Standard language: Difference between revisions
imported>Wolfdog Perhaps this simple preposition swap will make the lede run smoother |
imported>InternetArchiveBot Rescuing 1 sources and tagging 0 as dead.) #IABot (v2.0.9.5) (Tomkozak61 - 27605 |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Short description|Language variety with substantially codified | {{Short description|Language variety with substantially codified usage}} | ||
{{Use Oxford spelling|date=September 2024}} | {{Use Oxford spelling|date=September 2024}} | ||
{{Use dmy dates|date=November 2022}} | {{Use dmy dates|date=November 2022}} | ||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
Either course of events typically results in a relatively fixed orthography codified in [[linguistic prescription|grammars]] and normative [[Dictionary|dictionaries]], in which users can also sometimes find illustrative examples drawn from literary, legal, or religious texts.{{sfnp|Ammon|2004|p=275}} Whether grammars and dictionaries are created by the state or by private citizens (e.g. ''[[Webster's Dictionary]]''), some users regard such linguistic codifications as authoritative for correcting the spoken and written forms of the language.{{sfnp|Ammon|2004|p=276}} Effects of such codifications include slowing the pace of [[Historical linguistics|diachronic]] change in the standardized variety and affording a basis for further linguistic development (''[[Ausbau]]'').{{sfnp|Ammon|2004|p=275}} In the practices of broadcasting and of official communications, the standard usually functions as a normalizing reference for speech and writing. In educational contexts, it usually informs the version of the language taught to non-native learners.{{sfnp|Trudgill|2006|p=119}} | Either course of events typically results in a relatively fixed orthography codified in [[linguistic prescription|grammars]] and normative [[Dictionary|dictionaries]], in which users can also sometimes find illustrative examples drawn from literary, legal, or religious texts.{{sfnp|Ammon|2004|p=275}} Whether grammars and dictionaries are created by the state or by private citizens (e.g. ''[[Webster's Dictionary]]''), some users regard such linguistic codifications as authoritative for correcting the spoken and written forms of the language.{{sfnp|Ammon|2004|p=276}} Effects of such codifications include slowing the pace of [[Historical linguistics|diachronic]] change in the standardized variety and affording a basis for further linguistic development (''[[Ausbau]]'').{{sfnp|Ammon|2004|p=275}} In the practices of broadcasting and of official communications, the standard usually functions as a normalizing reference for speech and writing. In educational contexts, it usually informs the version of the language taught to non-native learners.{{sfnp|Trudgill|2006|p=119}} | ||
In those ways, the standard variety acquires [[prestige (sociolinguistics)|social prestige]] and greater functional importance than [[nonstandard dialect]]s,{{sfnp|Trudgill|2006|p=119}} which depend upon or are [[autonomy and heteronomy | In those ways, the standard variety acquires [[prestige (sociolinguistics)|social prestige]] and greater functional importance than [[nonstandard dialect]]s,{{sfnp|Trudgill|2006|p=119}} which depend upon or are [[autonomy and heteronomy|heteronomous]] with respect to the standard idiom. Standard usage serves as the linguistic authority, as in the case of specialist [[terminology]]; moreover, the standardization of spoken forms is oriented towards the codified standard.{{sfnp|Chambers|Trudgill|1998|p=9}} Historically, a standard language arises in two ways: (i) in the case of [[Standard English]], linguistic standardization occurs informally and piecemeal, without formal government intervention; (ii) in the cases of the French and Spanish languages, linguistic standardization occurs formally, directed by [[Linguistic prescription|prescriptive]] language institutions, such as the {{Lang|fr|[[Académie Française]]|italic=no}} and the [[Royal Spanish Academy]], which respectively produce ''Le bon français'' and ''El buen español''.{{sfnp|McArthur|McArthur|1992|p=290}}{{sfnp|Trudgill|2006|p=119}} | ||
A standard variety can be conceptualized in two ways: (i) as the [[sociolect]] of a given [[Social stratification|socio-economic stratum]] or (ii) as the normative codification of a [[dialect]], an idealized abstraction.{{sfnp|Van Mol|2003|p=11}} Hence, the full standardization of a language is impractical, because a standardized dialect cannot fully function as a real entity, but does function as set of linguistic norms observed to varying degrees in the course of ''[[usus]]'' – of how people actually speak and write the language.{{sfnp|Starčević|2016|p=71}}{{sfnp|Romaine|2008|p=685}} In practice, the language varieties identified as standard are neither uniform nor fully stabilized, especially in their spoken forms.{{sfnp|Milroy|2007}} From that perspective, the linguist [[Suzanne Romaine]] says that standard languages can be conceptually compared to the [[imagined communities]] of ''nation'' and ''nationalism'', as described by the political scientist [[Benedict Anderson]],{{sfnp|Romaine|2008|p=685}} which indicates that linguistic standardization is the result of a society's history and sociology, and thus is not a universal phenomenon;{{sfnp|Romaine|2008|p=685}} of the approximately 7,000 contemporary spoken languages, most do not have a codified standard dialect.