--

UNIT 4 LANGUAGE STANDAmHZ!kTION

Structure

Objectives
Introduction
The need for standardization
The process of standardization
The consequences of standardization
A socio-ethical critique of standardization
Let us sum up
Key words
Questions
Bibliography

-
4.0 OBJECTIVES

This unit is designed to help you

understand the notions 'standard' and 'varieties'.
get an insight into the processes that are involved in standardization
appreciate the need for standardization
understand the use of standardized language.
problematize the notion 'standard' and see what consequences it has for other
non-standard forms.
develop a critical perspective on standardization and power.

4.1 INTRODUCTION

Have you ever paused to think what is meant by such sentences as: 'This book is
written in English' or 'The news bulletin in English follows' or 'My son goes to an
English medium school' or 'English is the National Language of England, Australia
and the U.S.A.' Such sentences have one very obvious implication that there is a
language which is somehow recognised as the English language and that this English
language, despite regional, social and historical variation, somehow has one standkd
form which is used in the book, the news-bulletin, the school and the countries
referred to in the above sentences. What is not so obvious, and therefore worthy of
further investigation, is how from among so many diverse forms of any given
language - say English or Hindi or Chinese - one form comes to be commonly
understood to be the standard form. We all know that English is a global language
and over the last two centuries or so, it has spread to different parts of the world.
Thus, to-day we have British English, American English, Australian English, African
English, Indian English, etc. each of which subsumes regional, local, social and
individual variation, and each of which also boasts of having some standard fonn of
its own. And yet, over and above all these, we can and do have the notion of a
standard English. In the following sections of this unit we shall try to understand
how such standard languages come into being (i.e. the processes involved), why such
standards arise (the motivation behind the processes of standardization) and what
purposes such standards serve.
I
I
 Language
4.2 THE NEED FOR STANDARDIZATION Standardization

There has been a sort of consensus among scholars (including sociologists, linguists
and educationists) that in view of the seemingly endless variation and diversity in
languages, some form of standardization or fixing of norms is essential. It has been
argued (though it is still a moot point, and we shall return to it later in this unit) that
heterogeneity and diversity is in some ways a hindrance to progress, development and
governance. No doubt there are different forms of language - regional dialects,
social dialects, and so on - but some form has to be 'fixed' as standard even for
purposes of studying and analyzing the structure of the language (the 'grammarians'
enterprise) and for using that as reference-point for talking about other dialects or
varieties. The creation of (or rather the construction of) a standard form or standard
language, it is further argued, brings about unity and uniformity which are essential
conditions for development, progress and government.

It has been further argued that people (who are speakers of various dialects) need one
standard language both in the spoken and written modes, in order to feel that they are
one people. This feeling of oneness, despite dialect differences, makes them feel
proud of this single standard language and they begin to share the prestige associated
with the standard language. In practical terms, if there is one standard language, it
becomes easy for the rulers (leaders) to govern them, legislate for them, lay down the
laws of the land, create educational materials, provide literacy and create more and
more channels of communication for them. All these arguments, in their essence,
mean that some standard form of a language is needed for literacy, education, law and
order, governance, inter-regional communication, for creation of discourses in
various disciplines and for providing people with an 'identity' of which they can feel
proud.

On the face of it, these arguments appear to be totally unexceptionable, but as we go

- on we shall see that several serious socio-political and psychological implications are
contained in these arguments, as well as in the age-old human quest for the creation
. and support and perpetuation of standard languages. In brief, then, we need a
standard language for

creation of scientific descriptions of language,

creation of text books, primers, reference materials,
creation of discourse in various disciplines,
dissemination of knowledge,
education and literary,
a sense of unity and identity,
proper and smooth functioning of law and order,
easy governance
inter-regional andlor international communication.
modernity, stability and development

4.3 THE PROCESS OF STANDARDIZATION -.

Standardization refers to the process by which a language gets codified in some way.
Quite often certain events or items may also be associated with this process. In the
case of the standization of English it is customary to mention such things as
Wycliffe's translation of the Bible into English, Caxton's establishment of the printing
press in England and Dr. Johnson's dictiohary of English published in 1755, etc.
tangrruge in Apart frorn such events or items, linguists and sociolinguists generally agree that the
coming into being of a standard language i.e. the process of standardization involves
four stages. Einar Haugen ('1966) has proposed the following fo~trstages:

