Diglossia

In other parts of the world, dialect switching of the Lowland-Scots-Standard-English type may take on a rather different form. In some communities, for example, switching is carried out on a much larger and more institutionalised scale. This sociolinguistic situation has been called diglossia. Diglossia is a particular kind of language standardisation where two distinct varieties of a language exist side by side throughout the speech community (not just in the case of a particular group of speakers, such as working-class Scots), and where each of the two varieties is assigned a definite social function. (Since the term diglossia was first introduced by Charles Ferguson, it has been extended by some writers to include any situation where switching between two varieties takes place. The two linguistic varieties in a diglossic situation are considered by speakers to be discrete, although this is usually not altogether the case in practice, and comprise a standardised high variety and a low variety, which can also be standardised but may be subject to geographical differentiation too. The two varieties have overt recognition in the community, and have commonly known and used labels. Examples of language communities, which are diglossic, together with the names used, are the following:

High Low

Swiss German Hochdeutsch Schweizerdeutsch

Arabic classical colloquial

Tamil literary colloquial

Russian literary spoken

English written oral

The most important feature of the diglossic situation is probably the specialisation of the two varieties functioning. It varies from community to community, but typically the high variety is used in sermons, formal letters, political speeches, university lectures, news broadcasts, newspaper editorials, and 'high' poetry. The low variety, on the other hand, is used in conversation with family and friends, radio serials, political and academic discussions, political cartoons, and 'folk' literature.

The main differences between diglossic and other situations are that the low diglossic variety is standardised, to varying extents (Schweizerdeutsch and regional colloquial Arabic are both used on the radio, for instance); that the two varieties have names and are felt to be distinct; that the situations where each is to be used are socially fairly well defined; and - and this is of great importance - no section of the community regularly uses the high variety as the normal medium of everyday conversation (this distinguishes it from the English situation, for instance). The high variety has in all cases to be learnt as a school language. That is why the situations where the high variety is used involve either a written language or, if a spoken language is involved, tend to be a well prepared situation. Where individuals do attempt to use the high variety in everyday speech this is generally felt to be artificial, pedantic, snobbish or reactionary.

Generally speaking, the high variety has greater prestige than the low one, and it is often regarded as more beautiful, even if it is less intelligible. For instance, in Arabic, it has been considered a good form by some to write an editorial or a poem containing rare or old-fashioned expressions which no one can understand without consulting a dictionary. Linguistically speaking, the differences between the high and low varieties in the diglossic situation may be considerable. Many of the differences, are vocabulary differences: many pairs of words may occur, referring to common objects or concepts, where the meaning is roughly the same, but where the usage of one item rather than another immediately indicates high or low variety. For example, in Arabic the form [ra’kha:] to see indicates the high classical variety, [sa:f] the low variety. There are generally grammatical differences, too. The phonology will also often vary. In Arabic the two phonologies are quite different, and in Swiss German very different.

As far as Arabic in general is concerned, the sociolinguistic relationship of the two varieties varies today from country to country. Although it is still possible to speak the high variety (particularly in lectures, for example) but it is less usual. In normal educated speech there is often a mixture: mainly colloquial Arabic with an admixture of classical elements.

The situation in German Switzerland differs somewhat from the Arabic situation. Schweizerdeutsch is widely used on the Swiss radio, but there is no really agreed standardisation. In spite of the tendency to iron out regional differences, say, from the town speech, many regional dialects are still widely used by speakers from all social backgrounds. The high variety, Standard German, is used, as a spoken language, in parliament, in courts, churches, universities, higher forms of schools, and in the interaction with Germans, Austrians, and non-native German speakers. It is, however, spoken with Swiss phonetics, and contains a number of regionalisms (rather in the fashion of standard Scots English), and is therefore markedly different from the spoken Standard German of Germany. Otherwise the high variety serves as the written language. (There is a notable body of literature in Schweizerdeutsch, but much of it is of the somewhat self-conscious dialect-literature type.) Swiss German dialects, on the other hand, are the normal medium of everyday conversation for Swiss Germans of all social backgrounds.

This gives some indication of the educational problems faced by Swiss German children, who must learn Standard German in addition to acquiring literacy. The acquisition of Standard German, however, makes Swiss German children members of the wider German-speaking community, and gives them access to a language of wider communication and to German literature and publications.

