#3231. ɸ˼ Blake αѸ˻ʬ ([2018-03-02-1]) ǾҲ𤷤褦ˡBlake ˤѸ˻ʬϡŰƬŰɸಽȤʤ줿ʬǤ롥ŪʱѸˤλʬ˴ƤȡȻפȤĤ뤬Ȥ櫓Υޥ (norman_conquest) ˰ܤˤ1066ǯȤȾۤƤΤ褦29Ⱦ?1250ǯˤˤ϶äΤǤϤʤΥޥȤС̾Ѹ˾太ӥɻ˾λȤư뤬Blake θˤȡޤ2ǤλȤ֤Ť
Blake ˤС2ϥȥνɸबƶϤäȤ롥Υޥˤäƥȥνɸ̵˵ΤǤϤʤäޤ#2712. ѸθŪ֤ꤿ ([2016-09-29-1]) Ǽ夲褦ˡ1250ǯޤǤ˶ɽŪǤϤ졤AB language, Orm, Laȝamon ˤɸ˽ऺΰӤֻȯãƤꡤ褿٤ͽȤ̣ǡष3ܶᤷƤȤȤ館٤ǤϤʤ
Υޥ塤12Ⱦ13ˤƸ뤳θŪʡɸŪֻϡBlake ˤСޤǸűѸΥȥɸ˵ĤΤǤꡤβѷȯŸȤȤ館٤ȤΤ˾ʤ̲ѤäƤꡤȼȯŸ뤲Ƥ뤫⤷ʤĤƤɸήǤȤ̣ǡܼϲŪʤΤǤȤߤƤ롥
βŪݤäƤ2κǸΥƥȤ1Ĥϡ1258ǯΡ#2561. The Proclamation of Henry III ([2016-05-01-1]) ǤϤĤƤɸ̾ĤȤ졤κǤʬ䤹㤬 <æ> λѤǤ롥Blake (135) ˤСűѸή <æ> αѸ˾ǸλȤ
դǯĶȡŪʷϵϾä餫˿λ塤ĤޤɸȤǰʤؤäƤBlake (131) ۩
From now on there were no further attempts to create a standard English writing system which could be said to look back to that found earlier, and Old English manuscripts ceased to be living texts which were copied and recopied. A period of uncertainty as to writing in English succeeded, and when a new standard started to arise it would be based on different premises and a different dialect area.
Blake, N. F. A History of the English Language. Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1996.
ޤDZѸɸಽ (standardisation) ܤ뵭¿ƤդΥ衼åѤνλϤɤäΤFisher (81) ˤСɸಽˤ2Ĥζ̹बФ롥
First, it is apparent that the European languages were standardized first in writing and only later, if ever, in speech. Second, standard written forms appeared first in official government and business documents. These served as the basis for the usage of scribes and printers and eventually of handbooks and dictionaries created for teaching the standard written language.
ä2ܤפǡ衼åѤνˤʽաɸ˨Ͼ˸ŪʸˤäȤȤǤ롥νïȤСʤ顤̳ (official secretariats) Ǥ롥ĤޤꡤɸθϡؼԤ䥢ǥߡǤʤз丢ϼԤοͤǤʤ¿̾ʤ̳äΤˤĤơFisher (83) ɤ뤮ʤοƤ롥
. . . there is no ambiguity as to what standard language is today. It is the official language of government, the judiciary, and business. And so it always has been. Since the advent of printing, popular education, and the mass media, the standard language appears to have moved out from under the aegis of government bureaucracy. Indeed, there is much criticism today of bureaucratese and legalese. But make no mistake, standard language is still anchored as firmly in the seats of power as it has been since the dawn of writing. When there have been efforts at spelling or lexical reform, as there were by the academies of Italy, Spain, and France, they have been government sponsored and supported and, one might add, not notably successful. Scholars and writers have had less influence on the shape of the standard language than the nameless bureaucrats and clerks in government offices.
ࡤννʸϤɸʤΤ
Fisher, John H. "European Chancelleries and the Rise of Written Language." Chapter 4 of The Emergence of Standard English. John H. Fisher. Lexington: UP of Kentucky, 1996. 65--83.
15Ⱦ Chancery Standard ȤձѸѼ郎ȤˤĤơ#3214. 1410ǯ夫30ǯˤƤ Chancery English ˨ ([2018-02-13-1]) ϤȤ chancery_standard εǽҤ٤ƤϹʸѤ줿ѸѼؤνɸȤȤǤСɡʵڤӤθαѹˤˤ뤽18Ⱦ˻ޤǥƥǤ³Ȥ¤ϲƤɬפ롥Ĥޤꡤ "Chancery Standard" ȤϡѸ1ѼΤȤʤɤǤϤʤƥΤȤʤΤǤ롥Schaefer (214) Τ褦˽Ƥ롥
English was not the language of the administration, but rather the minor partner of French and Latin. As Benskin (2004: 38) unmistakably states: "Chancery Standard was Latin, and save for nine years during the Commonwealth, it remained so until 1731, when for official purposes it was abolished altogether by Act of Parliament.
ѸνɸθĤȤ Chancery Standard ϡ"Standard" ȸƤФ줳졤ºݤˤϤҿι⤤ƥեνդ٤Сޥʡʰ֤ŤˤʤäȤŦ⤷
Τ褦ˤƤΥɤθŪʽդŪįȡФбѸ (reestablishment_of_english) ħȤߤʤƤ1362ǯ "Statute of Pleading" ʺȽˤʾټ³αѸ첽ˡΧˤ⡤ϥƥȥեФʸҤФ뾮ˤʤȤ⸫Ƥcf. #324. IJˡDZѸѤǧ줿ǯ ([2010-03-17-1])ˡSchaefer (217) ꡤϢڤ
The so-called "Statute of Pleading" of 1362 --- which is so often judged as having considerably raised the status of English --- indeed mandates that English be the (spoken) language of pleading at court. Yet it does so in French --- and in the complicated left-branching syntax of "courtly style" --- because, at the time, French was the language in which royal statutes where (sic) published; and it also regulates that the pleas be "entered and enrolled" in Latin, because this was the language of permanent record.