{{sfnp|Romaine|2008|p=685}} | A standard variety can be conceptualized in two ways: (i) as the [[sociolect]] of a given [[Social stratification|socio-economic stratum]] or (ii) as the normative codification of a [[dialect]], an idealized abstraction.{{sfnp|Van Mol|2003|p=11}} Hence, the full standardization of a language is impractical, because a standardized dialect cannot fully function as a real entity, but does function as set of linguistic norms observed to varying degrees in the course of ''[[usus]]'' – of how people actually speak and write the language.{{sfnp|Starčević|2016|p=71}}{{sfnp|Romaine|2008|p=685}} In practice, the language varieties identified as standard are neither uniform nor fully stabilized, especially in their spoken forms.{{sfnp|Milroy|2007}} From that perspective, the linguist [[Suzanne Romaine]] says that standard languages can be conceptually compared to the [[imagined communities]] of ''nation'' and ''nationalism'', as described by the political scientist [[Benedict Anderson]],{{sfnp|Romaine|2008|p=685}} which indicates that linguistic standardization is the result of a society's history and sociology, and thus is not a universal phenomenon;{{sfnp|Romaine|2008|p=685}} of the approximately 7,000 contemporary spoken languages, most do not have a codified standard dialect.{{sfnp|Romaine|2008|p=685}} | ||
| Line 42: | Line 42: | ||
===English in the United Kingdom=== | ===English in the United Kingdom=== | ||
{{Further|Standard English}} | {{Further|Standard English}} | ||
In the United Kingdom, the standard language is [[British English]], which is based upon the language of the medieval [[court of Chancery]] of England and Wales.{{sfnp|Smith|1996}} In the late-seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries, [[Standard English]] became established as the linguistic norm of the [[Social class in the United Kingdom|upper class]], composed of the [[Peerage of the United Kingdom|peerage]] and the [[gentry]].{{sfnp|Blake|1996}} Socially, the accent of the spoken version of the standard language then indicated that the speaker was a man or a woman possessed of a good education, and thus of high [[reputation|social prestige]].{{sfnp|Baugh|Cable|2002}} In England and Wales, Standard English is usually associated with [[Received Pronunciation]], "the standard accent of English as spoken in the [[Southern England|south of England]] | In the United Kingdom, the standard language is [[British English]], which is based upon the language of the medieval [[court of Chancery]] of England and Wales.{{sfnp|Smith|1996}} In the late-seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries, [[Standard English]] became established as the linguistic norm of the [[Social class in the United Kingdom|upper class]], composed of the [[Peerage of the United Kingdom|peerage]] and the [[gentry]].{{sfnp|Blake|1996}} Socially, the accent of the spoken version of the standard language then indicated that the speaker was a man or a woman possessed of a good education, and thus of high [[reputation|social prestige]].{{sfnp|Baugh|Cable|2002}} In England and Wales, Standard English is usually associated with [[Received Pronunciation]], "the standard accent of English as spoken in the [[Southern England|south of England]]", but it may also be spoken with other accents, and in other countries still other accents are used ([[Australian English|Australian]], [[Canadian English|Canadian]], [[American English|American]], [[Scottish English|Scottish]], etc.).{{sfnp|Pearsall|1999|p=xiv}} | ||
===Greek=== | ===Greek=== | ||
The standard form of [[Modern Greek]] is based on the [[Varieties of Modern Greek#Modern varieties|Southern dialects]]; these dialects are spoken mainly in the [[Peloponnese]], the [[Ionian Islands]], [[Attica]], [[Crete]] and the [[Cyclades]].{{sfnp|Horrocks|1997}} | The standard form of [[Modern Greek]] is based on the [[Varieties of Modern Greek#Modern varieties|Southern dialects]]; these dialects are spoken mainly in the [[Peloponnese]], the [[Ionian Islands]], [[Attica]], [[Crete]] and the [[Cyclades]].{{sfnp|Horrocks|1997}} | ||
=== | ===Hindi–Urdu=== | ||
Two standardized [[register (sociolinguistics)|registers]] of the [[Hindustani language]] have legal status in India: [[Standard Hindi]] (one of 23 co-official national languages) and [[Urdu]] ([[Pakistan]]'s official tongue); as a result, Hindustani is often called "Hindi-Urdu".{{sfnp|Blum|2002}} | Two standardized [[register (sociolinguistics)|registers]] of the [[Hindustani language]] have legal status in India: [[Standard Hindi]] (one of 23 co-official national languages) and [[Urdu]] ([[Pakistan]]'s official tongue); as a result, Hindustani is often called "Hindi-Urdu".{{sfnp|Blum|2002}} | ||
| Line 63: | Line 63: | ||
===Portuguese=== | ===Portuguese=== | ||
==== Brazil ==== | ====Brazil==== | ||
