This book develops a theory of language management based on research on the family, religion, the workplace, the media, schools, legal and health institutions. Bernard Spolsky defines language management as “an attempt by some person or As Spolsky points out, his domain-based approach departs from the tr. Download Citation on ResearchGate | Bernard Spolsky, Language management | SpolskyBernard, Language management. New York: Cambridge University.
|Published (Last):||27 October 2015|
|PDF File Size:||9.47 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||20.78 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
The author of the book under review, however, prefers ”language management” over ”language planning,” ”because it more precisely captures the nature of the phenomenon” p. A model is developed that recognises the complexity of language management, makes sense of the various forces involved, and clarifies why it is such a difficult enterprise.
The domain approach is used to structure the rest of the book: He has written several books for Oxford University Press: Reyska marked it as to-read Nov 30, This feature may be connected with the way this book is written. However, implicit motivation for particular behaviour does not have to be ”guessed’,’ but is a normal object of scientific inquiry.
These and other pieces of incorrect information show that the langugae of the book has not treated his data and sources carefully.
Language Management by Bernard Spolsky
Some of these choices are the result of management, reflecting conscious and explicit efforts by language This would shed doubt on the reliability of his conclusions about mutual influences between the domains. The Spolsky’s definition of language management suggests that it should be a mere substitute for the term ”language planning” cf.
An International Handbook of Contemporary Research.
brnard Little space is left for discussion and theoretical considerations. Just as independence in India and the division from Pakistan had led to the splitting of Hindustani into Hindi and Urdu, so did the splitting of Czechoslovakia produce a renewal of separate identities for Czech and Slovak Erik marked it as to-read May 26, Spolsky focuses especially on the question of which participants understood as ”social roles” in language management are there in a particular domain, and pays attention to the question of the bernqrd to which language management is carried out or influenced by domain-internal or domain-external forces.
Even if you speak only one language, you have choices of dialects and styles. Some of these choices are the result of management, reflecting conscious and explicit efforts by language managers to control the choices. Bernarr, the identity of Czech and Slovak was not blurred.
Spolsky, however, does not go into these nuances of social interaction, as he does not treat or describe language management as social interaction in general.
He thus refers to Jernudd’s and Neustupny’s language management theory, but leaves the relationship of his conception to theirs unclarified. This book is not yet featured on Listopia. Skip to main content. The split of Czechoslovakia in did not bring about anything new with respect lajguage the identities of the two languages. Books by Bernard Spolsky.
The author expresses a sceptical view on the possibility of language management to make a positive manageemnt to the world society in general. Only after the fall of the communist regime manage,ent, therefore, of heavily centralized state power in Czechoslovakia indid the split of this already federal state become possible in There were 18, employed, with a projected increase over the next ten years of percent each year.
The conclusion of Chapter 2 is similarly simple: The author also touches upon the issue of the cultivation of the public use of language. Sections usually end with the final example in the sequence. Spolsky’s conception of language management can be contrasted to languaeg conception, namely, the one by Bjorn H.
Language Management Bernard Spolsky No preview available – Lievia rated it it was amazing May 19, For example, the author suggests, without providing arguments, that corpus planning be ”perhaps better labelled with the Prague School term ‘cultivation’ Prague School ” p.
It is disappointing that even after pages the author — writing about the building of a theory of language management from the beginning — has not gone farther than to prolegomena of a theory. Language policy is all about choices. The definitions resemble definitions of ”language planning” cf.
Helen Kennedy added it May 18, This, however, is not the case. Liudmyla Beraud marked it as to-read Aug 15, Further, on page 86, ”the Czech reversed cedilla for nasalization” is mentioned. Chapter 9 deals with a number of topics pertaining to ”Local, regional, and national governments managing languages. Benard model is developed that recognises the complexity of language management, makes sense of the various forces involved, and clarifies why it is such a difficult enterprise.
The Czech Republic, set up in with the breakup of the Soviet Union, restored a division that had been blurred when Czechoslovakia was created in This may relate to the fact that he has not identified the domains empirically, as Fishman required, but has simply postulated them.
Vito marked it as to-read Jul 09,