Schaefer, Ursula. "Standardization." Chapter 11 of The History of English. Vol. 3. Ed. Laurel J. Brinton and Alexander Bergs. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter, 2017. 205--23.
Benskin, Michael. "Chancery Standard." New Perspectives on English Historical Linguistics. Selected Papers from 12 ICEHL, Glasgow, 21--26 August 2002. Vol. 2. Lexis and Transmission. Ed. Christian Kay, Carole Hough, and Irené Wotherspoon. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 2004. 1--40.
#2869. ťΥɸ줫μѤϸűѸǤäƤ⡤ʸڤѸ ([2017-03-05-1]) Ǥ夲ƤˤĤƹͤƤߤ
ѸθäˤϸťΥɸ줫μѸ줬¿ޤޤƤ롥ŪطʤȤƤϡ9Ⱦʹߤ˸ťΥɸȤ꽻DZѸüԤȺäȤаޤ롥ǼѤ줿Ϥ¿θťΥɸ줫ñ줬ʸ˽ƸΤϡ꽻ʤűѸˤƤǤϤʤʤ̻֤ѸʹߡȤ櫓13ʹߤΤȤʤΤǤ롥ŪͽۤǯȼºݤʸڤǯȤδ֤˥åפȤϡѸˤǤ⤷Фм夲뤬ͳϰŪ˼Τ褦˹ͤƤBlake, p. 92 ˡ
It is a feature of the history of the English language that there are a considerable number of Old Norse loans in the language, but the appearance of these loans in writing occurs mainly from the thirteenth century onwards and not from the pre-Conquest period which is when the Viking invasions and settlements occurred. The usual explanation for this is as follows. Most Old English literature which has survived is written in the West Saxon dialect, and the dialect represents those areas of England which were least affected by the Scandinavian invasions and settlements. Hence Scandinavian influence in these areas cannot have been very significant. Even in those areas where the Danes had settled, they continued to live in their own communities and would only gradually have become absorbed among the Anglo-Saxon population. This implies that the new settlers were for a long time regarded as foreigners and no attempt was made to assimilate them. Consequently the introduction of Old Norse words into English was delayed in the Anglian dialects, and their southward drift would be even later than that. It is hardly surprising in this view that words of Scandinavian origin are not found in English in any numbers until the thirteenth century.
ĤޤꡤϳΤ˥ˤɬ⤹ˤ轻ΥͤȺä櫓ǤϤʤüѤޤŪͻϰƳ٤äȤ櫓ޤűѸʸȤƻĤäƤΤ¿ϥ West Saxon ǽƤ뤿ᡤθŪƶϸűѸˤʸڤˤΤȤ
Blake (93--94) ϤΰŪʸɤ˲ȤߤƤ롥
The continuity of West Saxon as Standard Old English would have discouraged the adoption of new words from other varieties and even from other languages. The tenth-century reforms were a continuation of the policies introduced by Alfred, and it is not surprising that the attitude towards standardisation and conservatism should have become more rigid as the standard grew in importance.
Blake ιͤϤäդΥ٥ǤϡŪаޤ鼫ͽۤȤꡤťΥɸ줫μѸ¿Ǥ˸űѸäƤɸŪݼŪ West Saxon νդˤƤϡŪάŪʶοȤ⤤٤ťΥɸѸѤ뤳ȤϤդ路ʤȹͤ졤ӽ줿ΤǤϤʤĤޤꡤ͡θȯƤʸϤˤȿǤʤäȤȤǤϤʤ
դݼϤ褯Τ줿¤ɸŪʽդȤʤФޤޤݼŪˤʤȤȤϡΤ˹ͤ롥
Blake, N. F. A History of the English Language. Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1996.
#2742. Haugen θɸಽ4ʳ ([2016-10-29-1]) #2745. Haugen θɸಽ4ʳ (2) ([2016-11-01-1]) ǾҲ𤷤 Haugen θɸಽ (standardisation) ΥǥǤϡ (form) ȵǽ (function) ֤ˤɸಽȤ館Ƥ롥ˤȡɸಽȤ "maximal variation in function" "minimal variation in form" ħŤ븽ݤǤ롥Ԥ codification (of form)Ԥ elaboration (of function) бȹͤ롥
"elaboration" ȤѸդɬפǤ롥Haugen ɸಽεǰտޤƤΤϡ͡ʻѰ (register) ǹѤ뤳ȤǤȤ̣Ǥ "elaboration of function" ΤȤ "elaboration of form" Ȥ̤β⡤ѸˤɸಽȿϢ뤫뤿ˡHaugen Ȥạ̈Ǥ "elaboration of function" "extensive elaboration" ȸƤӡ"elaboration of form" Τۤ "intensive elaboration" ȸƤǤ⤤ (Schaefer 209)
Ǥϡ"intensive elaboration" 뤤 "elaboration of form" ȤϲؤΤSchaefer (209) ˤСβˤƤ "the range of the native linguistic inventory is increased by new forms adding further 'variability and expressiveness'" ȤѸθȾޤǤϡդɸȤСѸβ餫ǤϤʤषƥեȤäˤƱѸ줬ƤȡѸ줬γäɸϰ̤˽Ȥˤʤäκݤɸ줿ƥե줫̤θäѤѸä¿ݤäޤޤˡ˾褻ơեθäȥƥθä졤ΤȤƽʤع¤θä˻äʤλˤĤƤϡ#334. Ѹäλع¤ ([2010-03-27-1]) #2977. Ϣ6֤ʤѸä3ع¤Τ --- ͥΥƥ줫֤ȥס ([2017-06-21-1]) εȡˡѸä̤ߡվ塤Ѹθä줿ȤʤСϸɸಽħŤ "minimal variation in form" Ȥϡष "maximal variation in form" ظäƤ褦ʰݤͿ롥μ variation 뤤 variability äؤơ"intensive elaboration" 뤤 "elaboration of form" ȸƤ֤ΤǤ롥
ĤޤꡤɸಽˤϷѰۤʤ¦̤⤢Сۤʤ뼡ǡѰۤ礭ʤ¦̤⤢ꤦȤȤǤ롥ΰ츫̷⤹褦ɸಽΤSchaefer (220) ϼΤ褦ˤޤȤƤ롥
While such standardizing developments reduced variation, the extensive elaboration to achieve a "maximal variation in function" demanded increased variation, or rather variability. This type of standardization, and hence norm-compliance, aimed at the discourse-traditional norms already available in the literary languages French and Latin. Late Middle English was thus re-established in writing with the help of both Latin and French norms rather than merely substituting for these literary languages.
