A pluricentric language or polycentric language is a language with several interacting codified standard forms, often corresponding to different countries.[1][2][3] Many examples of such languages can be found worldwide among the most-spoken languages, including but not limited to Chinese in Mainland China, Taiwan and Singapore; English in the United Kingdom, the United States, India, and elsewhere; and French in France, Canada, and elsewhere.[4] The converse case is a monocentric language, which has only one formally standardized version. Examples include Japanese and Russian.[5] In some cases, the different standards of a pluricentric language may be elaborated until they become autonomous languages, as happened with Malaysian and Indonesian, and with Hindi and Urdu.[5] The same process is under way in Serbo-Croatian[5][6] and Bulgarian.

Examples of varying degrees of pluricentrism

This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.Find sources: "Pluricentric language" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (October 2016) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)


Main article: Varieties of Arabic

Pre-Islamic Arabic can be considered a polycentric language.[7] In Arabic-speaking countries different levels of polycentricity can be detected.[8] Modern Arabic is a pluricentric language with varying branches correlating with different regions where Arabic is spoken and the type of communities speaking it. The vernacular varieties of Arabic include:

In addition, many speakers use Modern Standard Arabic in education and formal settings. Therefore, in Arabic-speaking communities, diglossia is frequent.


See also: Armenian orthography reform

The Armenian language is a pluricentric language with two standard varieties, Eastern Armenian and Western Armenian, which have developed as separate literary languages since the eighteenth century.[9] Prior to this, almost all Armenian literature was written in Classical Armenian, which is now solely used as a liturgical language. Eastern and Western Armenian can also refer to the two major dialectal blocks into which the various non-standard dialects of Armenian are categorized. Eastern Armenian is the official language of the Republic of Armenia. It is also spoken, with dialectal variations, by Iranian Armenians, Armenians in Karabakh (see Karabakh dialect), and in the Armenian diaspora, especially in the former Soviet Union (Russia, Georgia, Ukraine). Western Armenian is spoken mainly in the Armenian diaspora, especially in the Middle East, France, the US, and Canada.

Additionally, Armenian is written in two standard orthographies: classical and reformed Armenian orthography. The former is used by practically all speakers of Western Armenian and by Armenians in Iran, while the latter, which was developed in Soviet Armenia in the 20th century, is used in Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh.


This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (December 2015) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

Main article: Catalan dialects

The term "Catalan–Valencian–Balearic" is seldom used (for example, in a dictionary by Antoni Maria Alcover i Sureda).

This language is internationally known as Catalan, as in Ethnologue. This is also the most commonly used name in Catalonia, but also in Andorra and the Balearic Islands, probably due to the prestige of the Central Catalan dialect spoken in and around Barcelona. However, in the Valencian Community, the official name of this language is Valencian. One reason for this is political (see Serbo-Croatian for a similar situation), but this variant does have its own literary tradition that dates back to the Reconquista.

Although mutually intelligible with other varieties of Catalan, Valencian has lexical peculiarities and its own spelling rules, which are set out by the Acadèmia Valenciana de la Llengua, created in 1998. However, this institution recognizes that Catalan and Valencian are varieties of the same language. For their part, there are specific varieties in the two major Balearic islands, Mallorcan (mallorquí) in Mallorca, Menorcan (menorquí) in Menorca, Eivissenc in Eivissa. The University of the Balearic Islands is the language regulator for these varieties.


Main article: Varieties of Chinese

Until the mid-20th century, most Chinese people spoke only their local varieties of Chinese. These varieties had diverged widely from the written form used by scholars, Literary Chinese, which was modelled on the language of the Chinese classics. As a practical measure, officials of the Ming and Qing dynasties carried out the administration of the empire using a common language based on northern varieties, known as Guānhuà (官話, literally "speech of officials"), known as Mandarin in English after the officials. Knowledge of this language was thus essential for an official career, but it was never formally defined.[10]

In the early years of the 20th century, Literary Chinese was replaced as the written standard by written vernacular Chinese, which was based on northern dialects. In the 1930s, a standard national language Guóyǔ (國語, literally "national language") was adopted, with its pronunciation based on the Beijing dialect, but with vocabulary also drawn from other northern varieties.[11] After the establishment of the People's Republic of China in 1949, the standard was known as Pǔtōnghuà (普通话/普通話, literally "common speech"), but was defined in the same way as Guóyǔ in the Republic of China now governing Taiwan.[10] It also became one of the official languages of Singapore, under the name Huáyǔ (华语/華語, literally "Chinese language").