In Brazil, actors and journalists usually adopt an unofficial, but ''[[de facto]]'', spoken standard of [[Brazilian Portuguese]], originally derived from the middle-class dialects of [[Rio de Janeiro (city)|Rio de Janeiro]] and [[Brasília]], but that now encompasses educated urban pronunciations from the different speech communities in the southeast. This artificial accent is called [[:pt:Dialeto_neutro|''sotaque neutro'']]. In that standard, {{angbr|s}} represents the phoneme {{IPA|/s/}} when it appears at the end of a syllable (whereas in Rio de Janeiro this represents {{IPA|/ʃ/}}) and the [[rhotic consonant]] spelled {{angbr|r}} is pronounced {{IPA|[h]}} in the same situation (whereas in [[São Paulo (city)|São Paulo]] this is usually an [[alveolar flap]] or [[alveolar trill|trill]]). | In Brazil, actors and journalists usually adopt an unofficial, but ''[[de facto]]'', spoken standard of [[Brazilian Portuguese]], originally derived from the middle-class dialects of [[Rio de Janeiro (city)|Rio de Janeiro]] and [[Brasília]], but that now encompasses educated urban pronunciations from the different speech communities in the southeast. This artificial accent is called [[:pt:Dialeto_neutro|''sotaque neutro'']]. In that standard, {{angbr|s}} represents the phoneme {{IPA|/s/}} when it appears at the end of a syllable (whereas in Rio de Janeiro this represents {{IPA|/ʃ/}}) and the [[rhotic consonant]] spelled {{angbr|r}} is pronounced {{IPA|[h]}} in the same situation (whereas in [[São Paulo (city)|São Paulo]] this is usually an [[alveolar flap]] or [[alveolar trill|trill]]). | ||
The [[sociolect]] of [[Prestige (sociolinguistics)|prestige]] of ''[[mineiro]]'' spoken in the capital of [[Minas Gerais]], [[Belo Horizonte]], is the accent from Brazilian Portuguese that is the nearest to ''sotaque neutro''.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Vieira Lima Neto |first=Newton |date=2018 |title=BRASÍLIA, SUA GENTE, SEUS SOTAQUES: DIFUSÃO CANDANGA E FOCALIZAÇÃO BRASILIENSE NA CAPITAL FEDERAL |url=http://icts.unb.br/jspui/bitstream/10482/34808/1/2018_NewtonVieiraLimaNeto.pdf |access-date=2024-09-15 |website=University of Brasília}}</ref> | The [[sociolect]] of [[Prestige (sociolinguistics)|prestige]] of ''[[mineiro]]'' spoken in the capital of [[Minas Gerais]], [[Belo Horizonte]], is the accent from Brazilian Portuguese that is the nearest to ''sotaque neutro''.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Vieira Lima Neto |first=Newton |date=2018 |title=BRASÍLIA, SUA GENTE, SEUS SOTAQUES: DIFUSÃO CANDANGA E FOCALIZAÇÃO BRASILIENSE NA CAPITAL FEDERAL |url=http://icts.unb.br/jspui/bitstream/10482/34808/1/2018_NewtonVieiraLimaNeto.pdf |access-date=2024-09-15 |website=University of Brasília |archive-date=14 September 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240914230041/http://icts.unb.br/jspui/bitstream/10482/34808/1/2018_NewtonVieiraLimaNeto.pdf |url-status=dead }}</ref> | ||
==== Africa and Europe ==== | ====Africa and Europe==== | ||
European and African dialects have differing realizations of {{IPA|/ʁ/}} than Brazilian dialects, with the former using {{IPA|[ʁ]}} and {{IPA|[r]}} and the latter using {{IPA|[x]}}, {{IPA|[h]}}, or {{IPA|[χ]}}.{{sfnp|Mateus|d'Andrade|2000|pp=5–6, 11}} | European and African dialects have differing realizations of {{IPA|/ʁ/}} than Brazilian dialects, with the former using {{IPA|[ʁ]}} and {{IPA|[r]}} and the latter using {{IPA|[x]}}, {{IPA|[h]}}, or {{IPA|[χ]}}.{{sfnp|Mateus|d'Andrade|2000|pp=5–6, 11}} | ||
| Line 82: | Line 82: | ||
==See also== | ==See also== | ||
* [[Classical language]] | * [[Classical language]] | ||
* [[Covert prestige]] | |||
* [[Koiné language]] | * [[Koiné language]] | ||
* [[Language secessionism]] | * [[Language secessionism]] | ||
| Line 130: | Line 131: | ||
*{{cite web | *{{cite web | ||
|author=BBC | |author=BBC | ||
|url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/northernireland/irish/blas/education/beginnersblas/dictionaries.shtml | |url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/northernireland/irish/blas/education/beginnersblas/dictionaries.shtml | ||
|title=Beginners' Blas | |title=Beginners' Blas | ||
|access-date=18 March 2011 | |access-date=18 March 2011 | ||
|date=June 2005 | |date=June 2005 | ||
|publisher=BBC | |publisher=BBC | ||
}} | }} | ||
| Line 192: | Line 192: | ||
|year=1992 | |year=1992 | ||
|editor1-last=Clyne | |editor1-last=Clyne | ||
|editor1-first=Michael G | |editor1-first=Michael G | ||
|chapter=Serbo-Croatian as a pluricentric language | |chapter=Serbo-Croatian as a pluricentric language | ||
|title=Pluricentric Languages: Differing Norms in Different Nations | |title=Pluricentric Languages: Differing Norms in Different Nations | ||
|publisher=Mouton de Gruyter | |publisher=Mouton de Gruyter | ||
|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=wawGFWNuHiwC | |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=wawGFWNuHiwC | ||
|series=Contributions to the sociology of language 62 | |series=Contributions to the sociology of language 62 | ||
|location=Berlin & New York | |location=Berlin & New York | ||
|isbn=9783110128550 | |isbn=9783110128550 | ||
|oclc=24668375 | |oclc=24668375 | ||
| Line 296: | Line 296: | ||
|year=1989 | |year=1989 | ||
|title=Język mieszkańców Krakowa, część I | |title=Język mieszkańców Krakowa, część I | ||
|publisher=Nakł. Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego | |||
|location=Warszawa-Kraków | |location=Warszawa-Kraków | ||
|pages=134 | |pages=134 | ||
| Line 302: | Line 303: | ||
*{{cite book | *{{cite book | ||
|editor-last=Eachach | |editor-last=Eachach | ||
|editor-first=Vivian Uíbh | |editor-first=Vivian Uíbh | ||
|title=An Caighdeán Oifigiúil—Caighdeán Athbhreithnithe | |title=An Caighdeán Oifigiúil—Caighdeán Athbhreithnithe | ||
|year= 2012 | |year=2012 | ||