Schaefer Ursula. "Standardization." Chapter 11 of The History of English. Vol. 3. Ed. Laurel J. Brinton and Alexander Bergs. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter, 2017. 205--23.
űѸˤĤɸಽ (standardisation) ݤ˼礿ȤʤΤϡ(1) űѸ "Early West Saxon" 뤤 "Alfredian Old English" ˡ(2) űѸ "Late West Saxon", "Ælfrician Old English" 뤤 "Standard Old English" ˡ(3) "Winchester vocabulary" 3Τۤˤ⡤"Mercian literary language" ʤɤɸಽȤܤΤȤǰ꤫⤷ʤ
θűѸΡɸפϡ#2745. Haugen θɸಽ4ʳ (2) ([2016-11-01-1]) #3209. ɸಽ7Ĥ¦̡ ([2018-02-08-1]) ǾҲ𤷤 Haugen Milroy and Milroy ɸಽŪʴ˾Ȥ餷ƤߤСޤǸŪʰ̣ǤΡɸפˤʤȤϤ㤨 Late West Saxon űѸɸʾʤȤˡˤơˤǤȤªŪˤʤäƤ뤬 Haugen Τ Selection ʳФ٤˲Codification, Elaboration, Acceptance Ȥ¦̤ˤĤƤϤۤܲؤäƤʤ̩ˤΤǤСɸפʤɤǤϤʤȤȤˤʤ롥Late West Saxon ˤĤƤϡˡǤϤʤषˤɸʲˤۤŬڤǤϤʤȤո⤢ (Kornexl 231)
ѸΤήΤʤɸಽͤǤϡϤűѸξоݤȤƲƤΤ褤㤨СűѸ Early West Saxon ȸűѸ Late West Saxon ˤĤƤϡ줾ˡθŪɸಽ뤳ȤǤ뤬ξԤδ֤ˤɬ̻ŪϢ³ϤʤȤƤϽפǤ (Kornexl 230) ޤѸȯãɸ⡤θűѸɸΤȤϢ³ʤĤޤꡤѸɸಽϡ˾塤ΩƲ٤Ƥ롥
ä˴ؤűѸɸಽλȤƤϡ"Winchester vocabulary" 롥10--11 "Winchester group/circle" ̾դ줿ɤ Winchester ˽äƽʸϤΤʤˡꤵ줿Ȥܤθäǧ롥γɤΤʤǺǤŵŪԤ Ælfric ǤꡤΥƥȤˤƤ "Winchester vocabulary" κΨ98.3%ˤȤɸŪäεɤˤΤˤĤƤϵ뤬ƥƥȤθűѸκݤȤ夷Τ¿ȤȤƤ롥äợǤϳΰϤˤɸಽλȤȤˤʤ
Kornexl, Lucia. "Standardization." Chapter 12 of The History of English. Vol. 2. Ed. Laurel J. Brinton and Alexander Bergs. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter, 2017. 220--35.
#3222. 2 HiSoPra* DZѸˤˤɸಽˤĤäޤ ([2018-02-21-1]) ǰ⤷ޤ줿ƱΤʤDZѸɸಽ (standardisation) ˤˤĤƾäޤ֥ɤη ̸ˤоȤƸƤΡפꤹ륷ݥΰĤȤơѸˤΩ줫ޤΤ褦ʾߤƤäؽιϤᡤγŤ˷Ȥäư̤˴դޤ
ݥλȤơʲΤ褦ʥޥɥޥåפޤܤդλ (PDF: 582KB) ɤ

ݥǤȤ3ˤɸಽβоȤޤ̤ơɸಽפȤƱ٥ǤȤƤɬƱɶǵǤ櫓ǤʤȤ˴ޤߤ˥ƤʤȤФȡɤƤΤȵȼΤ̤ä褦˻פޤƸȤޤäƸ첣Ūʵ뤳ȤǡʤȤϰۤʤ뿷ʻɷ뤳ȤǤޤƬ餫ʤС
Ѹɸಽ˴ؤϡܥ֥Ǥ standardisation νǽƤޤΤǡ⤴
ɸȴϢϡ#1385. Caxton ֻɸಽ˹ʤäȹͤ뺬 ([2013-02-10-1]) ǼꤢϡFisher "Caxton and Chancery English" ꤹ뾮η (129) Ѥơ
Caxton's place in the history of the development of standard written English must be regarded as that of a transmitter rather than an innovator. He should be thanked for supporting the foundation of a written standard by employing 86 percent of the time the favorite forms of Chancery Standard, but he is also responsible for perpetuating the variations and archaisms of Chancery Standard to which much of the irregularity and irrationality of Modern English spelling must be attributed. Some of these variations have been ironed out by printers, lexicographers, and grammarians in succeeding centuries, but modern written Standard English continues to bear the imprint of Caxton's heterogeneous practice.
