Acceso usuarios
Ari Páll Kristinsson
The article addresses the actual and perceived roles of national organisations and bodies, such as language ‘academies’ or ‘councils’, in recent history. In particular, the article seeks to shed light on the question what may prompt national governments in modernity and late modernity to establish and fund such bodies to regulate and promote languages which already are used in all spheres of society, already enjoy status as national languages, de facto if not also de jure, and already have standardized written forms with no rival varieties. In a period characterised by national sentiment and nation building, it is likely that the three pillars of language policy (management, beliefs, practices) are in harmony. As long as governments consider the processes of norm selection, form codification, elaboration of function, and acceptance by the community, to be sufficiently implemented, they have no need to establish official language management agencies. At a later stage, however, governments may react to an evolving language situation, notably perceived threats of foreign influence through globalisation and migration, as well as perceived threats as to changing linguistic practices, not least in the lexical domain, by using their legislative and institutional powers in new ways in order to consolidate the foundations of language management by, among other things, founding language ‘academies’ or ‘councils’. My claim is supported by evidence from the Northern European (‘Nordic’) countries where such ‘councils’ were established in the post World War II period. The Icelandic ‘council’, and the language ideologies of Iceland, are discussed in particular.