|url=http://www.oireachtas.ie/parliament/media/michelle/Final-Version.pdf | |url=http://www.oireachtas.ie/parliament/media/michelle/Final-Version.pdf | ||
|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130506010907/http://www.oireachtas.ie/parliament/media/michelle/Final-Version.pdf | |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130506010907/http://www.oireachtas.ie/parliament/media/michelle/Final-Version.pdf | ||
| Line 326: | Line 327: | ||
|title=Foilseacháin Rialtais / Government Publications—Don tSeachtain dar críoch 25 Iúil 2012 / For the week ended 25 July 2012 | |title=Foilseacháin Rialtais / Government Publications—Don tSeachtain dar críoch 25 Iúil 2012 / For the week ended 25 July 2012 | ||
|url=http://www.opw.ie/en/media/wl25072012.pdf | |url=http://www.opw.ie/en/media/wl25072012.pdf | ||
|publisher=Rialtas na hÉireann|access-date=2012-08-02 | |publisher=Rialtas na hÉireann | ||
|access-date=2012-08-02 | |||
|language=Irish, en | |language=Irish, en | ||
|date=27 July 2012 | |date=27 July 2012 | ||
|quote=M67B Gramadach na Gaeilge 9781406425766 390 10.00 | |quote=M67B Gramadach na Gaeilge 9781406425766 390 10.00 | ||
|ref = {{harvid| Foilseacháin Rialtais|2012}} | |ref={{harvid| Foilseacháin Rialtais|2012}} | ||
}}{{dead link|date=December 2017 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }} | }}{{dead link|date=December 2017 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }} | ||
*{{cite book | *{{cite book | ||
| Line 381: | Line 383: | ||
|editor2-last=Franz | |editor2-last=Franz | ||
|editor2-first=Joachim | |editor2-first=Joachim | ||
|chapter=Bosnisch, Kroatisch, Serbisch – Wie spricht man eigentlich in Bosnien-Herzegowina? |trans-chapter=Bosnian, Croatian, Serbian – How do people really speak in Bosnia-Herzegovina? | |chapter=Bosnisch, Kroatisch, Serbisch – Wie spricht man eigentlich in Bosnien-Herzegowina? | ||
|trans-chapter=Bosnian, Croatian, Serbian – How do people really speak in Bosnia-Herzegovina? | |||
|title=Die Ordnung des Standard und die Differenzierung der Diskurse; Teil 1 | |title=Die Ordnung des Standard und die Differenzierung der Diskurse; Teil 1 | ||
|publisher=Peter Lang | |publisher=Peter Lang | ||
| Line 387: | Line 390: | ||
|language=de | |language=de | ||
|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=63hKaFGtTDAC | |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=63hKaFGtTDAC | ||
|location=Frankfurt am Main | |location=Frankfurt am Main | ||
|isbn=9783631599174 | |isbn=9783631599174 | ||
|oclc=699514676 | |oclc=699514676 | ||
|access-date=9 May 2013 | |access-date=9 May 2013 | ||
}} | }} | ||
*{{cite journal | *{{cite journal | ||
|last=Kapović | |last=Kapović | ||
|first =Mate | |first=Mate | ||
|year=2011 | |year=2011 | ||
|title=Language, Ideology and Politics in Croatia | |title=Language, Ideology and Politics in Croatia | ||
| Line 401: | Line 404: | ||
|issue=2 | |issue=2 | ||
|url=https://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/566935.SCN_2_2011_Kapovic.pdf | |url=https://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/566935.SCN_2_2011_Kapovic.pdf | ||
|archive-date=22 January 2020 | |||
|access-date=16 June 2019 | |||
|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200122010746/https://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/566935.SCN_2_2011_Kapovic.pdf | |||
|url-status=dead | |||
}} | }} | ||
* {{cite journal | * {{cite journal | ||
| Line 423: | Line 430: | ||
|editor2-last=Sappok | |editor2-last=Sappok | ||
|editor2-first=Christian | |editor2-first=Christian | ||
|title=Slavistische Linguistik 2002: Referate des XXVIII. Konstanzer Slavistischen Arbeitstreffens, Bochum 10.-12. September 2002 | |title=Slavistische Linguistik 2002: Referate des XXVIII. Konstanzer Slavistischen Arbeitstreffens, Bochum 10.-12. September 2002 | ||
|series=Slavistishe Beiträge; vol. 434 | |series=Slavistishe Beiträge; vol. 434 | ||
|publisher=Otto Sagner | |publisher=Otto Sagner | ||
|pages=97–148 | |pages=97–148 | ||
|language=de | |language=de | ||
|chapter=Pro und kontra: "Serbokroatisch" heute |trans-chapter=Pro and contra: "Serbo-Croatian" nowadays |chapter-url=http://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/430499.PRO_UND_KONTRA_SERBOKROATISCH.PDF |url-status=live | |chapter=Pro und kontra: "Serbokroatisch" heute | ||
|trans-chapter=Pro and contra: "Serbo-Croatian" nowadays | |||
|chapter-url=http://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/430499.PRO_UND_KONTRA_SERBOKROATISCH.PDF | |||
|url-status=live | |||
|location=Munich | |location=Munich | ||
|isbn=3-87690-885-X | |isbn=3-87690-885-X | ||
|oclc=56198470 | |oclc=56198470 | ||
|ssrn=3434516 | |ssrn=3434516 | ||
|id={{CROSBI|430499}} | |id={{CROSBI|430499}} | ||
|archive-date=4 August 2012 |archive-url=https://www.webcitation.org/69f5n0ek4?url=http://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/430499.PRO_UND_KONTRA_SERBOKROATISCH.PDF | |archive-date=4 August 2012 | ||
|access-date=6 June 2015 | |archive-url=https://www.webcitation.org/69f5n0ek4?url=http://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/430499.PRO_UND_KONTRA_SERBOKROATISCH.PDF | ||
|access-date=6 June 2015 | |||
}} | }} | ||
*{{cite book | *{{cite book | ||
|last=Kordić | |last=Kordić | ||
|first=Snježana | |first=Snježana | ||
|year=2007 | |year=2007 | ||
|editor1-last=Madelain | |editor1-last=Madelain | ||