Chancery Standard Caxton ֻʤ١86%⡪˻ƤŦƤ롥ξǡֻɸಽФ Caxton ŪϡޤdzԤǤϤʤڼԤΤǤȷŤƤ롥դΤϡCaxton Chancery Standard ֻޤƤʤɤݻȤǤ롥ơɤ줬ޤǤٰѤƤΤǤ롥Caxton Chancery Standard ŪʽɸؤȤĤʤͤȤơѸ˾̤Ȥ
Caxton뤤ϰѤֻɸಽؤιˤĤƤϡʲε⻲Ȥ줿
#297. ѤƳϱѸɸಽʤݤ ([2010-02-18-1])
#871. Ѥȯˤֻθ경˷ӤĤʤäͳ ([2011-09-15-1])
#1312. Ѥȯˤֻθ경˷ӤĤʤäͳ (2) ([2012-11-29-1])
#1384. ֻɸಽ˹Τ17ؼԤȶա ([2013-02-09-1])
Fisher, John H. "Caxton and Chancery English." Chapter 8 of The Emergence of Standard English. John H. Fisher. Lexington: UP of Kentucky, 1996. 121--44.
[2018-02-24-1]ε˰³Ƥꡥε#3241. 1422ǯɥ¤ȹαѸ첽 ([2018-03-12-1]) ǰѤ Fisher ϡī15ȤƱѸι첽 Chancery Standard γΩڤ˴ͿǽˤĤơѶŪʵŸƤ롥Τ˥īβȤڵϤʤHoccleve Lydgate ˤ⤽λݤľŪʸڤϤʤʬϤľڵϤ Fisher 롥ξڵȤϡ褽 Chancery Standard ĹƤߥ˴ؤΤǤ롥
Hoccleve, no more than Lydgate, ever articulated for the Lancastrian rulers a policy of encouraging the development of English as a national language or of citing Chaucer as the exemplar for such a policy. But we have the documentary and literary evidence of what happened. The linkage of praise for Prince Henry as a model ruler concerned about the use of English and for master Chaucer as the "firste fyndere of our faire langage"; the sudden appearance of manuscripts of The Canterbury Tales, Troylus and Criseyde, and other English writings composed earlier but never before published; the conversion to English of the Signet clerks of Henry V, the Chancery clerks, and eventually the guild clerks; and the burgeoning of composition in English and the patronage of literature in English by the Lancastrian court circle are all concurrent historical events. The only question is whether their concurrence was coincidental or deliberate. (34)
ä Chaucer νʤμܤƤΤ14ǤϤʤ15äƤȤ̣Chaucer 1400ǯפθˤ褦䤯ܤƤȤΤ϶ʤΤ뤤ϡֽƱѸǰʺʤȡפ夲뤳ȤˤäơгŪ˥ɤؼ褦ȤŪʤ⤯ߤη̤ȤƤνǤǤϤʤäʴϢơHoccleve ˤ Chaucer ɾ ("firste fyndere of our faire langage") ˤĤơ#298. Chaucer Ѹ˾˲̤Ȥϡ (2) ([2010-02-19-1]) ȡ
Fisher ϡΤ褦ʸϸźդƤ뤳ȤҤ٤Ĥļ䶯Ƥ롥
All linguistic changes of this sort for which we have documentation---in Norway, India, Canada, Finland, Israel, or elsewhere---have been the result of planning and official policy. There is no reason to suppose that the situation was different in England.
Fisher, John H. "A Language Policy for Lancastrian England." Chapter 2 of The Emergence of Standard English. John H. Fisher. Lexington: UP of Kentucky, 1996. 16--35.
#131. Ѹ ([2009-09-05-1])#2562. Mugglestone ԡˤαѸǯɽ ([2016-05-02-1])#3214. 1410ǯ夫30ǯˤƤ Chancery English ˨ ([2018-02-13-1]) ǿ줿̤ꡤ1422ǯ˥ɥ¤ȹ (Brewers' Guild of London) ĻϿȷʸˤƥ줫Ѹؤڤؤη꼫ΤϥƥǵϿƤ뤬ݤϰʲΤ褦ʤΤäFisher (22--23) ¹Chambers and Daunt αѤ롥
Whereas our mother-tongue, to wit the English tongue, hath in modern days begun to be honorably enlarged and adorned, for that our most excellent lord, King Henry V, hath in his letters missive and divers affairs touching his own person, more willingly chosen to declare the secrets of his will, for the better understanding of his people, hath with a diligent mind procured the common idiom (setting aside others) to be commended by the exercise of writing; and there are many of our craft of Brewers who have the knowledge of writing and reading in the said english idiom, but in others, to wit, the Latin and French, before these times used, they do not in any wise understand. For which causes with many others, it being considered how that the greater part of the Lords and trusty Commons have begun to make their matters to be noted down in our mother tongue, so we also in our craft, following in some manner their steps, have decreed to commit to memory the needful things which concern us [in English]. (Chambers and Daunt 139)
Henry V ˸ڤƤ뤳Ȥ¬̤ꡤκǤˡȥåץǽդαѸ첽ϩȤƤ餷ޤΤɨ Chancery ˤơ "Chancery Standard" ̾դ뤳ȤˤʤɸѸνդ˨Τ褦ʤΤиƤȻפ롥դαѸ첽äơˤȽ̱ȤɤΤ褦ʴطˤäΤ϶̣ˤ1422ǯϡ15ȾαѸ˾žˤƾħŪʰ̣ǯȤϢơ#3225. īαѸ첽Τ⤯ߤ Chancery Standard ([2018-02-24-1]) ⻲ȡ
Fisher, John H. "A Language Policy for Lancastrian England." Chapter 2 of The Emergence of Standard English. John H. Fisher. Lexington: UP of Kentucky, 1996. 16--35.
