Примењена лингвистика у част Ранку Бугарском - Језик у

Jelena Filipović: LANGUAGE POLICY AND PLANNING IN STANDARD ...
about language, its structure, its functions and values, but, more importantly, they
are conventional cognitive representations of linguistic phenomena in a given
cultural/social/speech community. Members of each speech community use language
ideologies to learn and evaluate what are socially acceptable and appropriate
ways of applying linguistic means when communicating with other members
of the same community. Spolsky defines language practice as real-life language
use, while language management is understood as
124
(…) the explicit and observable effort by someone or some group that has or claims
authority over the participants in the domain to modify their practices or beliefs.
(…) Management (…) accounts for many language choices, but it is not
automatically successful. It presupposes a manager: the pressures produced by
language practices and beliefs are different in that they may be authorless. (…).
A number of scholars cite rhetorical statements in favor of a language as though
they proved the existence of language managers, rather than the wishful thinking
of politicians and language activists (Spolsky 2009: 5-6).
It is noteworthy that all researchers in this area presently insist on the fact
that any language policy and planning cannot be analyzed independently from all
other factors which influence and shape human lives within a given social system.
As a result, language use as well as language standardization always stands in a
two-way relationship with social, political, religious, ethnic, psychological, emotional
and other features of our speech communities.
If we accept the above as a new paradigm of language policy and planning,
we can then bring into this analysis some of the constructivist scientific concepts,
a postmodern view of science which re-examines and re-evaluates all the key scientific
notions and conclusions, and which offers alternative definitions of terms
such as language, standardization, culture, science, politics of knowledge, etc.:
Postmodern intellectual inquiry started to turn back on itself, to question how we
came to think as we do, why we construct particular visions of reality, in whose
interests supposed norms, values and givens operate. Postmodernism, then, is a
philosophical questioning of many of the foundational concepts of received canons
of knowledge (Pennycook 2006: 62; italics mine).
In the continuation of this paper, I will make an attempt to outline a possible
alternative view of future language policy and planning in the modern world,
focusing primarily on the European continent, which can be defined as the continent
of standard language cultures (Milroy 2001). I would like to examine the
possibilities of introducing theoretical and methodological models of language
policy which are not language management as defined by Spolsky (2009). Rather,
these new models would be based on certain clearly defined activities of indi-