|editor1-first=Anne | |editor1-first=Anne | ||
| Line 447: | Line 458: | ||
|publisher=Non Lieu | |publisher=Non Lieu | ||
|pages=71–78 | |pages=71–78 | ||
|language=fr | |language=fr | ||
|chapter=La langue croate, serbe, bosniaque et monténégrine | |chapter=La langue croate, serbe, bosniaque et monténégrine | ||
|trans-chapter=Croatian, Serbian, Bosniakian, and Montenegrin |chapter-url=http://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/429734.LA_LANGUE_CROATE_SERBE.PDF | |trans-chapter=Croatian, Serbian, Bosniakian, and Montenegrin | ||
|chapter-url=http://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/429734.LA_LANGUE_CROATE_SERBE.PDF | |||
|url-status=live | |url-status=live | ||
|location=Paris | |location=Paris | ||
|isbn=978-2-35270-036-4 | |isbn=978-2-35270-036-4 | ||
|oclc=182916790 | |oclc=182916790 | ||
|ssrn=3439662 | |ssrn=3439662 | ||
|id={{CROSBI|429734}} | |id={{CROSBI|429734}} | ||
|archive-date=4 August 2012 |archive-url=https://www.webcitation.org/69f5WqGAx?url=http://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/429734.LA_LANGUE_CROATE_SERBE.PDF | |archive-date=4 August 2012 | ||
|access-date=8 May 2014 | |archive-url=https://www.webcitation.org/69f5WqGAx?url=http://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/429734.LA_LANGUE_CROATE_SERBE.PDF | ||
|access-date=8 May 2014 | |||
}} | }} | ||
*{{cite book | *{{cite book | ||
|last=Kordić | |last = Kordić | ||
|first=Snježana | |first = Snježana | ||
| year=2009 | |year = 2009 | ||
|editor1-last=Badurina | |editor1-last = Badurina | ||
|editor1-first=Lada | |editor1-first = Lada | ||
|editor2-last=Pranjković | |editor2-last = Pranjković | ||
|editor2-first=Ivo | |editor2-first = Ivo | ||
|editor2-link=Ivo Pranjković | |editor2-link = Ivo Pranjković | ||
|editor3-last=Silić | |editor3-last = Silić | ||
|editor3-first=Josip | |editor3-first = Josip | ||
|title=Jezični varijeteti i nacionalni identiteti | |title = Jezični varijeteti i nacionalni identiteti | ||
|publisher=Disput | |publisher = Disput | ||
|pages=83–108 | |pages = 83–108 | ||
|language=sh | |language = sh | ||
|chapter=Policentrični standardni jezik | |chapter = Policentrični standardni jezik | ||
|trans-chapter=Polycentric Standard Language |chapter-url=http://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/426269.POLICENTRICNI_STANDARDNI.PDF | | |trans-chapter = Polycentric Standard Language | ||
url-status=live | |chapter-url = http://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/426269.POLICENTRICNI_STANDARDNI.PDF | ||
|location=Zagreb | |url-status = live | ||
|isbn=978-953-260-054-4 | |location = Zagreb | ||
|oclc=437306433 | |isbn = 978-953-260-054-4 | ||
|ssrn=3438216 | |oclc = 437306433 | ||
|id={{CROSBI|426269}} | |ssrn = 3438216 | ||
|archive-date=4 August 2012 |archive-url=https://www.webcitation.org/69f5Mtzox?url=http://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/426269.POLICENTRICNI_STANDARDNI.PDF | |id = {{CROSBI|426269}} | ||
|access-date=5 April 2013 | |archive-date = 4 August 2012 | ||
|archive-url = https://www.webcitation.org/69f5Mtzox?url=http://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/426269.POLICENTRICNI_STANDARDNI.PDF | |||
|access-date = 5 April 2013 | |||
}} | }} | ||
* {{cite book | * {{cite book | ||
|last=Kordić | |last=Kordić | ||
|first=Snježana | |first=Snježana | ||
|year=2010 | |year=2010 | ||
|language=sh | |language=sh | ||
|title=Jezik i nacionalizam | |title=Jezik i nacionalizam | ||
|trans-title=Language and Nationalism | |trans-title=Language and Nationalism | ||
|url=http://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/475567.Jezik_i_nacionalizam.pdf | |url=http://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/475567.Jezik_i_nacionalizam.pdf | ||
|url-status=live | |url-status=live | ||
|series=Rotulus Universitas | |series=Rotulus Universitas | ||
|location=Zagreb | |location=Zagreb | ||
| Line 503: | Line 518: | ||
|ol=15270636W | |ol=15270636W | ||
|id={{CROSBI|475567}} | |id={{CROSBI|475567}} | ||
|archive-date=1 June 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120601175359/http://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/475567.Jezik_i_nacionalizam.pdf | |archive-date=1 June 2012 | ||
|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120601175359/http://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/475567.Jezik_i_nacionalizam.pdf | |||
|access-date=5 August 2019 | |access-date=5 August 2019 | ||
}} | }} | ||
| Line 521: | Line 537: | ||
*{{Cite book | *{{Cite book | ||
|last1=Langston | |last1=Langston | ||
|first1=Keith | |first1=Keith | ||
|last2=Peti-Stantić | |last2=Peti-Stantić | ||
|first2=Anita | |first2=Anita | ||
| Line 556: | Line 572: | ||
* {{cite book | * {{cite book | ||
|last1=Mateus | |last1=Mateus | ||
|first1=Maria Helena | |first1=Maria Helena | ||
|last2=d'Andrade | |last2=d'Andrade | ||
|first2=Ernesto | |first2=Ernesto | ||
|year= 2000 | |year=2000 | ||
|title=The Phonology of Portuguese | |title=The Phonology of Portuguese | ||
|publisher=Oxford University Press | |publisher=Oxford University Press | ||
| Line 570: | Line 586: | ||
|date=10 April 2015 | |date=10 April 2015 | ||
|title=Naučnoznanstvena-znanstvenonaučna istina | |title=Naučnoznanstvena-znanstvenonaučna istina | ||
|trans-title=Scientific truth |url=http://tacno.net/novosti/naucnoznanstvena-znanstvenonaucna-istina/ | |trans-title=Scientific truth | ||
