Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of figures
- Preface
- Map of Norway
- 1 Land and people, language and language planning
- PART I THE NATIONALIST PERIOD, 1814–1917
- PART II THE SOCIOPOLITICAL PERIOD, 1917–66
- 6 The emergence of a socialist theory of language planning: a sociolinguistic experiment
- 7 The post-war language struggle (1945–66) to counter the sociolinguistic experiment of 1938
- PART III FROM A SINGLE-STANDARD TO A TWO-STANDARD STRATEGY
- References
- List of terms of language varieties
- Timeline for the different written varieties of Norwegian
- Timeline of important events for language planning and conflict in modern Norway
- Index
6 - The emergence of a socialist theory of language planning: a sociolinguistic experiment
from PART II - THE SOCIOPOLITICAL PERIOD, 1917–66
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 September 2014
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of figures
- Preface
- Map of Norway
- 1 Land and people, language and language planning
- PART I THE NATIONALIST PERIOD, 1814–1917
- PART II THE SOCIOPOLITICAL PERIOD, 1917–66
- 6 The emergence of a socialist theory of language planning: a sociolinguistic experiment
- 7 The post-war language struggle (1945–66) to counter the sociolinguistic experiment of 1938
- PART III FROM A SINGLE-STANDARD TO A TWO-STANDARD STRATEGY
- References
- List of terms of language varieties
- Timeline for the different written varieties of Norwegian
- Timeline of important events for language planning and conflict in modern Norway
- Index
Summary
After the 1917 reforms, what was needed was a fresh analysis of the language situation on which to build a theory of language planning; and rather than focusing on what could be considered Norwegian versus Danish, it should concentrate instead on bridging the major sociolinguistic divide between popular local dialects and upper-middle-class speech. Doing this would involve defining the popular local dialects – understood as a single linguistic entity – as constituting the foundation on which not only Landsmål but also Riksmål should be based. It would also be necessary to identify the dialect forms that could be used to span the linguistic gap between the two standards.
In the aftermath of the 1917 reforms, there were once again heated debates in Parliament and in society at large about which spoken language varieties were to be used in schools. In addition, around the year 1930, Parliament decided to change the name of the city of Trondhjem to its medieval appellation, Nidaros (see further below). This triggered a fierce struggle both locally and nationally. In the end, the medieval name proposal was withdrawn and the change in spelling to Trondheim was agreed upon (Lockertsen 2007). These two conflicts convinced the Labour Party leaders that it was necessary to actively take steps to solve the language question once and for all (cf. Bernsen 1975; Rogne 1998).
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Language Planning as a Sociolinguistic ExperimentThe Case of Modern Norwegian, pp. 101 - 126Publisher: Edinburgh University PressPrint publication year: 2014