Although the three standards remain close, they have diverged to some extent. Most Mandarin speakers in Taiwan and Singapore came from the southeast coast of China, where the local dialects lack the retroflex initials /tʂ tʂʰ ʂ/ found in northern dialects, so that many speakers in those places do not distinguish them from the apical sibilants /ts tsʰ s/. Similarly, retroflex codas (erhua) are typically avoided in Taiwan and Singapore. There are also differences in vocabulary, with Taiwanese Mandarin absorbing loanwords from Min Chinese, Hakka Chinese, and Japanese, and Singaporean Mandarin borrowing words from English, Malay, and southern varieties of Chinese.[12][13]

Eastern South Slavic (Bulgarian–Macedonian–Gorani–Paulician)

Further information: Eastern South Slavic, Macedonian language § Relationship to Bulgarian, Bulgarian language § Relationship to Macedonian, and Political views on the Macedonian language

See also: Bulgarian nationalism, Macedonian nationalism, and Accession of North Macedonia to the European Union

Some linguists and scholars, mostly from Bulgaria and Greece, but some also from other countries,[14][15] consider Eastern South Slavic to be a pluricentric language with four standards: Bulgarian (based on the Rup, Balkan and Moesian ("Eastern Bulgarian") dialects), Macedonian (based on the Western and Central Macedonian dialects), Gorani (based on the Torlakian dialects), and Paulician (including Banat Bulgarian).[16] Politicians and nationalists from Bulgaria are likely to refer to this entire grouping as 'Bulgarian', and to be particularly hostile to the notion that Macedonian is an autonomous language separate from Bulgarian, which Macedonian politicians and citizens tend to claim.[16] As of 2021, the hypothesis that Eastern South Slavic, 'Greater Bulgarian', 'Bulgaro-Macedonian', or simply 'Bulgarian', is a pluricentric language with several mutually intelligible official standards in the same way that Serbo-Croatian is, and Czechoslovak used to be,[clarification needed] has not yet been fully developed in linguistics; it is a popular idea in Bulgarian politics, but an unpopular one in North Macedonia.[16]


Main articles: List of dialects of English, Regional accents of English, and List of countries by English-speaking population

English is a pluricentric language,[17][18] with differences in pronunciation, vocabulary, spelling, etc., between each of the constituent countries of the United Kingdom, North America, the Caribbean, Ireland, English-speaking African countries, Singapore, India, and Oceania. Educated native English speakers using their version of one of the standard forms of English are almost completely mutually intelligible, but non-standard forms present significant dialectal variations, and are marked by reduced intelligibility.

British and American English are the two most commonly taught varieties in the education systems where English is taught as a second language. British English tends to predominate in Europe and the former British colonies of the West Indies, Africa, and Asia, where English is not the first language of the majority of the population. (The Falkland Islands, a British territory off the southeast coast of South America with English as its native language, have their own dialect, while British English is the standard.) In contrast, American English tends to dominate instruction in Latin America, Liberia, and East Asia[19][20] (In Latin America, British English is taught in schools with British curriculum in countries with descendants of British settlers.)

Due to globalization and the resulting spread of the language in recent decades, English is becoming increasingly decentralized, with daily use and statewide study of the language in schools growing in most regions of the world. However, in the global context, the number of native speakers of English is much smaller than the number of non-native speakers of English of reasonable competence. In 2018, it was estimated that for every native speaker of English, there are six non-native speakers of reasonable competence,[21] raising the questions of English as a lingua franca as the most widely spoken form of the language.

Philippine English (which is predominantly spoken as a second language) has been primarily influenced by American English. The rise of the call center industry in the Philippines has encouraged some Filipinos to "polish" or neutralize their accents to make them more closely resemble the accents of their client countries.

Countries such as Australia, New Zealand, and Canada have their own well-established varieties of English which are the standard within those countries but are far more rarely taught overseas to second language learners.[citation needed][22] (Standard English in Australia and New Zealand is related to British English in its common pronunciation and vocabulary; a similar relationship exists between Canadian English and American English.)

English was historically pluricentric when it was used across the independent kingdoms of England and Scotland prior to the Acts of Union in 1707. English English and Scottish English are now subsections of British English.


This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (September 2018) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

Main article: Varieties of French

In the modern era, there are several major loci of the French language, including Standard French (also known as Parisian French), Canadian French (including Quebec French and Acadian French), American French (for instance, Louisiana French), Haitian French, and African French.

Until the early 20th century, the French language was highly variable in pronunciation and vocabulary within France, with varying dialects and degrees of intelligibility, the langues d'oïl. However, government policy made it so that the dialect of Paris would be the method of instruction in schools, and other dialects, like Norman, which has influence from Scandinavian languages, were neglected. Controversy still remains in France over the fact that the government recognizes them as languages of France, but provides no monetary support for them nor has the Constitutional Council of France ratified the Charter for Regional or Minority Languages.

