In
linguistics, 'diglossia' is a situation where, in a given society, there are two (often closely-related) languages, one of high
prestige, which is generally used by the government and in formal texts, and one of low prestige, which is usually the spoken
vernacular tongue. The high-prestige language tends to be the more formalised, and its forms and vocabulary often 'filter down' into the vernacular, though often in a changed form. As an aspect of study of the relationships between codes and social structure, diglossia is an important concept in the field of
sociolinguistics.
Etymology
The
French term ''diglossie'' was first coined (as a translation of
Greek διγλωσσία, 'bilingualism') by the Greek linguist and
demoticist Ioannis Psycharis. The
Arabist William Marçais used the term in
1930 to describe the linguistic situation in
Arabic-speaking countries.
Language registers and types of diglossia
In
Charles A. Ferguson's article "Diglossia" in the journal ''Word'' (
1959), diglossia was described as a kind of
bilingualism in a given society in which one of the languages is (H), i.e. has high prestige, and another of the languages is (L), i.e. has low prestige. In Ferguson's definition, (H) and (L) are always closely related. Fishman also talks about diglossia with unrelated languages: "extended diglossia" (Fishman 1967), for example
Sanskrit as (H) and
Kannada as (L) or
Alsatian (Elsässisch) in
Alsace as (L) and
French as (H). Kloss calls the (H) variant ''exoglossia'' and the (L) variant ''endoglossia''.
In some cases (especially with
creole languages), the nature of the connection between (H) and (L) is not one of diglossia but a
continuum; for example,
Jamaican Creole as (L) and Standard
English as (H) in Jamaica.
(H) is usually the written language whereas (L) is the spoken language. In formal situations, (H) is used; in informal situations, (L) is used. One of the earliest known examples is Latin, having diglossia
Classical Latin (H) and
Vulgar Latin (L). The latter is the tongue from which the
Romance languages descended, and is almost completely unattested in text.
The (L) variants are not just simplifications or "corruptions" of the (H) variants. Many (L) languages have certain features that are more complex than the corresponding (H) languages: some Swiss German dialects have /e/, and while Standard German only has and . Jamaican Creole has fewer vowel phonemes than standard Englishes, but it has additional palatal and phonemes.
Especially in endoglossia the (L) form may also be called "
basilect", the (H) form "
acrolect", and an intermediate form "
mesolect". Note however that there is no "mesolect" in
German-speaking
Switzerland and in
Luxembourg. Whether Paraguay has a form of diglossia is controversial.
Guaraní and Spanish are both official languages of
Paraguay. Some scholars argue that there are Paraguayans who actually don't speak Guaraní. The
Chinese language also offers an interesting case.
Ferguson's classic examples include Standard German/
Swiss German, Standard
Arabic/
vernacular Arabic, Standard French/
Kréyòl in Haiti,
Katharevousa/
Dhimotiki in
Greece, and
Bokmål/
Nynorsk in Norway. However, Kréyòl is now recognised as a standard language in Haiti. Swiss German dialects are hardly languages with low prestige in Switzerland; and colloquial Arabic has more prestige in some respects than standard Arabic nowadays (see Chambers, Sociolinguistic Theory). And after the end of the
military regime in
1974, Dhimotiki was made into Greece's only standard language (
1976). Nowadays, Katharevousa is (with few exceptions, e. g. by the Greek Orthodox Church) no longer used. Harold Schiffman writes about Swiss German: "it seems to be the case that Swiss German was once consensually agreed to be in a diglossic hierarchy with Standard German, but that this consensus is now breaking." There is also a lot of
code-switching especially in the Arabic world; according to Andrew Freeman this is "different from Ferguson's description of diglossia which states that the two forms are in complementary distribution." To a certain extent, there is code switching and overlap in all diglossic societies, even German-speaking Switzerland. Furthermore, in Ferguson's definition, diglossia is not bilingualism; however this depends on the scholar's definition of language. For example, different kinds of Arabic are not
mutually intelligible; even though many are, but this may also be due to exposure to different varieties rather than inherent linguistic properties.