(i) Selection

Pirst of all, one variety of a language has to be selected from amongst the several
varieties that are used by speakers of a language. lf we look at the process of
selection in different ages and places, we shall find that the variety that gets selected
is more often than not associated with power. The power may be economic,
political, cultural or a combination of two or more of these. It is perhaps reasonable
to expect that in any society, the 'elite' - political, economic or cultural - would see to
it that the variety of language they use is chosen for standardization. The powerful
elite are naturally eager'to retain and perpetuate their power and influence and,
language being one of the most powerful and versatile instrument of social control,
they see to it their own variety gets selected for standardization. It would be an
interesting project for those interested to find out how and why a particular variety of
English got selected in England at a given point of time, and how and why a
particular variety of Hindi got selected for similar purposes in post-independence
India. As has been pointed out in another unit, "we need to remind ourselves again
and again that the selection ...........of a particular variety is not a socially natural
and innocent process".

i ) Codification

Once a particular variety has been selected, it needs to be codified i.e. the
grammatical rules, the norms of pronunciation, the spellings and other writing
conventions have to be 'fixed'. This stage of the process of standardization involves
the writing of standard grammars, manuals of pronunciations, thesauruses, reference
books, dictionaries. Codification and the fixing of norms of usage imply that the
forms enshrined in the grammars and other reference books come to be seen as the
only 'correct', 'pure', 'elegant' or 'sophisticated' forms. It is the codified standard
forms that are then used for creation of text books, reference manuals, learned
discourse, legal texts, legislative documents and all other important materials. The
media (both the print and electronic media) uses this codified variety, the education
system propagates it and the administration and judiciary sustain it. This codified,
fiozen set of linguistic norms thus comes to be accepted as 'The Correct' standard
and becomes the reference point used for treating all other varieties as deviations
from the norm, as sub-standard or non-standard. We shall return to this particular
point later in this unit.

i ) Elaboration of Function

The standard language, once codified, is not expected to be used in informal contexts
i.e. in domains such as the family, the neighbourhood or the playfield or in semi-
formal interactions between peers, buyer-sellers or across-the-counter situations.
However, in fomal, public domains this standard language is a must. The most
powerful and pervasive use of the standard language is in education. Text-books,
learned materials, lectures, seminars, examinations - all these require the use of
standard language. Higher education, technical education and scientific education,
especially, call for the use of standard language. Government agencies, law and
judiciary, bureaucracy, diplomacy, trade and commerce - all these again call for the
use of the standard language. As the standard language comes to be used in more and
more domains it needs to be expanded in terms of special, technical vocabularies,
which often requires the creation of new words and new terminologies. Several ,
standard languages meet this requirement by drawing upon classical sources-
English, for instance, draws much of its technicallspecial lexicon from Latin and I

Greek, while in the case of Hindi, the source is Sanskrit. This often has the effect of
making the standard language beyond the reach of the common man, giving it an
 artificial air and, generally, causing unease and even resentment among the average Language
brners and common masses. Elaboration of function also requires the creation of Standardization
new styles of discourse (e.g. business English, diplomatic English, etc.) and more
formal forms and formats of writing.

iv) Acceptance

me variety that gets codified and standardized has to gain wide acceptance within the
community. The speakers, though belonging to diverse dialect-groups, must come to
recognise, accept and cherish it as their 'language'. Sometimes it may so happen that
the standardized language is also recognized as the 'national' or 'official' language,
thus giving its users a distinct national-linguistic identity. English, in its standardized
fonns, is the national, official and dominant language in England, the U.S.A. and
Australia; Hindi is the 'National official' language in India, while languages like
Bangla, Gujarati, Marathi, Kannada and Manipuri are recognized, used and accepted
as official languages in their respective states. Acceptance of standardized languages,
thus, gives people distinct regional or national identities and this, in turn, further
strengthens the prestige and power of the standard languages.