North American French is the result of French colonization of the New World between the 17th and 18th centuries. In many cases, it contains vocabulary and dialectal quirks not found in Standard Parisian French owing to history: most of the original settlers of Quebec, Acadia, and later what would become Louisiana and northern New England came from Northern and Northwest France, and would have spoken dialects like Norman, Poitevin, and Angevin with far fewer speaking the dialect of Paris. This, plus isolation from developments in France, most notably the drive for standardization by L'Académie française, make North American dialects of the language quite distinct. Acadian French, that which is spoken in New Brunswick, Canada, contains many words that are much older than anything found in modern France, much of it having roots in the 17th century, and a distinct intonation. Québécois, the largest of the dialects, has a distinct pronunciation that is not found in Europe in any measure and a greater difference in vowel pronunciation, and syntax tends to vary greatly. Cajun French has some distinctions not found in Canada in that there is more vocabulary derived from both local Native American and African dialects and a pronunciation of the letter r that has disappeared in France entirely. It is rolled, and with heavier contact with the English language than any of the above the pronunciation has shifted to harder sounding consonants in the 20th century. Cajun French equally has been an oral language for generations and it is only recently that its syntax and features been adapted to French orthography.

Minor standards can also be found in Belgium and Switzerland, with particular influence of Germanic languages on grammar and vocabulary, sometimes through the influence of local dialects. In Belgium, for example, various Germanic influences in spoken French are evident in Wallonia (for example, to blink in English, and blinken in German and Dutch, blinquer in Walloon and local French, cligner in standard French). Ring (rocade or périphérique in standard French) is a common word in the three national languages for beltway or ring road. Also, in Belgium and Switzerland, there are noted differences in the number system when compared to standard Parisian or Canadian French, notably in the use of septante, octante/huitante and nonante for the numbers 70, 80 and 90. In other standards of French, these numbers are usually denoted soixante-dix (sixty-ten), quatre-vingts (four-twenties) and quatre-vingt-dix (four-twenties-and-ten). French varieties spoken in Oceania are also influenced by local languages. New Caledonian French is influenced by Kanak languages in its vocabulary and grammatical structure. African French is another variety.


Main article: Standard German

Standard German is often considered an asymmetric pluricentric language;[23] the standard used in Germany is often considered dominant, mostly because of the sheer number of its speakers and their frequent lack of awareness of the Austrian Standard German and Swiss Standard German varieties. Although there is a uniform stage pronunciation based on a manual by Theodor Siebs that is used in theatres, and, nowadays to a lesser extent, in radio and television news all across German-speaking countries, this is not true for the standards applied at public occasions in Austria, South Tyrol and Switzerland, which differ in pronunciation, vocabulary, and sometimes even grammar. (In Switzerland, the letter ß has been removed from the alphabet, with ss as its replacement.) Sometimes this even applies to news broadcasts in Bavaria, a German state with a strong separate cultural identity. The varieties of Standard German used in those regions are to some degree influenced by the respective dialects (but by no means identical to them), by specific cultural traditions (e.g. in culinary vocabulary, which differs markedly across the German-speaking area of Europe), and by different terminology employed in law and administration. A list of Austrian terms for certain food items has even been incorporated into EU law, even though it is clearly incomplete.[24]


The Hindi languages are a large dialect continuum defined as a unit culturally. Medieval Hindustani (then known as Hindi or Hindavi[25]) was based on a register of the Delhi dialect and has two modern literary forms, Standard Hindi and Standard Urdu. Additionally, there are historical literary standards, such as the closely related Braj Bhasha and the more distant Awadhi, as well as recently established standard languages based on what were once considered Hindi dialects: Maithili and Dogri. Other varieties, such as Rajasthani, are often considered distinct languages but have no standard form. Caribbean Hindi and Fijian Hindi also differ significantly from the Sanskritized standard Hindi spoken in India.


Main articles: Malay language, Comparison of Standard Malay and Indonesian, and Malay trade and creole languages

From a purely linguistic viewpoint, Malaysian and Indonesian are two normative varieties of the same language (Malay). Both lects have the same dialectal basis, and linguistic sources still tend to treat the standards as different forms of a single language.[26] In popular parlance, however, the two varieties are often thought of as distinct tongues in their own rights due to the growing divergence between them and for politically motivated reasons.[citation needed] Nevertheless, they retain a high degree of mutual intelligibility despite a number of differences in vocabulary and grammar. The Malay language itself has many local dialects and creolized versions, whereas the "Indonesian language", the standardized variety in Indonesia acting as a lingua franca of the country, has received a great number of international and local influences.