Chambers, R. W. and Marjorie Daunt, eds. A Book of London English. Oxford: Clarendon-Oxford UP, 1931.
줬Ūɸಽɸಽ֤ݤɸಽ (standardisation cycle) ȸƤ֡#3207. ɸѸȸɸಽ˴ؤ뤤ĤνѸ ([2018-02-06-1]) ǾҲ𤷤ѸѤСʶƱΡˤ focused diffuse ξˤԤä褿ꤹȤȤˤʤ롥
Swann et al. μҲؼŵˤȡΤ褦ˤ롥
standardisation cycle According to Greenberg (1986) and Ferguson (1988), a regular historical process by which an originally relatively uniform language splits into several dialects; then at a later stage a common, uniform standard is established on the basis of these dialects. Finally, this variety will again split into regional and social varieties and the cycle will start again.
ΤˡδѸˤ֤ȡȿѰۤ졤focused diffuse δ֤Ԥ褷ƤȤǧ뤳ȤǤ롥#3231. ɸ˼ Blake αѸ˻ʬ ([2018-03-02-1]) 7ʬά˥ղȡΤ褦ˤʤΤǤϤʤ

1000ǯˤëϡѸ˾ǽɸ Late West Saxon γΩؤΩȤϤäƤⴰʤ "focused" ξ֤ˤãƤ餺٤ѰۤƤˤɸǤ롥θ塤ƤѸ "diffuse" ʾ֤ز뤬15äȸɸˤĤʤĬήϤޤäƤ롥αѸ˾2ܤɸಽϡ1ܤ "focused" ٤ۤ "fixed" Ȥ٤ΤǤ뤳ȤդǸʹߡѸ줬ʬȻƤΤ¤Ǥꡤ⥰դΤǤСΤ褦ˤʤ뤫⤷ʤȤСfocused diffuse ؤΥ뤬ƤӻưƤ褦˸Ƥ롥
Swann, Joan, Ana Deumert, Theresa Lillis, and Rajend Mesthrie, eds. A Dictionary of Sociolinguistics. Tuscaloosa: U of Alabama P, 2004.
Greenberg, J. H. "Were There Egyptian Koines?" The Fergusonian Impact. Vol. 1. Ed. A. Fishman, A. Tabouret-Kellter, M. Clyne, B. Krishnamurti and M. Abdulaziz. Berlin and New York: Academic P, 1986.
Ferguson, C. A. "Standardization as a Form of Language Spread." Language Spread and Language Policy: Issues, Implications, and Case Studies. Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics, 1987. Ed. P. Lowenberg. Washington, DC: Georgetown UP, 1988.
Blake, N. F. A History of the English Language. Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1996.
ɸ쥤ǥ (standard language ideology) ȤϡSwann et al. μҲؼŵˤȰʲ̤Ǥ롥
standard language ideology A concept introduced to sociolinguistics by James Milroy and Lesley Milroy (1999) in order to describe the prescriptive attitudes that accompany the emergence of standard languages. Standard Language Ideologies (SLIs) are characterised by a metalinguistically articulated and culturally dominant belief that there is only one correct way of speaking (i.e. the standard language). The SLI leads to a general intolerance towards linguistic variation, and non-standard varieties in particular are regarded as 'undesirable' and 'deviant'.
ǻȤƤ Milroy and Milroy ˡ4ǡ2012ǯˤäƤߤȡp. 19 ˴Ϣ뵭Ҥ롥
. . . it seems appropriate to speak more abstractly of standardisation as an ideology, and a standard language as an idea in the mind rather than a reality --- a set of abstract norms to which actual usage conform to a greater or lesser extent.
ɸȤΤʪǤ뤳Ȥϡ#3232. ۲줿ŪѼȤƤɸ ([2018-03-03-1]) Ǥ Milroy and Milroy ̤ƳǧΤ褦Ѽ郎¸ߤȿ뤳Ȥϡ1ĤΥǥǤȤȤ줬ɸ쥤ǥפǤ롥
˿ʤƤСɸಽ (standardisation) ȤΤΤȤƤβȤ⡤ѻԤƬˤ륤ǥˤʤȤ٤ϡɸಽǥפȸƤǤ褤
֡ˤˤɸಽηȯŸפȤ褦ʥơޤˤϡΥơޤΩΤ1Ĥθ쥤ǥɤäƤդ٤⤳ޤDZѸɸಽˤѤʵȤɵᤷƤɸಽݤˤϡˤ륤ǥ˼ŪǤʤФʤʤȿʤƤ롥
Swann, Joan, Ana Deumert, Theresa Lillis, and Rajend Mesthrie, eds. A Dictionary of Sociolinguistics. Tuscaloosa: U of Alabama P, 2004.
Milroy, Lesley and James Milroy. Authority in Language: Investigating Language Prescription and Standardisation. 4th ed. London and New York: Routledge, 2012.