4.4 THE CONSEQUENCES OF STmDAPU)IZATI[ON

Standardization brings into being Standard Language. Once a standard language
has come into being it serves several useful purposes. For the community (social
group, region or nation state) it serves as a symbol of distinct, separate identity, as a
token of independence. Australians and Americans are rather proud of their
nationhood and of their distinct identity, and as a mark of that national pride they
. proclaim their standard English as Australian or American. Another positive
outcome of standardization is that the community or nation-state gets a formalized,
uniform linguistic entity (i.e. a standard language) that can open channels of
communication between linguistically (dialectally) diverse groups and communities.
This is important for people and messages to travel across space, overcoming
dialectal differences, and get wider acceptability. In another sense too, the presence
of a standard language helps people forget (or at least push below the surface) their
dialect differences and forge associations with one another in the name of the
standard language.

In practical terms, standardization leads to smoother governance, wider

communicability of messages and speedier and easier dissemination of knowledge.
Education, especially formal education benefits a great deal from the availability of a
standard language which provides a 'pedagogial ideal' to the teachers and pupils. The
standard language is what schools teach and it is also the medium through which
schools teach. For the learners, being educated becomes synonymous with gaining
mastery over th standard language, not only for being able to speak and write in it,
but also for accessing new knowledges and technologies throught it.

Standardization, furthermore, enable writers, scientists, thinkers to create newer

repositories of ideas, thoughts and discoveries in the forms of books, journals and
other forms of scholarly discourse. Electronic and print media (especially the latter)
use the standard fornl extensively for news, views and opinions. In fact, one of the
chief uses of standard language is the creation of a vast body of written documents,
so much so that often standard language becomes synonymous with written language.

On the negative side, standardization acts as a powerful iilstrument for the domination
of the elite over the masses. The standard language, because of its all pervasive use in
administration, bureaucracy, law, the professions and, most importantly, in education
helps the elite consolidate and perpetuate their power. ,&Thoughtheoretically the
standard language and the 'fruits' of standardization are available to all, in actual
practice, the vast majority remains outside the sphere of the standard
Lm'guage use-1 language. l l u s , while the presence of a standard language creates a kind of social
mandate that in order to move up in terms of socio-economic success, education and
professional advancement, one needs the standard language, the institutional and
organisational structures are such that a large majority of people are unable to leam
and use the standard language. That being so, this vast majority is then perceived as
being constituted of speakers of non-standard, sub-standard or mere dialects. In turn
they lose out socio-economically and politically and are doomed to stay in positions
of powerlessness. Another consequence of standardization is that speakers of dialects
or non-standard varieties develop strong negative perceptions of their own varieties
and even their own speech communities. These negative perceptions, over a period
of time, get fixed in the psyche of individuals and communities and become obstacles
in their full and meaningful participation in nationavregional enterprises.

Languages have always been standardized and all societies have created standard
languages in order to consolidate and sustain their power and to exercise social
control. Language standardization and codification has always been seen as a
positive human intervention aimed at the 'larger good' of the people. The arguments
built up in favour of codification and creation of standards have highlighted the need
to bring the masses (representing different dialectdvarieties) into the mainstream by
malting them literate and educating them in and through the standard language.
While, on the face of it, it is a laudable aim, the fact remains that in most societies the
access to standard language and the knowledge and technologies associated with it
have been largely the preserve of the select few -the elite and their cohoi-ts. The
masses have, as a result, been made to aspire and struggle and reach out to learn the
standard language, but a vast majority has always been denied this access due to
social, political and other factors. Those who fail to access the standard language are
thus hvice-cursed - they do not learn the standard language, and they also begin to
attach stigma to their own 'nonstandard forms' or dialects. They desert their mother
tongues in their pursuit of the standard languages, which constantly eludes them.
These vast numbers of people are then characterized as 'uneducated', 'illiterate',
'uncouth', 'uncultured' (the terms we often come across are JZG&& ganwaar, ~nparh,
etc.) because there is a very convenient myth constructed and floated by the 'elite' that
knowledge and wisdom and modernity and progress can come only through the
standard language. It is never stated that dialects or non-standard varieties can and do
represent knowledges, belief systems, great deal of creativity and insights into life
and nature. As a consequence, non-standard varieties get relegated to unimportant
margins of life, discourse and scholarly speculation. Consider the following two
statements that have been taken from as rather reputable text books on
sociolinguistics:

1. "It is probably fair to say that the only kind of variety which would count as
'proper language' is a standard l a n _ p u ~ ' '
2. "Standard English (e.g. the kind of English used in this book) is not a dialect
at all, but a language, whereas the varieties that are not used in formal writing
are dialects"
(R.A. Hudson)