Examples where the High/Low dichotomy is justified in terms of social prestige include
Italian dialects as (L) and Standard Italian as (H) in Italy and German dialects and standard German in Germany. In Italy and Germany, those speakers who still speak dialects typically use dialect in informal situations, especially in the family. In German-speaking Switzerland, on the other hand, Swiss German dialects are to a certain extent even used in schools and to a larger extent in churches. Ramseier calls German-speaking Switzerland's diglossia a "medial diglossia", whereas Felicity Rash prefers "functional diglossia". Paradoxically, Swiss German offers both the best example for diglossia (all speakers are native speakers of Swiss German and thus diglossic) and the worst, because there is no clear-cut hierarchy.
English during the Norman invasion
Historically, England had diglossia between a
French-speaking ruling class and Germanic-speaking commoners.
English was created through the merger of this divide. However, there is still evidence of a division, between "academic" words and "common" words. Many "power" words (such as ''bailiff'') are "academic".
Where English has had
doublets, one Germanic and one Romance, either a
semantic shift has taken place (as in ''pyre'' and ''fire''), or one word has disappeared from everyday vocabulary.
Arabic
Standard Arabic and the spoken
varieties of Arabic form a distinct diglossia. The spoken varieties, in addition, are generally mutually unintelligible. For various reasons, Standard Arabic, an educated
dachsprache, is mostly used for literary and official purposes, and is acquired only through education rather than at home.
Catalan
With the possible exception of
Andorra, where there is strong pressure from
Castilian ("
Español", referred to as ''Castellano'' by
The Constitution of
1978) and French,
Catalan is in a situation of diglossia in most of the Catalan-speaking territories. This is not only because other languages (Castilian, French, Italian) are used, to a large extent, by the corresponding official organizations. Immigration has also, in the case of speakers of the Castilian language, been so strong in the 20th century that one could speak of external diglossia, produced by the relative increase of Castilian speakers. Historically, successive Spanish and French governments did not provide education in Catalan during many years, but only in their respective official languages. In
Alghero, the Catalan language is in severe danger of disappearing from use, as has been recognized by
UNESCO. It could be said that historically the Catalan language was in this danger everywhere, due to the pressure of the official languages of the different states. However, currently, it is considered by far the most successfully re-introduced minority language within Europe.
Chinese
Classical Chinese
For over two thousand years, the Chinese used
Classical Chinese (Literary Chinese) as a formal standard written language. The standard written language served as a bridge for communication throughout
China (and other countries in the
CJKV area) for millennia.
However, the colloquial
spoken Chinese varieties continued to evolve. The gulf became so wide between the formal written and colloquial spoken languages that it was blamed for hindering education and literacy, and some even went so far as to blame it in part for the political turmoil that occurred in China during the
19th and early
20th centuries. This eventually culminated into the adoption of
Vernacular Chinese, which was based on
modern spoken Mandarin, for all formal communication.
Modern Chinese
After the adoption of Vernacular Chinese as the modern standard written language in the early 20th century, diglossia was no longer a big issue among the majority of Chinese speakers who natively spoke
Mandarin Chinese. However, Vernacular Chinese and its pronunciation in local dialects still is an
acrolect in regions where Mandarin is not spoken natively, such as most of
South China.
For instance in
Hong Kong,
Standard Cantonese is the primary language of spoken communication, although all formal written communication is done in Vernacular Chinese. Unique among the other Chinese dialects, Cantonese has its own
written form, but it is only used in informal contexts and is often inconsistent due to the absence of standardization.