[2018-02-12-1]εΤ褦ˡ34˺ػëѥˤָȿʹ֡ (HLC)մߥʡΰĤȤơ֡ɤѸ٤ȤƤɸѸȯãáֻʸˡ̻ŪʣŪɤפꤹ뤪äƤޤǤäżԤˡ鿽夲ޤˤȤäƤѸɸಽˤĤƹͤľ褤Ȥʤޤ
饤ɻѤäλϾ嵭θۡڡ֤Ƥ餤ޤؤΥĥäƤޤ饤⤫ܥ֥⳰¿Υĥ餻ƤޤΤǡȤƤɤ
1. ָȿʹ֡ (HLC) 43յߥʡ֤ȤФˤȤäơɤ٤ȤϲסɤѸפȤƤɸѸȯã--- áֻʸˡ̻ŪʣŪɤ---
2. ɸѸв
3. ɸѸ (Standard English) Ȥϡ
4. ɸѸɤѸ
5. ɸѸвνи
6. ؤ͡ʬˡȯã
7. 20Ⱦ?21Ƭθؤδؿο
8. ɸѸη
9. ɸ˼ Blake αѸ˻ʬ
10. Ѹɸಽ
11. ̤ɸγ
12. Milroy and Milroy ˤɸಽ7ʳ
13. Haugen ˤɸಽ4ʳ
14. ǥ (1) -- autumn vs fall
15. ξ
16. ǥ (2) ֻ -- 츻Ūֻ (etymological spelling)
17. debt ξ
18. 츻Ūֻ
19. եǤ츻Ūڥ
20. θȯΡɿסfault ξ
21. 츻ŪֻиŪط
22. EEBO Corpus ܲĴ
23. ǥ (3) ʸˡ -- 3ñ -s
24. űѸưζޡlufian (to love) ξ
25. Ѹζ
26. Ѹ줫ѸˤƤν
27. ΰյ
28. ɸಽ3ñ -s
29. 3ĤΥǥ֤ä
30.
31. ʸ
#3231. ɸ˼ Blake αѸ˻ʬ ([2018-03-02-1]) εǼꤢBlake ˤѸ˶ʬ61798ǯ?1914ǯˤˤĤƹͤ롥ޥε1˶ޤ줿λϡɸѸǰƬˤѸˤδϡѼŪ¿ռ줿Ȥ롥19Ťȡ18ħä줷ϼ꤫餢ٲ褦ˤʤꡤˤƼȯŪʸոºŤ졤ɸѼ郎ľѸ켫ͳѸвλۤȯȤäƤ褤𤲤ϵ줬ħŪˡWordsworth and Coleridge ˤ Lyrical Ballads (1798) νǤäBlake (13) ۩
This collection of poetry [= the Lyrical Ballads] attacked the idea of a prescriptive language for poetry and raised the concept that it should deal with 'the real language of men'. It was inspired in part by the French Revolution of 1789, which had called into question the very bases of the old order and its assumptions of regulation and conformity. This attitude gradually spilled over into language as well, for there seemed to be a profound attack on the nature of authority and the assumption that those at the top could dictate what was right and acceptable to the rest of society. While such attitudes did not change overnight, we can accept that there was a new spirit abroad which provides us with a convenient boundary in 1798.
1798ǯ˻Ϥޤꡤ1ȯ1914ǯޤǤλϡĹ19ɽƤ褤Blake ˤСλϡŪˤߤ (1) ¿ɸѼºš(2) ŪζδȤ2ħŤȤ줾ʬѤ褦
Firstly, the previous age had been concerned with regulating language and discovering the principles which underlined a language on the assumption that all languages followed the same structure. The nineteenth century was interested in the diversity of languages and varieties of language. The growth of the empire promoted interest in a whole range of languages other than the classical languages which had hitherto been the model for all linguistic structure. And scholars in England began to record the various regional dialects found in the United Kingdom. Whereas before these dialects may have been considered provincial and little more than barbarous, their use in poetry and the novel and the collections and studies based on these forms gradually meant that they were seen as real means of communication, even if they were not as socially acceptable as the standard. The respect for non-standard varieties increased, though this was a gradual process which even today has not made these dialects socially acceptable. One problem that such varieties faced, and still face, is that they do not usually exist in a regulated written form and thus may be regarded as inferior.
Secondly, the nineteenth century saw an enormous growth in the historical study of language. Many of the changes in English and its ancestors which will be outlined in the book were discovered in the nineteenth century. The development of the concept of a family tree for languages and the recognition that English was a Germanic language which belonged to the Proto-Indo-European family of languages (also known simply as Indo-European) were among the advances made at this time. Not unnaturally this put English and the classical languages into a different perspective. Their nature was not different from that of other languages, and English dialects could be regarded as closely related to standard English in origin and development; they had simply not been chosen to form the standard.
ǤСɸѸƱѸ줽ΤΤвª߽Ф줿ȤˤäŪʻ줿櫓ǤϤʤޤŪʻ¤ΩĤ褦ˤʤäȤȤǤ롥Ūʻϡ21κǤ⽽ʬƤΤ
Blake, N. F. A History of the English Language. Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1996.
ɸѸˤ˾ƤʸδƬǡMilroy (11) ˤޤɸȤΤˤĤƽҤ٤Ƥ롥
It has been observed (Coulmas 1992: 175) that 'traditionally most languages have been studied and described as if they were standard languages'. This is largely true of historical descriptions of English, and I am concerned in this paper with the effects of the ideology of standardisation (Milroy and Milroy 1991: 22--3) on scholars who have worked on the history of English. It seems to me that these effects have been so powerful in the past that the picture of language history that has been handed down to us is a partly false picture --- one in which the history of the language as a whole is very largely the story of the development of modern Standard English and not of its manifold varieties. This tendency has been so strong that traditional histories of English can themselves be seen as constituting part of the standard ideology --- that part of the ideology that confers legitimacy and historical depth on a language, or --- more precisely --- on what is held at some particular time to be the most important variety of a language.
In the present account, the standard language will not be treated as a definable variety of a language on a par with other varieties. The standard is not seen as part of the speech community in precisely the same sense that vernaculars can be said to exist in communities. Following Haugen (1966), standardisation is viewed as a process that is in some sense always in progress.
ɸȤŪ¸ʪǤϤʤưŪήΤΤ褦ʤΤǤ롥ɸಽȤưŪʲŪʤΤؤȥޥåԥͶŪʸѼ˶ᤤȤȤɸ˸¤餺Ѽ郎եǤȤϤcf. #1373. variety Ȥϲ ([2013-01-29-1])#415. All linguistic varieties are fictions ([2010-06-16-1])#2116. ֱѸפεۣ ([2015-02-11-1])#2265. ѼȤϸѲηϩꤷեǤ ([2015-07-10-1])ˡɸϡɸ뤹륤ǥ˻٤ơŪʥեեΥեˤʤ䤹ʪǤΤ⤷ʤ#1396. "Standard English" Ȥϲ ([2013-02-21-1]) Ȥˤ⡤ŤɽϤʤФʤʤΤ
Milroy, Jim. "Historical Description and the Ideology of the Standard Language." The Development of Standard English, 1300--1800. Ed. Laura Wright. Cambridge: CUP, 2000. 11--28.