A similar situation to that of German Switzerland obtains in Luxemburg. Here too the vernacular of the inhabitants is a dialect of German. As a focus of national loyalty this dialect has a status far above that of German dialects in Germany. Many Luxemburgers, in fact, consider it to be completely distinct from German, and there have been official moves in recent years to afford it a full status as a language. The position is, however, complicated by the fact that, in addition to Standard German, which acts as a high variety, French also plays an important role in Luxemburg society. Luxemburgish is not often written (although there are some children's books, dialect literature and newspaper articles). Children who have Luxemburgish as their vernacular have to learn to read and write in German when they go to school. Gradually German is also introduced as the medium of instruction until, in the last years of school, and often also in higher education, it is replaced by French.

This obviously places children in Luxemburg under considerable linguistic strain. On the other hand it also means that most educated Luxemburgers are trilingual (at least) and it gives them access to two 'world languages' through which they can gain contact with academic and other literature, and communicate with foreigners when they travel outside their country. French is the official parliamentary language in Luxemburg, as well as the language of higher education. Public signs and notices tend to be in French; books, newspapers and letters in German; and everyday speech in Luxemburgish. (It is also notable that the Luxemburgish spoken by students tends often to have some admixture of French, rather than of German words).

How stable are diglossic situations? An interesting light is shed on this question by what has happened recently in the case of Greek. Until at least 1970s, Greek was a diglossic language, with a high variety, Katharevousa, which harked back (возвращаться к исходному пункту) to the glories of the classical Byzantine past, and Dhimotiki which resembled the modem spoken language much more closely. At that time it was an archaic style of Greek that served as the language of administration and of most writing during the period of the Byzantine, or Eastern Roman Empire until the fall of Constantinople to the Turks in 1453.

The two varieties differed considerably in vocabulary and morphology. During this century, there was very considerable tension about which of the two varieties should be the language of the government and education with Katharevousa attracting more support from the political right, Dhimotiki from the left. The right-wing military junta, which seized power in a coup in 1967 was particularly heavy-handed in imposing Katharevousa. This has had the effect, since the restoration of democracy in Greece, of totally discrediting Katharevousa, which has now almost completely disappeared: Greek is no longer really diglossic. Interestingly, however, the form of Dhimotiki now in most widespread use does show quite a lot of linguistic influence from Katharevousa.

We have seen then, that a community's verbal repertoire may encompass simply different styles of the same dialect, as in the case of Standard-English speakers; different dialects of the same language, as in the case of Lowland Scots speakers; or, as a special case of two relatively standardised varieties in a diglossic relationship, as in the case of Arabic. In the case of Luxemburg, however, we saw a further complication introduced. The diglossic situation may be combined with another sociolinguistic activity, which we can call language switching.

So far we have been discussing the way in which speakers switch from one variety to another which is linguistically more or less closely related: formal English, informal English; Scots dialect, Standard English; colloquial Arabic, classical Arabic. In many communities, however, the verbal repertoire may contain varieties, which are not related; different languages, we can say. As in Luxemburg, where switching occurs between German and French, language switching will take place, like style or dialect switching, according to a social situation.

Paraguay is one of the places where research has been carried out into the nature of language switching of this sort. Here the two languages involved are Spanish and Guarani, an indigenous American Indian language. Guarani has been reported as being the vernacular of 88 per cent of the population, approximately, and Spanish of only 6 per cent, but a high percentage of people know and use both, and both are official languages. Paraguay is unusual in Latin America, since this type of bilingualism has usually indicated a transitional stage leading to a Spanish monolingualism. In Paraguay, however, 92 per cent of the population know Guarani, and most speakers continue to use it after learning Spanish. Bilingualism appears to be a permanent feature of the society. Many features of the social situation seem to be involved in determining which language is to be used. Perhaps the main one is the geographical location of conversation. If this takes place in a rural area, then Guarani is employed. Spanish is not really necessary in the countryside, although it is used in speaking to the village schoolteacher, and is taught and used in school. (Guarani, on the other hand, is not strictly necessary in towns. It is, however, undoubtedly an asset, and anyone unable to speak it would be socially isolated to a certain extent.) In urban areas, though, the position is more complicated. If, for instance, the relationship between the participants, is a formal one, then the language to be used is Spanish. If, however, it is informal, then other factors come into play, notably the degree of intimacy. If the relationship between speakers is not an intimate one, then Spanish is used (it is said that couples begin courting each other in Spanish!). But if the relationship is an intimate one, then the language used will depend on the topic of conversation. Jokes are always in Guarani, whereas if the topic is a serious one, then the language used will generally be the mother tongue (first language learnt) of the speaker concerned (although he or she will make allowances for the language proficiency of the hearer). Sex may also come into play as a factor here. Men for whom Spanish is the first language may still often use Guarani in such situations when speaking to other women. Thus, where in English factors of this sort would produce different styles, in Paraguay they produce different languages.

Дата добавления: 2014-01-11