All Chinese speakers will read and write in the Mandarin-based standard written language. However due to standard Chinese's quasi-phonetic writing system, Cantonese speakers who do not speak Mandarin will read aloud the
characters in Cantonese pronunciation only. The resulting speech is Mandarin-based grammar and vocabulary pronounced word-by-word in Cantonese. If the same sentence were to be spoken using regular colloquial Cantonese, it might be quite different. Here is an example (note the switching of the direct and indirect objects and the use of different vocabulary for certain words in the standard and colloquial renditions):
| 'English Sentence' | Please give me his book. |
| 'Standard Written Chinese Rendition' | |
| 'Standard Mandarin Pronunciation of Writing' | Qǐng gěi wǒ tā de shū. |
| 'Cantonese Pronunciation of Writing' | Chíng kāp ngóh tā dīk syū. |
| 'Written Colloquial Cantonese Rendition' | |
| 'Colloquial Cantonese Pronunciation' | M̀h-gōi béi kéuih bún syū ngóh. |
:''Note: Mandarin romanized using
Hanyu Pinyin. Cantonese romanized using
Yale''.
Note that many characters used in the written renditions of Cantonese are used strictly for their pronunciations and do not have any relation to the character's original definition. Some of these characters were modified from proper Chinese characters and do not have definitions outside of Cantonese context. Cantonese pronunciation of standard written Chinese is generally understandable to Cantonese speakers educated in the standard written language. It is most often used in Cantonese newscasts, albeit with certain substitutions of colloquial Cantonese vocabulary so as to make it not sound as stilted. This form of spoken Cantonese is a higher
register and can be considered the acrolect to the colloquial Cantonese basilect.
This situation was also the case when Classical Chinese was the standard written language, but since the modern adoption of Vernacular Chinese, the situation no longer applies to native Mandarin speakers.
Maltese
Malta is officially a bi-lingual country: both Maltese and English are official languages.
Maltese is, uniquely for Europe, a Semitic dialect left over from Arab domination of the islands which ended some 900 years ago and English as Malta was a colony until 1964.
Maltese society has been traditionally quite strongly divided, politically, between the working class and middle and upper classes and this is reflected in their language use. Although all Maltese can speak their native language, the extent to which one uses and is able to speak English often reflects one's background. This is most clearly illustrated by the different newspapers in Malta: the liberal/conservative ones are in English (with names like the ''Times of Malta'' and ''Malta Independent'') and the more left-leaning ones are in Maltese. Maltese people of a middle- and upper-class background will often speak English or use
code-switching extensively in public. There have been warnings from several quarters including a linguistics professor from the university of Malta that the Maltese language could become endangered if the government (currently the right of centre Nationalists) does not do more to promote it.
Portuguese
According to some contemporary
Brazilian linguists (Bortoni, Kato, Mattos e Silva, Perini and most recently, with great impact, Bagno),
Brazilian Portuguese may be a highly diglossic language. This theory claims that there is an L-variant (termed "Brazilian Vernacular"), which would be the mother tongue of all Brazilians, and an H-variant (standard Brazilian Portuguese) acquired through schooling. L-variant represents a simplified form of the language (in terms of grammar, but not of phonetics) that could have evolved from 16th century
Portuguese, influenced by
Amerindian (mostly
Tupian) and
African languages, while H-variant would be based on 19th century
European Portuguese (and very similar to Standard European Portuguese, with only minor differences in
spelling and grammar usage). Mário A. Perini, a Brazilian linguist, even compares the depth of the differences between L- and H- variants of Brazilian Portuguese with those between Standard Spanish and Standard Portuguese. However, his proposal is still not widely accepted by either grammarians or academics.
Urdu
In
Pakistan there is a diglossia between the extremely
Persianised Urdu to Persian itself being spoken by the Educated Elite such as Poets and Writers and Government Officials to an Urdu that is very similar to
Hindi being spoken by common people.