Coulmas, F. Language and Economy. Oxford: Blackwell, 1992.
Milroy, Lesley and James Milroy. Authority in Language: Investigating Language Prescription and Standardisation. 2nd ed. London and New York: Routledge, 1991.
Haugen, Einar. "Dialect, Language, Nation." American Anthropologist. 68 (1966): 922--35.
Blake αѸ˽ϡѸɸಽ (standardisation) ɸѸηȤ˾碌ͥ줿Ѹ˳Ǥ롥Ȥ櫓ܤ٤ϡΤΤȤ礭ۤʤѸˤλʬˡ (periodisation) Ǥ롥ѸˤθˤˤơޤǤ͡ʻʬƤƤBlake ΤϰӤɸ˼ҲŪʴƤǤꡤܤФ褦ʿ (Blake, Chapter 1) 7ʬƤ롥ʲˡȤȤ˵
(1) եå粦λ (?9Ⱦ)ɸŪѼ郎¸ߤ͡Ѽ郎ΩƤ
(2) 9Ⱦ?1250ǯȥνɸबƶϤä
(3) 1250ǯ?1400ǯɸȤǰʤ塨ɸΤ˶ޤ줿 "the Interregnum"
(4) 1400ǯ?1660ǯɸνաʤȤ櫓ֻȸäΥ٥ˤơˤΩƤ
(5) 1660ǯ?1798ǯɸλ
(6) 1798ǯ?1914ǯѼŪ¿ռ줿
(7) 1914ǯ?ѸʬԳΤħŤ
(1) եå粦λ (?9Ⱦ) ϡѸ줬ѸȤ1Ĥñ̤ȤƸƤȤ⡤ѸνѼ郎¤٤뽸ΤȸƤǤ롥äơ1ĤɸȤȯۤ¸ߤʤ
(2) եå粦λʹߡȤ櫓10--11ˤƥȥűѸνդɸȤƤϰ̤1066ǯΥΥޥϳΤ˱ѸμҲŪϰ̤ȤȥɸϱѸҶǺ١³1250ǯޤDZƶϤĤʤȤ⡤ϤƱѸȤꤿ¸ߤƤѸ˾塤ɸ줬ΩȤƽפǤ롥
(3) Ƥɸ줬ƶϤʤɸ줬ޤǤζ̴ (the Interregnum) Ѽ郎Ω1Ĥɸ줬ʤ塥
(4) Ѹ˾2ܤνդɸ줬졤夷Ƥ塥15Ⱦ Chancery Standard ΡʤΰˤǤȹͤ롥ޤȤȯۤϵǤ롥
(5) 뵬ϼλ塥ʸˡ¿蘆졤ɸܻؤ줿塥ڤǯϡ (Restoration) 1660ǯȡޥȤʤ Wordsworth and Coleridge ˤ Lyrical Ballads Ǥ줿1798ǯħŪǯǤϤ뤬Τ˴֤˶ޤ줿ϡסס«פȤäɤ礦Ǥ롥
(6) Lyrical Ballads 1 (1914) ޤǤλ塥Ĥ餢ټͳˤʤꡤѼؤδؿޤꡤɸвƸ褦ˤʤä塥夫εϼޤƤΤ¡
(7) 1狼鸽ߤޤǤλ塥Ѹ줬ʤʬԤƩʾ"fragmentation and uncertainty" (Blake 15) ħŤ塥
ŪʡָűѸסѸסֶѸפζʬȾۤƤϤ褤
Blake, N. F. A History of the English Language. Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1996.
ī㡼ɶιֺ֥ڥǤɤѸˡ5ˤ4224ڡˤ˳ޤϡdoubt <b>--- ѸΥڥפꤷơѸ1500--1900ǯˤΥڥ⤷ޤֺ¤Ѥ饤ɻ˥åפƤޤ
ϰʲ3ĤǤ
ͥ˥ƥ줫֤줷ڥ¿и
ڥɸಽ1418ȾФˤƤ©ĹĤߤä
ѸμˤƤ⡤ڥɸಽϴˤãƤʤ
Ȥ櫓츻ŪڥˤĤƤϡܥ֥Ǥ¿εǼ夲ƤΤǡetymological_respelling ʲ饤ɤΥڡȤ˥ĥäƤޤƥ饤ɤϡ֥ؤΥȤƤȤޤ
1. ֺ¡إڥǤɤѸˡ4doubt <b>--- ѸΥڥ
2.