|url=http://tacno.net/novosti/naucnoznanstvena-znanstvenonaucna-istina/ | |||
|language=sh | |language=sh | ||
|publisher=Tačno.net | |publisher=Tačno.net | ||
|location=Mostar | |location=Mostar | ||
|archive-date=16 April 2015 | |archive-date=16 April 2015 | ||
|url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150416011309/http://tacno.net/novosti/naucnoznanstvena-znanstvenonaucna-istina/ | |url-status=live | ||
|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150416011309/http://tacno.net/novosti/naucnoznanstvena-znanstvenonaucna-istina/ | |||
|access-date=12 February 2016 | |access-date=12 February 2016 | ||
}} | }} | ||
| Line 620: | Line 638: | ||
}} | }} | ||
*{{cite news | *{{cite news | ||
|last= Ní Shúilleabháin | |last=Ní Shúilleabháin | ||
|first=Niamh | |first=Niamh | ||
|title=Caighdeán Athbhreithnithe don Ghaeilge | |title=Caighdeán Athbhreithnithe don Ghaeilge | ||
| Line 628: | Line 646: | ||
|date=2012-08-02 | |date=2012-08-02 | ||
|language=Irish | |language=Irish | ||
|archive-date=2 August 2012 | |||
|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120802164633/http://www.gaelport.com/nuacht/Caighdean-athbhreithnithe-don-Ghaeilge/ | |||
|url-status=dead | |||
}} | }} | ||
* {{cite book | * {{cite book | ||
| Line 686: | Line 707: | ||
|chapter=Linguistic Diversity and Language Standardization | |chapter=Linguistic Diversity and Language Standardization | ||
|editor-last=Hellinger | |editor-last=Hellinger | ||
|editor-first=Marlis | |editor-first=Marlis | ||
|editor2-last=Pauwels | |editor2-last=Pauwels | ||
|editor2-first=Anne | |editor2-first=Anne | ||
|title=Handbook of Language and Communication: Diversity and Change | |title=Handbook of Language and Communication: Diversity and Change | ||
|isbn=9783110198539 | |isbn=9783110198539 | ||
| Line 747: | Line 768: | ||
|access-date=2019-01-13 | |access-date=2019-01-13 | ||
|language=uk | |language=uk | ||
|ref = {{harvid|Соціологія}} | |ref={{harvid|Соціологія}} | ||
}} | }} | ||
*{{Cite journal | *{{Cite journal | ||
| Line 790: | Line 811: | ||
|first=Paul-Louis | |first=Paul-Louis | ||
|year=2003 | |year=2003 | ||
|title=Le serbo-croate (bosniaque, croate, monténégrin, serbe): de l'étude d'une langue à l'identité des langues | |title=Le serbo-croate (bosniaque, croate, monténégrin, serbe): de l'étude d'une langue à l'identité des langues | ||
|trans-title=Serbo-Croatian (Bosnian, Croatian, Montenegrin, Serbian): from the study of a language to the identity of languages | |trans-title=Serbo-Croatian (Bosnian, Croatian, Montenegrin, Serbian): from the study of a language to the identity of languages | ||
|url=http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/article/slave_0080-2557_2002_num_74_2_6801 | |url=http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/article/slave_0080-2557_2002_num_74_2_6801 | ||
| Line 797: | Line 818: | ||
|volume=74 | |volume=74 | ||
|issue=2–3 | |issue=2–3 | ||
|pages=311–325 | |pages=311–325 | ||
|doi=10.3406/slave.2002.6801 | |doi=10.3406/slave.2002.6801 | ||
|issn=0080-2557 | |issn=0080-2557 | ||
|oclc=754204160 | |oclc=754204160 | ||
|id= {{ZDB|208723-6}} | |id={{ZDB|208723-6}} | ||
}} | }} | ||
* {{cite journal | * {{cite journal | ||
Latest revision as of 18:22, 29 December 2025
Template:Short description Template:Use Oxford spelling Template:Use dmy dates A standard language (or standard variety, standard dialect, standardized dialect or simply standard) is any language variety that has undergone substantial codification in its grammar, lexicon, writing system, or other features and that stands out among related varieties in a community as the one with the highest status or prestige.Template:SfnpTemplate:Sfnp Often, it is the prestige language variety of a whole country.Template:Sfnp
In linguistics, the process of a variety becoming organized into a standard, for instance by being widely expounded in grammar books or other reference works,Template:Sfnp and also the process of making people's language usage conform to that standard,Template:Sfnp is called standardization. Typically, the varieties that undergo standardization are those associated with centres of commerce and government,Template:SfnpTemplate:Sfnp used frequently by educated people and in news broadcasting, and taught widely in schools and to non-native learners of the language.[1]Template:Sfnp Within a language community, standardization usually begins with a particular variety being selected (often towards a goal of further linguistic uniformity), accepted by influential people, socially and culturally spread, established in opposition to competitor varieties, maintained, increasingly used in diverse contexts, and assigned a high social status as a result of the variety being linked to the most successful people.Template:Sfnp As a sociological effect of these processes, most users of a standard dialect—and many users of other dialects of the same language—come to believe that the standard is inherently superior to, or consider it the linguistic baseline against which to judge, the other dialects.Template:Sfnp However, such beliefs are firmly rooted in social perceptions rather than any objective evaluation.[1] Any varieties that do not carry high social status in a community (and thus may be defined in opposition to standard dialects) are called nonstandard or vernacular dialects.