Sinhala
Sinhala (also known as Sinhalese), spoken in Sri Lanka, is a diglossic language. There are several differences between the
literary language (also known as Literary Sinhala, LS) and the
spoken language (Spoken Sinhala, SS), specially about verbs:
★ different personal pronouns:
★
★ "he, she": LS ''; SS '' (lit. "that one", common);
★ lack of inflection of the verb in SS:
★
★ "I do", "you (sing.) do": LS '', '' (inflected); SS '', '' (not-inflected, the same form for all persons)
★ lack of future tense in SS, substituted by present tense plus optional temporal adverb:
★
★ LS '' "I will go"; SS '' "tomorrow I will go" (lit. "tomorrow I go");
★ different verbal forms (e.g. present participle in LS versus reduplicated form in SS);
★ different
adpositions:
★
★ "with": LS ''; SS ''
★
★ "from" (temporal): LS ''; SS ''
★
★ "before" : LS ''; SS '', ''
★ different vocabulary, e.g.:
★
★ "to help": LS ''; SS ''
★
★ "to touch": LS ''; SS ''
★
★ "to marry": LS ''; SS ''
★
★ "to study": LS ''; SS ''
★
★ "to fight": LS ''; SS ''
Literary or written Sinhala is commonly understood, and used in literary texts and formal occasions (public speeches, TV and radio news broadcasts, etc.), whereas the spoken language is used as the language of communication in everyday life. The children are taught the written language at school almost like a foreign language.
Tagalog
Tagalog is the language spoken in the southern part of Luzon, the northermost group of islands in the Philippines. Southern Luzon covers the provinces around the capital Metro Manila, including the capital itself. The language spoken there, Tagalog, is the basis for the country's national language, Filipino, which is basically the standardized form of the Tagalog spoken in Metro Manila. Tagalogs from Tagalog-speaking areas, other than Metro Manila, speak their own dialect of Tagalog. Foremost example is that of Batangas, Batangueño Tagalog. When those who speak Batangueño Tagalog, for example, go to Manila, they will eventually learn to use the Manila dialect and speak only their native dialect when they go back to their provinces or when they gather together. At the moment, very little is written using any other dialect of Tagalog other than that of Manila. Also, having a regional accent is view to be not beneficial in the Philippines. And although there are some who would maintain their accents, their use is very minimal outside the provinces.
Tamil
Tamil is a diglossic language. The classic form (''sentamil'') of the language is different from the
colloquial (''koduntamil'') form. This difference in the language has existed since ancient times.
The classic form is preferred for writing, and is also used for public speaking. While written Tamil is mostly standard across various Tamil speaking regions, spoken form of the language differs widely from the written form.
Novels, even popular ones, will use (H) for all description and narration and use (L) only for dialogue, if they use it at all. The (L) variant is often only used for dialogue of rural or less educated speakers. Even though all Tamils in ordinary conversation will use (L), novels often depict educated people speaking in an (H) form.
The Singapore Tamil population represents a case of irredentism, showing diglossia, where the Singaporean Tamils speak Tamil (L), but all their official communications have to be in English (H). However, Tamil is one of the four official languages of Singapore.
The (L) spoken form is highly modified and mixed up with the (H) English (and referred to as "Tinglish") used in the official documents and media, blurring the demarcation between L and H.
Regional and caste differences predominate in (L) variation. Tamil in the state capital Chennai (formerly Madras) is often quite distinct from that spoken elsewhere. Due to its proximity to Andhra Pradesh, there are often more Telugu words. Chennai (L) Tamil also often has more words of Urdu (or Deccani) than do varieties of Tamil from elsewhere in the state. Because of the larger role of English, Chennai Tamil also shows a great influence from this language. Of course, the Tamil spoken in Sri Lanka, while fully intelligible, also has clear differences in vocabulary and pronunciation. Throughout the state, a tripartite caste-based division is also common. Brahmins who have settled in Tamil Nadu speak Tamil (L) with modifications restricted to their caste. Similarly, Scheduled Castes (formerly called Untouchables) speak forms of (L) Tamil with clear grammatical differences from that of the members of other castes.
However, besides caste difference, regional differences are more interesting to note. The Tamil spoken by people in Northern districts of Tamil Nadu like Arcot, Chennai and Southern districts like Chidambaram, Tirunelveli, Madurai are different in their accents and sounds of words.
Ukrainian
Using the
Matched-Guise Test, Laada Bilaniuk (University of Michigan) administered surveys to 2,000 participants in Ukraine. In her article "Diglossia in Flux: Language and Ethnicity in Ukraine", Bilaniuk reports that until now, Russian has been the High language and
Ukrainian the Low language. However, her data shows that diglossia in
Ukraine is shifting.