3. (1) 츻Ūڥ (etymological spelling)
4. debt ξ
5. 츻Ūڥ
6. island ϡ츻Ūץڥ
7. 츻Ūڥ黿 Holofernes
8. θȯΡɿסfault ξ
9. եǤ츻Ūڥ
10. ڥεǽɽ
11. (2) ʥڥɸಽ
12. ϥڥɸಽ¥
13. (3) Ѹμˤߤ륹ڥ
14. Robert Cawdrey's A Table Alphabeticall (1603)
15. Samuel Johnson's Dictionary of the English Language (1755)
16. ޤȤ
17. ʸ
ϢʤѸνդˤɸಽưϡ1400ǯ˻ϤޤȹͤƤ褤Ǥ14餽ʳȤ٤ư줿15äդ꤫顤餯ŪưŤääƸ߲ƤŪưŤȤϡʩɴǯ (hundred_years_war) κˤäơīֱѸᥤɤιפռȤǤ롥ȤʤСʤѰۤˤƤڥɸಽܻؤ٤ǡ夫μƤɸಽưˡ¦ΰ첡ä뤳Ȥˤʤäīγ Henry IV 鲦̤Ѥ Henry V ϡ1415ǯ襤ˤ뾡Ǥ˹ҤȯȤεªƱѸθҤ褦ȱưΤǤ롥Chancery Standard ϡΤ褦ʷаޤޤ줿Τȹͤ
ΰϢήˤĤơBlake (11) ϼΤ褦ˤߤƤ롥
Some scholars believe that the Lancastrians actively promoted the cause of English in order to increase their appeal to merchants and commoners against the aristocrats who were the leaders of the rebellions against them. Even if this is true, it is not likely that the kings would actively promote a standard as such. At best they would encourage the use of English as the national language, but this in turn would enhance the prospects of a standardised variety of London English being adopted as the variety to be used nationally. In order to follow this policy, the kings would have to rely on the forms of language most accessible to them, and that meant using one of the standardised forms of English used in the Chancery or some other government agency. From 1400 onwards the idea that there should be a single form of 'English' based upon the language of London and its environs became predominant.
ŸƤϡīϡѸɸಽ褦ؤȤϡޤǹȯȤȤŪŪΤ˱ѸȤ褦ؤˤʤȤȤ餯θ˱Ѹ줬ɸಽƤäΤϡ¦ŪǤϤʤष̤Ȥߤ٤
Ϣơ#3214. 1410ǯ夫30ǯˤƤ Chancery English ˨ ([2018-02-13-1])#1207. Ѹνդ ([2012-08-16-1]) ⻲ȡ
Blake, N. F. A History of the English Language. Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1996.
ǯ314Ω夲졤ؽؤdzŤ줿˼Ҳء˸θ HiSoPra* (= HIstorical SOciolinguistics and PRAgmatics) 2313ƱؽؤˤƳͽǤץξܺ٤ΰ (PDF)
ǯ1ˤĤƤϡƤ˻äƤаޤ顤ܥ֥ǡ#2883. HiSoPra* ˻ä (1) ([2017-03-19-1])#2884. HiSoPra* ˻ä (2) ([2017-03-20-1]) ˤƲͻҤ𤷤ޤ٤2Ǥ⡤֥ɤη ̸ˤоȤƸƤΡפꤹ륷ݥǡѸɸಽβ˴ؤƾäƤȤˤʤޤΥɷˤоȤơեȵʤθ礦ȤݤǤΩäơܸˤĤ̾¼˹ֱ餷ƤθĤѸˤĤơƳؽؤιɥĸˤĤơȤˤʤäƤޤ3ʥץ饹ˤˤɸಽβоȸŪˤߤȤߤǤä礤ʳ顤¤˶̣֤ΰƱݥȤʣȽ֤ڤߤǤ¾ȯɽ並ͽꤵƤޤ
Ѹɸಽ˴ؤϡܥ֥Ǥ standardisation νǽƤޤδˡƹͤƹԤͽǤ
űѸ˴ؤ˸ȤơǶ2Ĥεǿ줿cf. #3208. ݥ饤ȥͥäűѸ ([2018-02-07-1])#3211. ù¤ ([2018-02-10-1])ˡ褽 speech_act, politeness, discourse_analysis, information_structure ˴ؤä Traugott γˤäơѸ˴ؤ˸ȤơɤΤ褦ʤΤ뤫Ƥߤ
Traugott ϡϥɥ֥åƬ3ĤŦƤ (466)
(1) "the shift from information-structure-oriented word order in Old English to 'syntacticized' order in Middle English; this in tern led, at the end of the period, to new strategies for marking topic and focus in special ways."
(2) "the development of auxiliary verbs in contexts where implied abstract temporal, modal, or aspectual meanings of certain concrete verbs became salient"
(3) "the appearance of a large set of new discourse types, from romances to drama, scientific writings, and letters"
(1) ϸΥե˴ؤ̤ȤäƤ褤űѸ줫Ѹˤƶޤष礬경ƤäȤˤꡤŪͳʸѤƾ¤ȤάäƤΤ뤳ȤǤʤʤäˡ̤μʤʤʤФʤʤʤäȤȤǤ롥㤨СѸˡټԤɸ by ȼư֤ιʸȯãƤȤϡΤ褦ʾ¤˵ʬ뤫⤷ʤ⤷β⤬ΤǤСŪװѲΰȤʤäȸ뤳Ȥˤʤ
(2) Ūʴޤߤ(1) ȴŪ˴ϢȻפ뤬ư줫ưؤȯãʤŵŪʸˡ (grammaticalisation) λˤΤˡʸ̮˽줿ް (implicature) ͶƳ (invited_inference) ʤɤƻΩƤäƤ븦ؤѸˤ϶ޤοˤ³ˡˡοˤꡤŪؼʤȤˡư줬ȯã뤬ȯãˤŪʥᥫ˥बͿƤǽ롥
(3) ϿäνиǤ롥夬ˤĤ졤λˤϤʤäƥȡפƤ뤳ȤѸ˸¤äݤǤϤʤѸǤΤ˿郎߽Ф줿Traugott ϥޥࡤʳŪʸϡȤäŦƤ뤬¾ˤեʤӥƥˤαƶ뤤Ϻ礷¿Ѥλʸ䱤ʸʤɤ
ۤѸˤϱѸνդɸಽ (standardisation) ⵯϤƤꡤïĤɤɸѼѤΤѤʤäΤȤäҲŪоݤȤʤ
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. "Middle English: Pragmatics and Discourse" Chapter 30 of English Historical Linguistics: An International Handbook. 2 vols. Ed. Alexander Bergs and Laurel J. Brinton. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 2012. 466--80.
Powered by WinChalow1.0rc4 based on chalow