The standardization of a language is a continual process, because language is always changing and a language in use cannot be permanently standardized.Template:Sfnp Standardization may originate from a motivation to make the written form of a language more uniform, as is the case of Standard English.Template:Sfnp Typically, standardization processes include efforts to stabilize the spelling of the prestige dialect, to codify usages and particular (denotative) meanings through formal grammars and dictionaries, and to encourage public acceptance of the codifications as intrinsically correct.Template:SfnpTemplate:Sfnp In that vein, a pluricentric language has interacting standard varieties.Template:SfnpTemplate:SfnpTemplate:Sfnp Examples are English, French, Portuguese, German, Korean, Serbo-Croatian, Spanish, Swedish, Armenian and Mandarin Chinese.Template:SfnpTemplate:Sfnp Monocentric languages, such as Russian and Japanese, have one standardized idiom.Template:Sfnp
The term standard language occasionally refers also to the entirety of a language that includes a standardized form as one of its varieties.Template:SfnpTemplate:Sfnp In Europe, a standardized written language is sometimes identified with the German word Script error: No such module "Lang". (written language). The term literary language is occasionally used as a synonym for standard language, a naming convention still prevalent in the linguistic traditions of eastern Europe.Template:SfnpTemplate:Sfnp In contemporary linguistic usage, the terms standard dialect and standard variety are neutral synonyms for the term standard language, usages which indicate that the standard language is one of many dialects and varieties of a language, rather than the totality of the language, whilst minimizing the negative implication of social subordination that the standard is the only form worthy of the label "language".Template:SfnpTemplate:Sfnp
Linguistic standardization
The term standard language identifies a repertoire of broadly recognizable conventions in spoken and written communications used in a society; the term implies neither a socially ideal idiom nor a culturally superior form of speech.Template:Sfnp These conventions develop from related dialects, usually by social action (ethnic and cultural unification) that elevate discourse patterns associated with perceived centres of culture, or more rarely, by deliberately defining the norms of standard language with selected linguistic features drawn from the existing dialects, as in the case of Modern Hebrew.Template:SfnpTemplate:Sfnp
Either course of events typically results in a relatively fixed orthography codified in grammars and normative dictionaries, in which users can also sometimes find illustrative examples drawn from literary, legal, or religious texts.Template:Sfnp Whether grammars and dictionaries are created by the state or by private citizens (e.g. Webster's Dictionary), some users regard such linguistic codifications as authoritative for correcting the spoken and written forms of the language.Template:Sfnp Effects of such codifications include slowing the pace of diachronic change in the standardized variety and affording a basis for further linguistic development (Ausbau).Template:Sfnp In the practices of broadcasting and of official communications, the standard usually functions as a normalizing reference for speech and writing. In educational contexts, it usually informs the version of the language taught to non-native learners.Template:Sfnp
In those ways, the standard variety acquires social prestige and greater functional importance than nonstandard dialects,Template:Sfnp which depend upon or are heteronomous with respect to the standard idiom. Standard usage serves as the linguistic authority, as in the case of specialist terminology; moreover, the standardization of spoken forms is oriented towards the codified standard.Template:Sfnp Historically, a standard language arises in two ways: (i) in the case of Standard English, linguistic standardization occurs informally and piecemeal, without formal government intervention; (ii) in the cases of the French and Spanish languages, linguistic standardization occurs formally, directed by prescriptive language institutions, such as the Script error: No such module "Lang". and the Royal Spanish Academy, which respectively produce Le bon français and El buen español.Template:SfnpTemplate:Sfnp
A standard variety can be conceptualized in two ways: (i) as the sociolect of a given socio-economic stratum or (ii) as the normative codification of a dialect, an idealized abstraction.Template:Sfnp Hence, the full standardization of a language is impractical, because a standardized dialect cannot fully function as a real entity, but does function as set of linguistic norms observed to varying degrees in the course of usus – of how people actually speak and write the language.Template:SfnpTemplate:Sfnp In practice, the language varieties identified as standard are neither uniform nor fully stabilized, especially in their spoken forms.Template:Sfnp From that perspective, the linguist Suzanne Romaine says that standard languages can be conceptually compared to the imagined communities of nation and nationalism, as described by the political scientist Benedict Anderson,Template:Sfnp which indicates that linguistic standardization is the result of a society's history and sociology, and thus is not a universal phenomenon;Template:Sfnp of the approximately 7,000 contemporary spoken languages, most do not have a codified standard dialect.Template:Sfnp
Politically, in the formation of a nation-state, identifying and cultivating a standard variety can serve efforts to establish a shared culture among the social and economic groups who compose the new nation-state.Template:Sfnp Different national standards, derived from a continuum of dialects, might be treated as discrete languages (along with heteronomous vernacular dialects)Template:Sfnp even if there are mutually intelligible varieties among them,Template:SfnpTemplate:Sfnp such as the North Germanic languages of Scandinavia (Danish, Norwegian, and Swedish).Template:Sfnp Moreover, in political praxis, either a government or a neighbouring population might deny the cultural status of a standard language.Template:Sfnp In response to such political interference, linguists develop a standard variety from elements of the different dialects used by a society.
For example, when Norway became independent from Denmark in 1814, the only written language was Danish. Different Norwegian dialects were spoken in rural districts and provincial cities, but people with higher education and upper-class urban people spoke "Danish with a Norwegian pronunciation". Based upon the bourgeois speech of the capital Oslo (Christiania) and other major cities, several orthographic reforms, notably in 1907 and 1917, resulted in the official standard Riksmål, in 1929 renamed Bokmål ('book tongue'). The philologist Ivar Aasen (1813–1896) considered urban and upper-class Dano-Norwegian too similar to Danish, so he developed Landsmål ('country tongue'), the standard based upon the dialects of western Norway. In 1885 the Storting (parliament) declared both forms official and equal. In 1929 it was officially renamed Nynorsk (New Norwegian).
Likewise, in Yugoslavia (1945–1992), when the Socialist Republic of Macedonia (1963–1991) developed their national language from the dialect continuum demarcated by Serbia to the north and Bulgaria to the east, their Standard Macedonian was based upon vernaculars from the west of the republic, which were the dialects most linguistically different from standard Bulgarian, the previous linguistic norm used in that region of the Balkan peninsula. Although Macedonian functions as the standard language of the Republic of North Macedonia, nonetheless, for political and cultural reasons, Bulgarians treat Macedonian as a Bulgarian dialect.Template:Sfnp
Examples
Script error: No such module "Labelled list hatnote".