Malayalam is a pluricentric language with historically more than one written form. Malayalam script is officially recognized, but there are other standardized varieties such as Arabi Malayalam of Mappila Muslims, Karshoni of Saint Thomas Christians and Judeo-Malayalam of Cochin Jews.


The Persian language has three standard varieties with official status in Iran (locally known as Farsi), Afghanistan (officially known as Dari), and Tajikistan (officially known as Tajik). The standard forms of the three are based on the Tehrani, Kabuli, and Dushanbe varieties, respectively.

The Persian alphabet is used for both Farsi (Iranian) and Dari (Afghan). Traditionally, Tajiki is also written with Perso-Arabic script. In order to increase literacy, a Latin alphabet (based on the Common Turkic Alphabet) was introduced in 1917. Later in the late 1930s, the Tajik Soviet Socialist Republic promoted the use of Cyrillic alphabet, which remains the most widely used system today. Attempts to reintroduce the Perso-Arabic script were made.[27]

The language spoken by Bukharan Jews is called Bukhori (or Bukharian), and is written in Hebrew alphabet.


Apart from the Galician question, Portuguese varies mainly between Brazilian Portuguese and European Portuguese (also known as "Lusitanian Portuguese", "Standard Portuguese" or even "Portuguese Portuguese"). Both varieties have undergone significant and divergent developments in phonology and the grammar of their pronominal systems. The result is that communication between the two varieties of the language without previous exposure can be occasionally difficult, although speakers of European Portuguese tend to understand Brazilian Portuguese better than vice versa, due to the heavy exposure to music, soap operas etc. from Brazil. Word ordering can be dramatically different between European and Brazilian Portuguese.[28]

Brazilian and European Portuguese currently have two distinct, albeit similar, spelling standards. A unified orthography for the two varieties (including a limited number of words with dual spelling) has been approved by the national legislatures of Brazil and Portugal and is now official; see Spelling reforms of Portuguese for additional details. Formal written standards remain grammatically close to each other, despite some minor syntactic differences.

African Portuguese and Asian Portuguese are based on the standard European dialect, but have undergone their own phonetic and grammatical developments, sometimes reminiscent of the spoken Brazilian variant. A number of creoles of Portuguese have developed in African countries, for example in Guinea-Bissau and on the island of São Tomé.[28]


See also: Language secessionism § In Serbo-Croatian

Serbo-Croatian is a pluricentric language with four standards (Bosnian, Croatian, Montenegrin, and Serbian) promoted in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Montenegro, and Serbia.[29][30][31][32][33][34] These standards do differ slightly, but do not hinder mutual intelligibility.[35][36][37][38][39][40] Rather, as all four standardised varieties are based on the prestige Shtokavian dialect, major differences in intelligibility are identified not on the basis of standardised varieties, but rather dialects, like Kajkavian and Chakavian.[41][42] Lexical and grammatical differences between the ethnic variants are reportedly limited, even when compared with those between closely related Slavic languages (such as standard Czech and Slovak, Bulgarian and Macedonian). The Montenegrin standard is largely based on the Serbian, while Bosnian is a compromise between Croatian and Serbian ones; Croatian and Serbian standards show 95% mutual intelligibility.[34] Shtokavian is largely mutually unintelligible with Kajkavian (which is closer to Slovene) and only partially intelligible with Chakavian.[citation needed]


Main article: Spanish dialects and varieties

Spanish has both national and regional linguistic norms, which vary in terms of vocabulary, grammar, and pronunciation, but all varieties are mutually intelligible and the same orthographic rules are shared throughout.[43]

In Spain, Standard Spanish is based upon the speech of educated speakers from Madrid.[44] All varieties spoken in the Iberian Peninsula are grouped as Peninsular Spanish. Canarian Spanish (spoken in the Canary Islands), along with Spanish spoken in the Americas (including Spanish spoken in the United States, Central American Spanish, Mexican Spanish, Andean Spanish, and Caribbean Spanish), are particularly related to Andalusian Spanish.

The United States is now the world's second-largest Spanish-speaking country after Mexico in total number of speakers (L1 and L2 speakers). A report said there are 41 million L1 Spanish speakers and another 11.6 million L2 speakers in the U.S. This puts the US ahead of Colombia (48 million) and Spain (46 million) and second only to Mexico (121 million).[45]

The Spanish of Latin Americans has a growing influence on the language across the globe through music, culture and television produced using the language of the largely bilingual speech community of US Latinos.[46][47][48]

In Argentina and Uruguay the Spanish standard is based on the local dialects of Buenos Aires and Montevideo. This is known as Rioplatense Spanish, (from Rio de la Plata (River Plate)) and is distinguishable from other standard Spanish dialects by voseo. In Colombia, Rolo (a name for the dialect of Bogotá) is valued for its clear pronunciation.[49] The Judeo-Spanish (also known as Ladino; not to be confused with Latino) spoken by Sephardi Jews can be found in Israel and elsewhere; it is usually considered a separate language.[citation needed]


Two varieties exist,[citation needed] though only one written standard remains (regulated by the Swedish Academy of Sweden): Rikssvenska (literally "Realm Swedish"), the official language of Sweden, and Finlandssvenska (in Finland known as "Högsvenska", 'High Swedish'), which, alongside Finnish, is the other official language of Finland. There are differences in vocabulary and grammar, with the variety used in Finland remaining a little more conservative. The most marked differences are in pronunciation and intonation: Whereas Swedish speakers usually pronounce /k/ before front vowels as [ɕ], this sound is usually pronounced by a Swedo-Finn as [t͡ʃ]; in addition, the two tones that are characteristic of Swedish (and Norwegian) are absent from most Finnish dialects of Swedish, which have an intonation reminiscent of Finnish and thus sound more monotonous when compared to Rikssvenska.

There are dialects that could be considered different languages due to long periods of isolation and geographical separation from the central dialects of Svealand and Götaland that came to constitute the base for the standard Rikssvenska. Dialects such as Elfdalian, Jamtlandic, and Gutnish all differ as much, or more, from standard Swedish than the standard varieties of Danish. Some of them have a standardized orthography, but the Swedish government has not granted any of them official recognition as regional languages and continues to look upon them as dialects of Swedish. Most of them are severely endangered and spoken by elderly people in the countryside.


The vast majority of Tamil speakers reside in southern India, where it is the official language of Tamil Nadu and of Puducherry, and one of 22 languages listed in the Eighth Schedule to the Constitution of India. It is also one of two official languages in Sri Lanka, one of four official languages in Singapore, and is used as the medium of instruction in government-aided Tamil primary schools in Malaysia. Other parts of the world have Tamil-speaking populations, but are not loci of planned development.[50]

Tamil is diglossic, with the literary variant used in books, poetry, speeches and news broadcasts while the spoken variant is used in everyday speech, online messaging and movies. While there are significant differences in the standard spoken forms of the different countries, the literary register is mostly uniform, with some differences in semantics that are not perceived by native speakers. There has been no attempt to compile a dictionary of Sri Lankan Tamil.[51]

As a result of the Pure Tamil Movement, Indian Tamil tends to avoid loanwords to a greater extent than Sri Lankan Tamil. Coinages of new technical terms also differ between the two.[52] Tamil policy in Singapore and Malaysia tends to follow that of Tamil Nadu regarding linguistic purism and technical coinages.[53]

There are some spelling differences, particularly in the greater use of Grantha letters to write loanwords and foreign names in Sri Lanka, Singapore and Malaysia. The Tamil Nadu script reform of 1978 has been accepted in Singapore and Malaysia, but not Sri Lanka.[54]


This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (February 2022) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

See also


  1. ^ Stewart 1968, p. 534.
  2. ^ Kloss 1967, p. 31.
  3. ^ Clyne 1992, p. 1.
  4. ^ Clyne 1992, pp. 1–3.
  5. ^ a b c Clyne 1992, p. 3.
  6. ^ Kordić, Snježana (2007). "La langue croate, serbe, bosniaque et monténégrine" [Croatian, Serbian, Bosniakian, and Montenegrin] (PDF). In Madelain, Anne (ed.). Au sud de l'Est. vol. 3 (in French). Paris: Non Lieu. pp. 71–78. ISBN 978-2-35270-036-4. OCLC 182916790. SSRN 3439662. CROSBI 429734. Archived (PDF) from the original on 4 August 2012. Retrieved 8 May 2019.
  7. ^ Abd-el-Jawad 1992, p. 262.
  8. ^ Abd-el-Jawad 1992, p. 271.
  9. ^ Dum-Tragut, Jasmine (2009). Armenian: Modern Eastern Armenian. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. pp. xiii, 1. ISBN 978-9027238146. OCLC 932596142.
  10. ^ a b Norman, Jerry (1988). Chinese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 136–137. ISBN 978-0-521-29653-3.
  11. ^ Ramsey, S. Robert (1987). The Languages of China. Princeton University Press. pp. 3–15. ISBN 978-0-691-01468-5.
  12. ^ Bradley, David (1992). "Chinese as a pluricentric language". In Clyne, Michael G. (ed.). Pluricentric Languages: Differing Norms in Different Nations. Walter de Gruyter. pp. 305–324. ISBN 978-3-11-012855-0.
  13. ^ Chen, Ping (1999). Modern Chinese: History and sociolinguistics. New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 46–49. ISBN 978-0-521-64572-0.
  14. ^ Language profile Macedonian Archived 11 March 2009 at the Wayback Machine, UCLA International Institute
  15. ^ Poulton, Hugh (2000). Who are the Macedonians?. C. Hurst & Co. Publishers. p. 116. ISBN 978-1-85065-534-3.
  16. ^ a b c Kamusella, Tomasz (17 June 2021). Politics and the Slavic Languages. p. 125. ISBN 9781000395990. Retrieved 23 August 2021.
  17. ^ Crystal, David (2003). A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. Blackwell.
  18. ^ Matthews, P.H. (2007). Oxford Concise Dictionary of Linguistics. Oxford University Press.
  19. ^ Yuko Goto Butler. "How Are Nonnative-English-Speaking Teachers Perceived by Young Learners?" TESOL Quarterly. Vol. 41, No. 4 (Dec., 2007), pp. 731-755.
  20. ^ Timothy J. Riney, Naoyuki Takagi & Kumiko Inutsuka. "Phonetic Parameters and Perceptual Judgments of Accent in English by American and Japanese Listeners." TESOL Quarterly Vol. 39, No. 3 (Sep., 2005), pp. 441-466
  21. ^ Dollinger, Stefan (2019). "Creating Canadian English". Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, UK: 18.
  22. ^ Leitner, Gerhard (1992). Clyne, Michael (ed.). English as a pluricentric language. Berlin: Mouton. p. 208.
  23. ^ Ammon 1995, pp. 484–499.
  24. ^ "Protokoll Nr. 10 über die Verwendung spezifisch österreichischer Ausdrücke der deutschen Sprache im Rahmen der Europäischen Union" [Protocol number 10 on the usage of specific Austrian terms of the German language within the European Union] (PDF) (in German). European Commission. Archived from the original (PDF) on 5 March 2016. Retrieved 13 November 2015.
  25. ^ Shaban, Abdul. "Urdu and Urdu Medium Schools in Maharashtra." Economic & Political Weekly 50.29 (2015): 47.
  26. ^ An example of equal treatment of Malaysian and Indonesian: the Pusat Rujukan Persuratan Melayu database from the Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka has a "Istilah MABBIM" section dedicated to documenting Malaysian, Indonesian and Bruneian official terminologies: see example
  27. ^ 'Tajikistan to use Persian alphabet,' Iranian website says. Tajikistan News ASIA-Plus. Published 3 May 2008, retrieved 9 April 2019.
  28. ^ a b Wetzels, W. Leo; Menuzzi, Sergio; Costa, João (7 April 2016). The Handbook of Portuguese Linguistics. John Wiley & Sons.
  29. ^ Mørk, Henning (2002). Serbokroatisk grammatik: substantivets morfologi [Serbo-Croatian Grammar: Noun Morphology]. Arbejdspapirer ; vol. 1 (in Danish). Århus: Slavisk Institut, Århus Universitet. p. unpaginated (Preface). OCLC 471591123.
  30. ^ Brozović, Dalibor (1992). "Serbo-Croatian as a pluricentric language". In Clyne, Michael G (ed.). Pluricentric Languages: Differing Norms in Different Nations. Contributions to the sociology of language 62. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. pp. 347–380. ISBN 3-11-012855-1. OCLC 24668375. Retrieved 2 August 2012.
  31. ^ Bunčić, Daniel (2008). "Die (Re-)Nationalisierung der serbokroatischen Standards" [The (Re-)Nationalisation of Serbo-Croatian Standards]. In Kempgen, Sebastian (ed.). Deutsche Beiträge zum 14. Internationalen Slavistenkongress, Ohrid, 2008. Welt der Slaven (in German). Munich: Otto Sagner. p. 93. ISBN 978-3-86688-007-8. OCLC 238795822. (ÖNB).
  32. ^ Kordić, Snježana (2018) [1st pub. 2010]. Jezik i nacionalizam [Language and Nationalism] (PDF). Rotulus Universitas (in Serbo-Croatian). Zagreb: Durieux. pp. 69–168. doi:10.2139/ssrn.3467646. ISBN 978-953-188-311-5. LCCN 2011520778. OCLC 729837512. OL 15270636W. S2CID 220918333. CROSBI 475567. Archived (PDF) from the original on 1 June 2012. Retrieved 3 March 2022.
  33. ^ Zanelli, Aldo (2018). Eine Analyse der Metaphern in der kroatischen Linguistikfachzeitschrift Jezik von 1991 bis 1997 [An analysis of the metaphors in the Croatian linguistic journal Jezik from 1991 to 1997]. Studien zur Slavistik ; 41 (in German). Hamburg: Dr. Kovač. pp. 20–21. ISBN 978-3-8300-9773-0. OCLC 1023608613. CROSBI 935754. (NSK). (FFZG).
  34. ^ a b Šipka, Danko (2019). Lexical layers of identity: words, meaning, and culture in the Slavic languages. New York: Cambridge University Press. p. 166. doi:10.1017/9781108685795. ISBN 978-953-313-086-6. LCCN 2018048005. OCLC 1061308790. S2CID 150383965.
  35. ^ Pohl, Hans-Dieter (1996). "Serbokroatisch - Rückblick und Ausblick" [Serbo-Croatian – Looking backward and forward]. In Ohnheiser, Ingeborg (ed.). Wechselbeziehungen zwischen slawischen Sprachen, Literaturen und Kulturen in Vergangenheit und Gegenwart : Akten der Tagung aus Anlaß des 25jährigen Bestehens des Instituts für Slawistik an der Universität Innsbruck, Innsbruck, 25. - 27. Mai 1995. Innsbrucker Beiträge zur Kulturwissenschaft, Slavica aenipontana ; vol. 4 (in German). Innsbruck: Non Lieu. p. 219. ISBN 3-85124-180-0. OCLC 243829127. (ÖNB).
  36. ^ Kordić, Snježana (2008). "Nationale Varietäten der serbokroatischen Sprache" [National Varieties of Serbo-Croatian] (PDF). In Golubović, Biljana; Raecke, Jochen (eds.). Bosnisch - Kroatisch - Serbisch als Fremdsprachen an den Universitäten der Welt. Die Welt der Slaven, Sammelbände - Sborniki, Band 31 (in German). Munich: Otto Sagner. pp. 93–102. ISBN 978-3-86688-032-0. OCLC 244788988. SSRN 3434432. CROSBI 426566. Archived (PDF) from the original on 4 August 2012. Retrieved 5 October 2013. (ÖNB).
  37. ^ Gröschel, Bernhard (2009). Das Serbokroatische zwischen Linguistik und Politik: mit einer Bibliographie zum postjugoslavischen Sprachenstreit [Serbo-Croatian Between Linguistics and Politics: With a Bibliography of the Post-Yugoslav Language Dispute]. Lincom Studies in Slavic Linguistics 34 (in German). Munich: Lincom Europa. p. 451. ISBN 978-3-929075-79-3. LCCN 2009473660. OCLC 428012015. OL 15295665W.
  38. ^ Thomas, Paul-Louis (2003). "Le serbo-croate (bosniaque, croate, monténégrin, serbe): de l'étude d'une langue à l'identité des langues" [Serbo-Croatian (Bosnian, Croatian, Montenegrin, Serbian): from the study of a language to the identity of languages]. Revue des études slaves (in French). 74 (2–3): 325. ISSN 0080-2557. OCLC 754204160. ZDB-ID 208723-6. Retrieved 5 March 2013. (ÖNB).
  39. ^ Kordić, Snježana (2004). "Le serbo-croate aujourd'hui: entre aspirations politiques et faits linguistiques" [Serbo-Croatian nowadays: between political aspirations and linguistic facts]. Revue des études slaves (in French). 75 (1): 31–43. doi:10.3406/slave.2004.6860. ISSN 0080-2557. OCLC 754207802. S2CID 228222009. SSRN 3433041. CROSBI 430127. ZDB-ID 208723-6. Archived (PDF) from the original on 29 May 2012. Retrieved 16 April 2020. (ÖNB).
  40. ^ Kafadar, Enisa (2009). "Bosnisch, Kroatisch, Serbisch – Wie spricht man eigentlich in Bosnien-Herzegowina?" [Bosnian, Croatian, Serbian – How do people really speak in Bosnia-Herzegovina?]. In Henn-Memmesheimer, Beate; Franz, Joachim (eds.). Die Ordnung des Standard und die Differenzierung der Diskurse; Teil 1 (in German). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. p. 103. ISBN 9783631599174. OCLC 699514676. Retrieved 9 August 2012.
  41. ^ http://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/475567.Jezik_i_nacionalizam.pdf[bare URL PDF]
  42. ^ "Bez tlake na jeziku".
  43. ^ Thompson, R.W. (1992). "Spanisch as a pluricentric language". In Clyne, Michael G (ed.). Pluricentric Languages: Differing Norms in Different Nations. Contributions to the sociology of language 62. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. pp. 45–70. ISBN 978-3-11-012855-0. Retrieved 4 August 2012.
  44. ^ Penny, Ralph (2000). Variation and Change in Spanish. Cambridge University Press. p. 199. ISBN 0-521-78045-4. whatever might be claimed by other centres, such as Valladolid, it was educated varieties of Madrid Spanish that were mostly regularly reflected in the written standard.
  45. ^ "US now has more Spanish speakers than Spain – only Mexico has more". TheGuardian.com. 29 June 2015.
  46. ^ Mar‐Molinero, C., & Paffey, D. (2011). Linguistic imperialism: who owns global Spanish?. The handbook of Hispanic sociolinguistics, 747-764.
  47. ^ Mar-Molinero, Clare. "The European linguistic legacy in a global era: Linguistic imperialism, Spanish and the Instituto Cervantes." In Language Ideologies, Policies and Practices, pp. 76-88. Palgrave Macmillan UK, 2006.
  48. ^ Mar-Molinero, C. (2008). Subverting Cervantes: language authority in global Spanish. International Multilingual Research Journal, 2(1-2), 27-47.
  49. ^ "The clearest Spanish".
  50. ^ Annamalai (1992), p. 94.
  51. ^ Annamalai (1992), p. 95.
  52. ^ Annamalai (1992), p. 96.
  53. ^ Annamalai (1992), p. 98.
  54. ^ Annamalai (1992), pp. 96, 98.
  55. ^ Session VI of the People's Supreme Assembly, II Legistlature. The Constitution of the Lao People's Democratic Republic Archived 2011-08-06 at the Wayback Machine. (15, Aug 1991).


