It turns up the vigorous field of
terminology. Term management is globally networked and hierarchically organized, public as
well as private, comprehensive as well as sectoral. I find it disturbing that
terminological literature reveals a striking lack of overlap of reference and personnel
between it and the college of language planners.
approach turns up the rapidly expanding language industry; language management as a
significant component of localization in the private sector; and it recognizes document
management, administration, and simply communications in private businesses as in regional
and international organizations (such as the European Union). Technical writing,
publishing, the media... a range of activities that so far have remained outside the scope
of language management enquiry.
teaching industry is highly organized, global, rigorous. Yet it is curiously disconnected
from the communicative lives of the speech communities whose languages are taught.
recognizable activities with their own theories, idioms, networks, organizations and
personnel are all kinds of directed language management. They all solve language problems
that have arisen out of or been predicted to arise in actual discourse.
c) Kinds of
language management by time and place
This multitude of
directed responses to language problems can be ordered in yet another way, as responses to
the kinds of language problems that arise in a particular socioeconomic organization of
society, at its time and place. There is every reason to surmise that kinds of language
management at one time in the development of a speech community imply particular other
kinds of language management at another.
nation-state plans, standardizes, disfavors variation; the post-modern state endorses
variation, in fact, becomes one among many itself by entering into regional political
arrangements. There is progression because of speech community maturation, a developmental
vector; another vector may depend on speech community integration in international economy
and political organization. Consequently, the study of language management will reflect
the Zeitgeist and show progression of differential problems and differential interests.
became a field of study as new nations grappled with national communication problems.
Intellectual maturation of that study diffracted it into, among other approaches of study,
times have also revived interest in language planning. One reason is that European
political integration has stimulated local self-assertion of minor speech communities
(whether in defense or as a result of active localization policies or as a result of the
opportunity to skip the national level in seeking support). Another reason is the massive
in-migration of other-speaking peoples into European countries; a third is the fact of
European political integration which pitches a language-in-common solution to joint work
at the center of the union against the full participation by all citizens in European
affairs in their own languages (2).
In the parallel
language cultivation tradition, a contemporary topic is Eurospeak, raising the issue of
equality of participation in the European Union political process by citizens of the many
constituting speech communities; and another issue is the full equal development of
functions of member communities' languages (in German, Fortbestehen).
kind of language management is language planning?
could be defined as the kind of organized language management that is managed from within
the state bureaucracy, with comprehensive scope and in many states quite rigorously. Also,
language planning is a long-term process, authorized by legislation.
Members of the
college of language planning are now in a position to benefit from a definition of
language planning. This would considerably help development of thought about planning
language. The disciplinary perspective from language management promises a definition.
Agreeing on a definition, within any disciplinary framework, would help us answer
questions such as the following. When does language planning occur? What motivates state
action towards language? Whose interests are represented? How does policy process interact
with planning process? What is legitimate planning of language in terms of avoiding
violations of human rights? What indeed is language planning as distinct from ethnic
management or simply an attempt by one group to dominate another through yet one more
means of rationing or control? Language management theory provides a clear criterion: what
problems in actual communication are removed by planning acts?
management bases the study of language planning as behavior towards language on actual
discourse. This is a severe limitation on a behavior that involves so much else than
communicative considerations. The political science perspective obviously complements the
perspective from language management. Sociology and history provide rich texture.
Economics elucidates relations of language planning processes to resource scarcity. I
invite presentations of other disciplinary perspectives and discourses on the study of
deliberate behavior towards language, and of language planning.