Now, both standard
Russian and standard
Ukrainian are considered the High languages, and the Low category is filled with all non-standard dialects of the High languages.
Bibliography
★ Eeden, Petrus van. "Diglossie" http://www.afrikaans.nu/pag7.htm
★
Ferguson, Charles A. 1959. "Diglossia," ''Word'' 15: 325-340.
★
Fishman, Joshua. 1967. “Bilingualism with and without diglossia; diglossia with and without bilingualism.” ''Journal of Social Issues'' 23: 29-38.
★ Freeman, Andrew. "Andrew Freeman's Perspectives on Arabic Diglossia" http://www-personal.umich.edu/~andyf/digl_96.htm
★ Lubliner, Jacob. "Reflections on Diglossia" http://www.ce.berkeley.edu/~coby/essays/refdigl.htm
★
The Languages of China, Ramsey, S. Robert, , , Princeton University Press, 1987, ISBN 0-691-01468-X
★ Rash, Felicity. 1998. The German Language in Switzerland. Multilingualism, Diglossia and Variation. Bern: Peter Lang.
★ Schiffman, Harold. "Diglossia as a Sociolinguistic Situation" http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~haroldfs/messeas/diglossia/node1.html
Ukrainian/Russian
★ Diglossia in flux: language and ethnicity in Ukraine. Texas Linguistic Forum (1993) 33:79-88.
Yavorska Galyna M. Prescriptyvna lingvistyka yak dyskurs: Mova, kultura, vlada (Prescriptive linguistics as a discourse: Language. Clture. Power). Kyiv, VIPOL, 2000. - 288 p.
Yavorska G. Do problemy naivnoyi linguistyky (On the problem of folk linguistics). - Lingvistychni studii. Cherkassy, 1999, # 3. - 13-20.
Yavorska G. Dejaki osoblyvosti movnykh kontaktiv blyz'kosporidnenykh mov (do kharakterystyky ukrain's'koho puryzmu) (On contacts of closely related languages: some features of Ukrainian purism). In memoria of K. Trofymovych. L'viv, Litopys, 1998.
Other sources for reference (by Bilaniuk)
★ The Languages of Ukraine’s Orange Revolution. REECAS Newsletter, Russian, East European & Central Asian Studies, Jackson School of International Studies, University of Washington (Spring).
★ A typology of surzhyk: mixed Ukrainian-Russian language. International Journal of Bilingualism 8(4):409-425.
★ Gender, language attitudes, and language status in Ukraine. Language in Society. 32:47-78.
★ Pidsvidome stavlennia do mov: zerkalo movnoï polityky. (Subconscious language attitudes: a mirror of language politics.) Urok Ukraïnskoï (Ukrainian journal for educators and language planners). Kyiv. 7:5-8. [Based on 1998 "Purity & power" data.]
★ Kartyna movnoho svitohliadu v Ukraïni. (Linguistic ideology in Ukraine). Movoznavstvo (major Ukrainian linguistics journal). 4/5:44-51. [Based on 1997 "Matching guises" data.]
★ Movna krytyka i samovpevnenist': ideolohichni vplyvy na status mov v Ukraïni. [Linguistic criticism and self-confidence: ideological influences on language status in Ukraine]. Derzhavnist' ukraïns'koï movy i movnyi dosvid svitu: materialy mizhnarodnoï konferentsiï.
★ Kyiv: National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine. Pp. 131-138.
★ Speaking of surzhyk: ideologies and mixed languages. Harvard Ukrainian Studies. 21(1/2):93-117.
★ Purity and power: the geography of language ideology in Ukraine. Michigan Discussions in Anthropology 13:165-189.
★ Matching guises and mapping language ideologies in Ukraine. Texas Linguistic Forum 37:298-310.
See also
★
Register (linguistics)
★
Ausbausprache - Abstandsprache - Dachsprache
★
Standard language
★
Dialect continuum
★
Pluricentric language
★
Bilingualism
★
Sociolinguistics
العربية
中国
Français
Deutsch
Ελληνική
हिन्दी
Italiano
日本語
Português
Русский
Español
