BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//Talks.cam//talks.cam.ac.uk//
X-WR-CALNAME:Talks.cam
BEGIN:VEVENT
SUMMARY:Can diverse research concepts of metalinguistic activities be harm
 onized? Language management theory\, its scope and potential for language 
 policy research - Dr Vit Dovalil
DTSTART:20191106T170000Z
DTEND:20191106T183000Z
UID:TALK134287@talks.cam.ac.uk
CONTACT:Abhimanyu Sharma
DESCRIPTION:The paper provides an overview of a theoretical framework whic
 h aims at systematic analyses of metalinguistic activities of various acto
 rs involved in policymaking processes. Metalinguistic activities refer to 
 the behavior of speakers toward language\, which is designated as language
  management (Neustupný & Jernudd 1987\; Nekvapil 2016). Language Manageme
 nt Theory (LMT) consists of the following elements:\n1) actors involved in
  language-related behavior\, their interests\, social status\, and (more o
 r less complex) networks\; \n2) processual character of this behavior and 
 its specific phases\;\n3) interconnection of socioeconomic\, communicative
  and linguistic levels of language management activities.\nLMT provides th
 e researchers with a broad scope of possibilities in which seemingly diffe
 rent and theoretically heterogeneous concepts are hidden. It is revealed t
 hat the research on attitudes\, language standards\, language law\, status
  of a language in international organizations or states as well as some ot
 her issues may be carried out systematically on a unified and coherent the
 oretical basis (Fairbrother\, Nekvapil & Sloboda 2018\; Dovalil 2015a\; Do
 valil 2015b). To highlight the potential of language management\, I use ex
 amples that showcase the processes of (re)shaping standard German (Dovalil
  forthcoming).\n\nOne of the methodological inconsistencies of the traditi
 onal research on standard varieties consists in overestimation of object l
 anguage: drawing upon the linguistic corpora\, the usage-based approach ig
 nores most of metalinguistic activities. Such an approach also ignores the
  fact that norms and standard varieties represent social (= interactive) p
 henomena. This methodological inconsistency can be remedied if the behavio
 r toward standard language\, which is conducted by relevant agents\, is an
 alyzed systematically.\n\nReflecting on the corpus-based approach\, I take
  a critical view of the usual question what is standard and complement it 
 with the question who decides about what is standard how\, in interactions
  with whom\, in which social contexts\, with which intentions\, and with w
 hich consequences. Using examples from German\, this approach tries to sho
 w that standard varieties are (re)shaped in interactions\, which also appl
 ies to management of pluricentric standards. Thus\, the dynamic nature of 
 managing standard varieties can be foregrounded. \n\n
LOCATION:Sidgwick Site\, Faculty of English\, GR04
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR