This chapter discusses the analysis of language attitudes as they are expressed in spoken interaction. Although the approach might be considered to have some limitations because it is generally confined to smaller samples of data, it offers valuable insights by providing greater contextualisation of attitudes as they are communicated, whilst also accounting for their fluid and shifting nature as they emerge in discourse. Key points of departure are ideas from discursive psychology and the application of discourse analysis to studying attitudes. The chapter proceeds to outline fundamental developments in this line of enquiry, ranging from work on discourse strategies to more recent research which has placed increasing focus on the elicitation and investigation of language attitudes in the context of interaction between the study participants. The chapter provides information on practical issues of planning and research design for such studies, followed by potential strategies for the analysis and interpretation of the resultant data. The main points arising from the discussion are illustrated by a case study undertaken in the post-industrial urban Ruhr region in Germany, where attitudes towards the local variety – Ruhrdeutsch – were investigated.

There is plenty of evidence indicating that the rise in usage and influence of digital and online forms of communication is having an effect on language norms and processes of standardization. Some examples are the shifts in writing norms in digital spaces, the diversification of language norm authorities and the impact of crowdsourcing on dictionaries and reference works. Whereas existing research has predominantly centred on the consequences of digital and online technologies for developments ‘from below’, this chapter focuses instead on their significance for standardization and policies ‘from above’. With reference to the most recent official revisions to the Luxembourgish language orthography, the chapter examines efforts by state institutions and private organizations to implement language standards and create greater awareness of written norms for Luxembourgish. The analysis encompasses the Schreiwen.lu online resources and spelling campaign, digital Luxembourigish dictionaries and spellcheckers, as well as the rtl.lu online news platform. The findings indicate that such technological developments enable multiple approaches for creating, negotiating and disseminating language standards. Online and digital media not only affect bottom-up language practices, but also have an increasingly influential role in the norm implementation and standardization effected by the state and by private entities.

Linguistic standardization has long preoccupied researchers from different sub-disciplines of linguistics, including historical, applied and sociolinguists, as well as those working on language policy. This Introduction outlines some of the key issues that run through the literature on standardization, as well as the chapters in this volume, and on which there has not always been a clear consensus. These include terminological issues, the relationship between written and spoken standards, the variability of the standard both synchronically and diachronically and the authorities on which standard languages are based. We consider how traditional models are being reviewed and challenged by opening up the scope and type of case studies to embrace multilingual situations, minoritized languages and transnational contexts. Traditional standardization narratives are also being questioned through consideration of standardization ‘from below’. Standard languages play an important role in the legal and educational systems, bringing opportunities but also challenges. We conclude by discussing a number of symptoms of the increased ‘democratization’ of standardization, such as online and digital channels, and the emergence of ‘unofficial spoken standards’.

The widespread recognition of Karl Marx as a leading, classical contributor to ecological thought is a fairly recent historical occurrence. The revival of Marx’s ecology since the 1960s, and especially since the 1990s, occurred in a number of stages. The dominant interpretation on the left up through the 1980s faulted Marx for his supposedly instrumentalist, ‘Promethean’, conception of nature and alleged lack of an ecological sensibility. This view resulted in what has come to be known as ‘first-stage ecosocialism’, characterized by the grafting of Green thought onto Marxism (or in some cases Marxism onto Green thought) based on the presumption that Marx’s entire critique was ecologically flawed.