Search

Copyright of Eesti Rakenduslingvistika Ühingu Aastaraamat is the property of Eesti Rakenduslingvistika Uhing (ERU) / Estonian Association for Applied Linguistics and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Language standardization has historically been a critical area of inquiry in language policy and planning (LPP) research. This is a political matter, which contributes to “more (and hierarchical) heterogeneity” rather than linguistic homogeneity (Gal 2006: 171). The paper empirically explores extralinguistic arguments, which are used by language professionals (planners, academics, educators) in mainstream media discourse. This public discourse is initiated by the launch of an Estonian “superdictionary” in 2019 (see Tavast et al. 2020), and its public reception. By using Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) as a method, the paper also provides insight into the discursive construction of language as such and (Standard) Estonian by different LPP actors. Above all, it aims to understand the issues of power and authority in language standardization. The discourse illustrates the paradigmatic change in standardization and lexicography: from including selected language samples to the acceptance of non-elite language variants and varieties. This change has generated a polarization of stance among language professionals, and similar discursive moves, e.g., references to the past and future dangers, metaphors and other comparisons are used. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]