![]() Weth, Constanze ![]() in Written Language and Literacy (2020), 23(2), 133-153 Research on language contact has so far mainly focused on oral situations, although standardization and language ideologies always have an important influence on multilingualism in both its written and ... [more ▼] Research on language contact has so far mainly focused on oral situations, although standardization and language ideologies always have an important influence on multilingualism in both its written and its spoken form. This raises the question of which theoretical models are most suitable for the description of written language contact. The present paper recalls linguistic investigations of written language. Some research on multilingual writing shares concepts with research on oral language contacts, always adapting them for writing. Other research develops new concepts for investigating multilingual writing. Within the framework of research on multilingualism, some concepts approach language contact as a question of systematic interactions between linguistic systems (e.g. borrowing, code-switching, graphe¬mat¬ic matrix, schriftdenken), other concepts envisage language contact as a multilingual practice (e.g. translanguaging, multimodal analysis, biliteracy). Written language contact is an especially fruitful field of study for pointing out major differences between these two research traditions and for bridging them. [less ▲] Detailed reference viewed: 98 (0 UL)![]() Weth, Constanze ![]() in Written Language and Literacy (2020), 23(2), 289-312 The concept of schriftdenken describes how the knowledge of a writing system in use guides the creation of a writing system for a yet to be standardized language. Trubetzkoy described this effect with ... [more ▼] The concept of schriftdenken describes how the knowledge of a writing system in use guides the creation of a writing system for a yet to be standardized language. Trubetzkoy described this effect with reference to the invention of the Glagolitic alphabet in the 9th century with Greek as the reference writing system. This paper demonstrates schriftdenken and measures to increase orthographic differences in two writing systems with a relatively young history: Luxembourgish (a Germanic language) and Rusyn (a Slavic language). In the Luxembourgish context, schriftdenken and orthographic separation are revealed by the historical context, whereas in the Rusyn context, both practices are related to different geographic contact situations in the countries where Rusyn is spoken and written. The reference languages for Luxem¬bourg¬ish are German, French and Dutch; for Rusyn, they are Russian, Ukrainian, Church Slavonic, Polish and Slovak. [less ▲] Detailed reference viewed: 70 (1 UL)![]() ![]() Weth, Constanze ![]() in Bunčić, Daniel (Ed.) Biscriptality a sociolinguistic typology (2016) Detailed reference viewed: 101 (0 UL) |
||