Chinese
Chinese consists of hundreds of local varieties, many of which are not mutually intelligible, usually classified into seven to ten major groups, including Mandarin, Wu, Yue, Hakka and Min. Before the 20th century, most Chinese spoke only their local variety. For two millennia, formal writing had been done in Classical Chinese, a style modelled on the classics and far removed from any contemporary speech.Template:Sfnp As a practical measure, officials of the late imperial dynasties carried out the administration of the empire using a common language based on Mandarin varieties, known as Guānhuà (literally "speech of officials").Template:Sfnp
In the early 20th century, many Chinese intellectuals argued that the country needed a standardized language. By the 1920s, Literary Chinese had been replaced as the written standard by written vernacular Chinese, which was based on Mandarin dialects.Template:Sfnp In the 1930s, Standard Chinese was adopted, with its pronunciation based on the Beijing dialect, but with vocabulary also drawn from other Mandarin varieties and its syntax based on the written vernacular.Template:Sfnp It is the official spoken language of the People's Republic of China (where it is called Pǔtōnghuà "common speech"), the de facto official language of the Republic of China governing Taiwan (as Guóyǔ "national language") and one of the official languages of Singapore (as Huáyǔ "Chinese language").Template:Sfnp Standard Chinese now dominates public life, and is much more widely studied than any other variety of Chinese.Template:Sfnp
English in the United Kingdom
Script error: No such module "labelled list hatnote". In the United Kingdom, the standard language is British English, which is based upon the language of the medieval court of Chancery of England and Wales.Template:Sfnp In the late-seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries, Standard English became established as the linguistic norm of the upper class, composed of the peerage and the gentry.Template:Sfnp Socially, the accent of the spoken version of the standard language then indicated that the speaker was a man or a woman possessed of a good education, and thus of high social prestige.Template:Sfnp In England and Wales, Standard English is usually associated with Received Pronunciation, "the standard accent of English as spoken in the south of England", but it may also be spoken with other accents, and in other countries still other accents are used (Australian, Canadian, American, Scottish, etc.).Template:Sfnp
Greek
The standard form of Modern Greek is based on the Southern dialects; these dialects are spoken mainly in the Peloponnese, the Ionian Islands, Attica, Crete and the Cyclades.Template:Sfnp
Hindi–Urdu
Two standardized registers of the Hindustani language have legal status in India: Standard Hindi (one of 23 co-official national languages) and Urdu (Pakistan's official tongue); as a result, Hindustani is often called "Hindi-Urdu".Template:Sfnp
Irish
Template:Main article Script error: No such module "Lang". ('The Official Standard'), often shortened to Script error: No such module "Lang"., is the official standard of the Irish language. It was first published by the translators in Dáil Éireann in the 1950s.Template:Sfnp As of September 2013,Template:Sfnp the first major revision of the Caighdeán Oifigiúil is available, both onlineTemplate:Sfnp and in print.Template:Sfnp Among the changes to be found in the revised version are, for example, various attempts to bring the recommendations of the Caighdeán closer to the spoken dialect of Gaeltacht speakers,Template:Sfnp including allowing further use of the nominative case where the genitive would historically have been found.Template:Sfnp
Italian
Standard Italian is derived from the Tuscan dialect, specifically from its Florentine variety—the Florentine influence upon early Italian literature established that dialect as base for the standard language of Italy.Template:SfnpTemplate:Sfnp In particular, Italian became the language of culture for all the people of Italy, thanks to the prestige of the masterpieces of Florentine authors like Dante Alighieri, as well as to the political and cultural significance of Florence at the time and the fact that it was linguistically an intermediate between the northern and the southern Italian dialects.Template:Sfnp It would later become the official language of all the Italian states, and after the Italian unification it became the national language of the Kingdom of Italy.Template:Sfnp Modern Standard Italian's lexicon has been deeply influenced by almost all regional languages of Italy.
Latin
The standard language in the Roman Republic (509 BC – 27 BC) and the Roman Empire (27 BC – AD 1453) was Classical Latin, the literary dialect spoken by upper classes of Roman society, whilst Vulgar Latin was the sociolect (colloquial language) spoken by the educated and uneducated peoples of the middle and the lower social classes of Roman society. The Latin language that Roman armies introduced to Gaul, Hispania, and Dacia had a grammar, syntax, and vocabulary different from the Classical Latin spoken and written by the statesman Cicero.Template:Sfnp
Portuguese
Brazil
In Brazil, actors and journalists usually adopt an unofficial, but de facto, spoken standard of Brazilian Portuguese, originally derived from the middle-class dialects of Rio de Janeiro and Brasília, but that now encompasses educated urban pronunciations from the different speech communities in the southeast. This artificial accent is called sotaque neutro. In that standard, Template:Angbr represents the phoneme Script error: No such module "IPA". when it appears at the end of a syllable (whereas in Rio de Janeiro this represents Script error: No such module "IPA".) and the rhotic consonant spelled Template:Angbr is pronounced Script error: No such module "IPA". in the same situation (whereas in São Paulo this is usually an alveolar flap or trill).
The sociolect of prestige of mineiro spoken in the capital of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, is the accent from Brazilian Portuguese that is the nearest to sotaque neutro.[2]
Africa and Europe
European and African dialects have differing realizations of Script error: No such module "IPA". than Brazilian dialects, with the former using Script error: No such module "IPA". and Script error: No such module "IPA". and the latter using Script error: No such module "IPA"., Script error: No such module "IPA"., or Script error: No such module "IPA"..Template:Sfnp
Serbo-Croatian
Four standard variants of the pluricentric Serbo-Croatian are spoken in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Montenegro, and Serbia.Template:SfnpTemplate:Sfnp They all have the same dialect basis (Štokavian).Template:SfnpTemplate:SfnpTemplate:Sfnp These variants do differ slightly, as is the case with other pluricentric languages,Template:SfnpTemplate:Sfnp but not to a degree that would justify considering them as different languages. The differences between the variants do not hinder mutual intelligibility and do not undermine the integrity of the system as a whole.Template:SfnpTemplate:SfnpTemplate:Sfnp Compared to the differences between the variants of English, German, French, Spanish, or Portuguese, the distinctions between the variants of Serbo-Croatian are less significant.Template:SfnpTemplate:SfnpNonetheless, Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Montenegro have all named the language differently in their constitutions.Template:Sfnp
Somali
In Somalia, Northern Somali (or North-Central Somali) forms the basis for Standard Somali,Template:Sfnp particularly the Mudug dialect of the northern Darod clan. Northern Central Somali has frequently been used by famous Somali poets as well as the political elite, and thus has the most prestige among other Somali dialects.Template:Sfnp
Encoding
The Unicode Common Locale Data Repository uses 001 as the region subtag for a standardized form such as ar-001 for Modern Standard Arabic.[3]
See also
- Classical language
- Covert prestige
- Koiné language
- Language secessionism
- Literary language
- National language
- Nonstandard dialect
- Official language
- Vernacular
References
<templatestyles src="Reflist/styles.css" />
Script error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".
Bibliography
<templatestyles src="Refbegin/styles.css" />
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".Script error: No such module "Unsubst".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
Further reading
<templatestyles src="Refbegin/styles.css" />
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".