  • Annamalai, E. (1992). "Chinese as a pluricentric language". In Clyne, Michael G. (ed.). Pluricentric Languages: Differing Norms in Different Nations. Walter de Gruyter. pp. 305–324. ISBN 978-3-11-012855-0.
  • Abd-el-Jawad, Hassan R.S. (1992). "Is Arabic a pluricentric language?". In Clyne, Michael G. (ed.). Pluricentric Languages: Differing Norms in Different Nations. Contributions to the sociology of language 62. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. pp. 261–303. ISBN 3-11-012855-1.
  • Ammon, Ulrich (1995). Die deutsche Sprache in Deutschland, Österreich und der Schweiz: das Problem der nationalen Varietäten [German Language in Germany, Austria and Switzerland: The Problem of National Varieties] (in German). Berlin & New York: Walter de Gruyter. p. 575. ISBN 3-11-014753-X. OCLC 33981055.
  • Blum, Daniel (2002). Sprache und Politik : Sprachpolitik und Sprachnationalismus in der Republik Indien und dem sozialistischen Jugoslawien (1945-1991) [Language and Policy: Language Policy and Linguistic Nationalism in the Republic of India and the Socialist Yugoslavia (1945-1991)]. Beiträge zur Südasienforschung ; vol. 192 (in German). Würzburg: Ergon. p. 200. ISBN 3-89913-253-X. OCLC 51961066.
  • Clyne, Michael G., ed. (1992). Pluricentric Languages: Differing Norms in Different Nations. Contributions to the sociology of language 62. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. ISBN 3-11-012855-1.
  • Clyne, Michael G.; & Kipp, Sandra. (1999). Pluricentric languages in an immigrant context: Spanish, Arabic and Chinese. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. ISBN 3-11-016577-5.
  • Daneš, František (1988). "Herausbildung und Reform von Standardsprachen" [Development and Reform of Standard Languages]. In Ammon, Ulrich; Dittmar, Norbert; Mattheier, Klaus J (eds.). Sociolinguistics: An International Handbook of the Science of Language and Society II. Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft 3.2. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. pp. 1506–1516. ISBN 3-11-011645-6. OCLC 639109991.
  • Dua, Hans Raj (1992). "Hindi-Urdu as a pluricentric language". In Clyne, Michael G (ed.). Pluricentric Languages: Differing Norms in Different Nations. Contributions to the sociology of language 62. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. pp. 381–400. ISBN 3-11-012855-1. OCLC 24668375.
  • Kloss, Heinz (1967). "'Abstand languages' and 'ausbau languages'". Anthropological Linguistics. 9 (7): 29–41. JSTOR 30029461.
  • Kordić, Snježana (2009). "Policentrični standardni jezik" [Polycentric Standard Language] (PDF). In Badurina, Lada; Pranjković, Ivo; Silić, Josip (eds.). Jezični varijeteti i nacionalni identiteti (in Serbo-Croatian). Zagreb: Disput. pp. 83–108. ISBN 978-953-260-054-4. OCLC 437306433. SSRN 3438216. CROSBI 426269. Archived (PDF) from the original on 4 August 2012. Retrieved 9 May 2018. (ÖNB).
  • Stewart, William A (1968) [1962]. "A Sociolinguistic Typology for Describing National Multilingualism". In Fishman, Joshua A (ed.). Readings in the Sociology of Language. The Hague, Paris: Mouton. pp. 531–545. doi:10.1515/9783110805376.531. ISBN 978-3-11-080537-6.

Further reading