Search

One of the attributes of monolingual policy is linguistic purism with its active impact on a language and the processes with the view of an ideal image of language. In such an ideal language, first of all foreign words are exposed to puristic regulation. In Soviet times the sole Russian language conducted foreign words into Kazakh language standardising its semantics, pronunciation and spelling. Such a centralisation of the process of borrowings led to unlimited impact of the Russian language, and flow of foreign lexicon into Kazakh language via only Russian was realised purposefully and deliberately.

Grammar is defined as “a science which identifies the rules of a language after analysing phonology, syntax and sentence structure” (Turkish Language Institution 2005). Functional Linguistics has gained popularity in the recent centuries after related researches. Again by Turkish Language Institution (2005) defines “function” as: “Any duty, any functionality or ability to perform a duty.” From the distinctions given above, it is necessary to classify and define Functional Linguistics and Functional Grammar separately. Functional Grammar is a Structural Linguistic Trend which deals with the components and the connections between these components of a language in terms of informational functions, which gives priority to informational function to identify and evaluate language facts and finally by this concept, which tries to find out correct linguistic description. As for the methodology the main rule here is to identify the functions of linguistic facts which try to fulfill the informative duties and thereby find the specific value of it in the language system. (Vardar ad, 1998: page 129; by Iscan, 2007 ). “Functional Linguistics tries to identify the main meaningful components of the language system, the connections between these components and their functionalities of informative duties.” ( Rifat, 2000 , Page.63).

This article offers an integrational linguistic critique of the way in which the notions of linguistic diversity and language loss/death are theorised within orthodox linguistics. The fundamental issue concerns the ontological status of languages. While orthodox approaches take the existence of separately identifiable languages or language varieties (lects) as a foundational theoretical postulate even in the absence of any consistent definitional criteria, from an integrational perspective languages are nothing more than second-order metalinguistic abstractions from actual language practices. Consequently, any theory of first-order linguistic diversity based on the enumeration of individual languages is automatically suspect. Furthermore, since languages do not exist as ontological realia, it cannot be the case that linguistic diversity is declining due to language loss. To suppose otherwise rests on a conflation of the linguistic and the metalinguistic, a failing endemic to orthodox linguistics. The discussion concludes by offering an integrational view on some of the epistemological and language-political issues which commonly surface in discussions of linguistic diversity and language loss.

This paper discusses the relationship between entrenched beliefs about language (‘language ideologies’) and the linguistic system, and considers how conflicts between propositional and procedural knowledge about language have an effect upon the way in which language is regulated within society. It examines the epistemological foundations for drawing a distinction between language ideology and the linguistic system, and discusses the way in which the conflicting influences of these two aspects of language behaviour create the framework by which language is regulated in both academic and institutional contexts. Drawing upon critical insights provided by theoretical work in linguistic anthropology, and combining these with a philosophical consideration of language behaviour, the paper poses the question of whether there is a fundamental interdependency between patterns of entrenched belief about language and the nature of language itself. It then examines the implications of such a question for our understanding of the role that language plays in the lived experience.

This case study on the linguistic ideas of George Berkeley is intended to exemplify the clandestine intrusion of ‘linguistic Platonism’, i.e. occult conceptions of language, into linguistic theories in modern times. The assumption underlying the study is that occult linguistic thought has played an important role in the formation of all modern theories of language which argue for a cognitive function alongside, or instead of, the communicative function of language. In Section 3 , I argue that the apparent contradictions and inconsistencies of Berkeley’s statements on language can be reconciled, if and only if we view them as grounded in the complex architecture of the two-languages metaphysics, or linguistic Platonism. Section 4 places the results in the wider perspective of linguistic theorizing in modern times.

This case study on the linguistic ideas of George Berkeley is designed to exemplify the clandestine intrusion of ‘linguistic Platonism’, i.e. occult conceptions of language, into linguistic theories of modern times. The assumption underlying the study is that occult linguistic thought has played an important role in the formation of all modern theories of language which argue for a cognitive function alongside, or instead of, a communicative function of language. Focusing on the historical emergence of linguistic Platonism in Renaissance esoteric traditions, part I will lay the foundations for a new interpretation of Berkeley’s theory of language (part II), which will be presented in the following issue. Here I will argue that occult concepts of language are indeed amenable to serious historiographic study, widespread convictions to the contrary notwithstanding. I will suggest that the apparent contradictions and other theoretical inconsistencies in occult concepts of language vanish once we allow for the possibility that they can be allocated to two different kinds of language and to two theories of language. It is this double theory of language that provides the theoretical backbone of linguistic Platonism.

This paper examines factors complicating the definition of Standard Chinese, including register and socio-geographical variation, sound change and folk etymology, foreign loans and contact-induced structural change, and inherent imprecisions in the national spelling system. Also examined are reactions to change in the linguistic and language-teaching communities, how lay and academic attitudes towards impurities and linguistic innovation differ, and how differences between Chinese and western notions of ‘language’ and ‘dialect’ serve to further widen the gap between the textbook standard and perceived standardness. Predictions are made regarding the future development of Modern Standard Chinese that take into consideration the popular appeal of the language of westernized Chinese societies (e.g., Hong Kong and Taiwan) and the effect of the growth of native speakers of Mandarin in the Chinese-speaking world.

This article looks at language practices in secondary classrooms in Malta. It shows how teachers and learners employ code switching between Maltese and English as a communicative resource in constructing knowledge across the curriculum, in interacting with monolingual English texts, and in building relationships with one another. The article also places these bilingual discursive practices against the historical and social background of the islands. It shows how teachers attend to the symbolic values associated with Maltese and English in their classroom conversations with learners. It shows that they do so in two ways. First, Maltese is used to convey friendliness and warmth and to reduce the social distance between the teacher and the learners, although English remains the language of the textbook, and its use increases the social distance between the participants. Secondly, because exclusive use of Maltese is associated with linguistic purism in the Maltese context and exclusive use of English is associated with snobbism, code switching constitutes a means of avoiding being dubbed as either purist or snob. Code switching by the Maltese teachers in the classroom contexts considered here needs to be seen not only as a communicative resource for accomplishing lessons but also as a means of constructing specific professional identities: using enough English to appear “educated” but, at the same time, espousing a Maltese identity.