 participants in Ukraine. In her article "Diglossia in Flux: Language and Ethnicity in Ukraine", Bilaniuk reports that until now, Russian has been the H(igh) language and Ukrainian the L(ow) language. However, her data shows that diglossia in Ukraine is shifting.

Now, both standard Russian and standard Ukrainian are considered the H(igh) languages, and the L(ow) category is filled with all non-standard dialects of the H(igh) languages.

[edit] Bibliography for this section

• Diglossia in flux: language and ethnicity in Ukraine. Texas Linguistic Forum (1993) 33:79-88.

Yavorska Galyna M. Prescriptyvna lingvistyka yak dyskurs: Mova, kultura, vlada (Prescriptive linguistics as a discourse: Language. Clture. Power). Kyiv, VIPOL, 2000. - 288 p. Yavorska G. Do problemy naivnoyi linguistyky (On the problem of folk linguistics). - Lingvistychni studii. Cherkassy, 1999, # 3. - 13-20. Yavorska G. Dejaki osoblyvosti movnykh kontaktiv blyz'kosporidnenykh mov (do kharakterystyky ukrain's'koho puryzmu) (On contacts of closely related languages: some features of Ukrainian purism). In memoria of K. Trofymovych. L'viv, Litopys, 1998.

[edit] Other sources for reference (by Bilaniuk)

• The Languages of Ukraine’s Orange Revolution. REECAS Newsletter, Russian, East European & Central Asian Studies, Jackson School of International Studies, University of Washington (Spring).
• A typology of surzhyk: mixed Ukrainian-Russian language. International Journal of Bilingualism 8(4):409-425.
• Gender, language attitudes, and language status in Ukraine. Language in Society. 32:47-78.
• Pidsvidome stavlennia do mov: zerkalo movnoï polityky. (Subconscious language attitudes: a mirror of language politics.) Urok Ukraïnskoï (Ukrainian journal for educators and language planners). Kyiv. 7:5-8. [Based on 1998 "Purity & power" data.]
• Kartyna movnoho svitohliadu v Ukraïni. (Linguistic ideology in Ukraine). Movoznavstvo (major Ukrainian linguistics journal). 4/5:44-51. [Based on 1997 "Matching guises" data.]
• Movna krytyka i samovpevnenist': ideolohichni vplyvy na status mov v Ukraïni. [Linguistic criticism and self-confidence: ideological influences on language status in Ukraine]. Derzhavnist' ukraïns'koï movy i movnyi dosvid svitu: materialy mizhnarodnoï konferentsiï. *Kyiv: National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine. Pp. 131-138.
• Speaking of surzhyk: ideologies and mixed languages. Harvard Ukrainian Studies. 21(1/2):93-117.
• Purity and power: the geography of language ideology in Ukraine. Michigan Discussions in Anthropology 13:165-189.
• Matching guises and mapping language ideologies in Ukraine. Texas Linguistic Forum 37:298-310.

[edit] Bibliography

• Azevedo, Milton. 2005. "Portuguese. A linguistic introduction". Cambridge University Press.
• Azevedo, Milton; University of California. "Vernacular Features in Educated Speech in Brazilian Portuguese" http://www.cervantesvirtual.com/servlet/SirveObras/79117399329793384100080/p0000008.htm
• Bagno, Marcos. "Português ou Brasileiro? (Portuguese or Brazilian?)" http://paginas.terra.com.br/educacao/marcosbagno/
• Eeden, Petrus van. "Diglossie" http://www.afrikaans.nu/pag7.htm
• Freeman, Andrew. "Andrew Freeman's Perspectives on Arabic Diglossia" http://www-personal.umich.edu/~andyf/digl_96.htm
• Lubliner, Jacob. "Reflections on Diglossia" http://www.ce.berkeley.edu/~coby/essays/refdigl.htm
• Módolo, Marcelo. "As duas línguas do Brasil.(Two languages of Brazil)" Editora FAUUSP.
• Perini, Mário. 2002. "Modern Portuguese. A Reference Grammar." Yale University Press. New Haven.
• Ramsey, S. Robert (1987). The Languages of China. Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-01468-X.
• Rash, Felicity. 1998. The German Language in Switzerland. Multilingualism, Diglossia and Variation. Bern: Peter Lang.
• Schiffman, Harold. "Diglossia as a Sociolinguistic Situation" http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~haroldfs/messeas/diglossia/node1.html

[edit] See also

• Ausbausprache - Abstandsprache - Dachsprache
• Standard language
• Dialect continuum
• Pluricentric language