Abstract
ABSTRACT This paper considers the at-first-sight puzzling presence of Nazi linguistics as sources in two post-war sociolinguistic works, authored by Joshua Fishman and Uriel Weinreich respectively. It offers an account of who these Nazi linguists were and the basic ideological positions they represented. The argument is made that the presence of these sources reflects a wider problem in post-war sociolinguistics, namely a lack of awareness of the nature of interwar language politics. The question of Umvolkung (‘assimilation’, ‘transethnization’, ‘ethnoconversion’) in interwar Europe concerned state boundaries and the status of ethnolinguistic minorities. In the post-war United States, assimilation was understood in the context of indigenous and migrant languages and cultures, within a language ecology dominated by English. Post-War US identity politics concerned social and institutional space, rather than the ownership and occupation of territory. The same concept may be potentially toxic in one sociopolitical context and progressive in another.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.