One can immediately see from these statements the kind of logic that is inexorably
built up by those who create the standard language and ivho stand to benefit fiom it
the most: standard language is the only 'proper language' and this 'proper language' is
the only form that is suitable for 'foimal' (read this to mean learned or scholarly or ,
serious) writing. This being the logic, it is small wonder that all the knowledge and
learning and culture are appropriated by those who control and use the standard
language, and it is then at their sole discretion that all these 'riches' have to be Language
apportioned among the masses of common people (i.e. speakers of didects). Standardization

Standardization and the concomitant codification of language, it is argued, are aimed

at minimizing vagueness and ambiguity. The implication is damning for non- -
standard varieties - they are full of vagueness and ambiguities and uncertain
articulations, and it needs the intervention of well-meaning linguists and language
planners to remove, or at least reduce this vagueness and hinbiguity through a process
of standardization. In order to counter this kind of argument, it has been suggested
that standard languages (the result of codification) may be good for formal discourse
in spoken and written forms, but they lack charm and earthiness and a certain
cadence which the so-called dialects and non-standard varieties have

4.6 LET US SUM UP

In this unit, we have tried to make you understand the notion of 'standard' and
'dialects'/'varietiesf. We have also given you an insight into the processes of
standardization, the need for a standard language and the consequences for the non-
standard varieties,

4.7 KEYWORDS

standardization the process of making a variety of language conform

to a standard variety. This may take place in
connection with the writing system or spelling or
even pronunciation, and is usually implemented by
government authority.

standard language That particular variety oSa language, usually both

spoken and written, which is accepted as the norm
for educated usage. The standard variety is taught in
schools and used for almost all publication; educated
speakers speak it in all circumstances, except
possibly in speaking to close relatives.

standard English That particular variety of English which is

considered to be appropriate in formal contexts, and
which is considered by many educated speakers to
be appropriate in all contexts. Acquiring fluency in
standard English is a large part of what we consider
education. Within limits pronunciation is not
considered part of standard English, and standard
English may be spoken with almost any kind of
regional accent. However, in the written form,
standard English is generally the same all over the
world.

selection The first step in standardization: choosing which

dialect should be the standard.

codification 'Fixing' conventions/rules (i,e. grammatical rules,

norms of pronunciation, spelling and other writing
convention) in the process of 'creating' a standard
language.
41

- - ----
 I
Lntrgrrrrge in use-1
elaboration of function Taking a language which has greviollsly been used
only for certain purposes and introducin~gchanges
(such as new voiabulal-y) that will allow it to bk used
for a much wider range of purposes, s~achas writing
laws, and writing on other academic subjects. This
is usually a central part of language planning.

acceptance The final stage in language planning in which the

k w l y constructed language comes to be generally
used by the community.

4.8 QUESTIONS

1. Which language do you identify with and why? Do you think it is a standard
language or a dialect?

2. Do you agree with the two statements quoted in 4.5 above? Give your
arguments.

3. 'Standard language' - the n o t i o ~d . ~ ~ g e sthat

t s there can only be one standard
language and the rest are dialects. Would you agree with this or would you
rather maintain that it is possible to have several standards? Consider the
case of English and Hindi and answer.

4. Reflect on the different ways in which dialects and their users can suffer as a
result of the hegemony and poker of a standard language.

J. Can there ever be only one 'correct' way of sayingtwriting things? Take sides
and discuss.

4.9 BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Fairclough, N. 19921ed.l Critical Language Awareness. London: Longman.

2. Gupta, R.S. and K.S.Aggarwal. 1998(eds.) Studies in Indian

Sociolinguistics New Delhi: Creative Books.

3. Hudson, R.A. 1980 Sociolinguistics. Cambridge: C.U.P. I

4. Kress, G.R. and R.V. Hodge. 1979. Language as Ideology. London:

Routledge and Kegan Paul.

5. Kress, G.R. 1985 Linguistic Processes in Sociocultural Practice. Victoria:

Deakin University Press.

6. Wardaugh, R. 1986 An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. Oxford: Basil

Blackwell.

7. William, Glyn. 1992: Sociolinguistics: A Sociolngical Critique. London and

New York: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
NOTES