Примењена лингвистика у част Ранку Бугарском - Језик у

JEZIK U UPOTREBI / LANGUAGE IN USE
as systems which may be more or less suitable for standardization and modernization
is rejected in favor of a critical, socially engaged analysis of language
status, language corpus and language acquisition 1 policy and planning in different
socio-political contexts. Consequently, the idea that languages are independent
from their users and that language planning should be applied to varieties which
are the most suitable for future modernization and development, stripped of all
social, ideological, political, ethical and other connotations, is no longer acceptable
as the model of language policy and planning theory.
The last decade of the 20 th century brings about new ideas about linguistic
rights and linguistic human rights, and the theory and practice of language policy
and planning experiences another shift in focus:
(…), the question is not so much how to develop languages as which languages to
develop for what purposes, and, in particular, how and for what purposes to develop
local, threatened languages in relation to global, spreading ones (Hornberger
2006: 28).
In recent years a number of research agendas in the field of linguistics have
opted for a critical approach to language and its functions, and view language as
one of the crucial devices in the process of formation of cultural models which
affect the structure of our social and speech communities, as well as the nature
of human relations in private and public domains, together with the concepts of
social power, social hierarchy and hegemony. Consequently, language use is correlated
directly with social relations within a community. Study of this correlation
provides us with important information about the essence of balance and/or
imbalance of power, equality and/or inequality as well as hegemony, which are at
the core of our societies (Filipović 2009a: 110).
In other words, as Spolsky (2009: 1) states, language policy and planning
is always about choices, whether it is a choice of languages among bilingual/
plurilingual speakers, or a choice of dialects, registers or styles within a single
linguistic variety. All these choices always stand in correlation with the structure
of our social systems, with the type of communicative situation, and with
the verbal repertoire of the members of the speech/social/ethnic/cultural community.
Spolsky (2009) presents three distinct components of language policy: language
practice, language ideology and language management. He uses the term
‘language beliefs’ for what I define as language ideology, as I believe language
ideologies to be social rather than individual constructs (such as beliefs and attitudes).
Language ideologies not only contain traditional attitudes and beliefs
1
Language acquisition policy and planning is here used as a synonym for language education
policy and planning.
123