Language planning in Diaspora: the Case of the Kurdish Kurmanji Dialect

In this paper, we study a particular case of language planning in Diaspora through the activities of the Committee for Standardization of Kurdish Kurmanji dialect spoken by the majority of Kurds living in Turkey, in Syria and by part of the Kurds living in Iran and in Iraq. Despite its sizeable sp...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Salih Akin
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: University of Tartu Press 2011-12-01
Series:Eesti ja Soome-ugri Keeleteaduse Ajakiri
Online Access:https://ojs.utlib.ee/index.php/jeful/article/view/15286
id doaj-c6d3bdf4fec049678a0b688f52ec332a
record_format Article
spelling doaj-c6d3bdf4fec049678a0b688f52ec332a2020-11-25T02:33:28ZengUniversity of Tartu PressEesti ja Soome-ugri Keeleteaduse Ajakiri1736-89872228-13392011-12-012110.12697/jeful.2011.2.1.01Language planning in Diaspora: the Case of the Kurdish Kurmanji DialectSalih Akin In this paper, we study a particular case of language planning in Diaspora through the activities of the Committee for Standardization of Kurdish Kurmanji dialect spoken by the majority of Kurds living in Turkey, in Syria and by part of the Kurds living in Iran and in Iraq. Despite its sizeable speaker community, Kurmanji is not officially recognized and public education is not provided in this dialect in the countries where it is spoken. The absence of official recognition and structural variation within Kurmanji led Kurdish intellectuals and researchers living in exile to form the Committee in 1987. Holding two meetings per year in a European city, the Committee tries to standardize and to revitalize the Kurmanji dialect without relying on government support. We examine the activities of the committee in the light of its research in the field of language policy and planning. The activities will be assessed by three typologies of language planning: 1) Haugen’s classical model of language planning (1991 [1983]); 2) Hornberger’s integrative framework of language planning (1988); 3) Nahir’s Language Planning Goals (2000). Our contribution focuses on two aspects of the activities: corpus planning and dissemination of results in exile. We study the practices of collection of vocabulary and neology in different scientific domains as well as the influences of these activities on the development of Kurmanji https://ojs.utlib.ee/index.php/jeful/article/view/15286
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Salih Akin
spellingShingle Salih Akin
Language planning in Diaspora: the Case of the Kurdish Kurmanji Dialect
Eesti ja Soome-ugri Keeleteaduse Ajakiri
author_facet Salih Akin
author_sort Salih Akin
title Language planning in Diaspora: the Case of the Kurdish Kurmanji Dialect
title_short Language planning in Diaspora: the Case of the Kurdish Kurmanji Dialect
title_full Language planning in Diaspora: the Case of the Kurdish Kurmanji Dialect
title_fullStr Language planning in Diaspora: the Case of the Kurdish Kurmanji Dialect
title_full_unstemmed Language planning in Diaspora: the Case of the Kurdish Kurmanji Dialect
title_sort language planning in diaspora: the case of the kurdish kurmanji dialect
publisher University of Tartu Press
series Eesti ja Soome-ugri Keeleteaduse Ajakiri
issn 1736-8987
2228-1339
publishDate 2011-12-01
description In this paper, we study a particular case of language planning in Diaspora through the activities of the Committee for Standardization of Kurdish Kurmanji dialect spoken by the majority of Kurds living in Turkey, in Syria and by part of the Kurds living in Iran and in Iraq. Despite its sizeable speaker community, Kurmanji is not officially recognized and public education is not provided in this dialect in the countries where it is spoken. The absence of official recognition and structural variation within Kurmanji led Kurdish intellectuals and researchers living in exile to form the Committee in 1987. Holding two meetings per year in a European city, the Committee tries to standardize and to revitalize the Kurmanji dialect without relying on government support. We examine the activities of the committee in the light of its research in the field of language policy and planning. The activities will be assessed by three typologies of language planning: 1) Haugen’s classical model of language planning (1991 [1983]); 2) Hornberger’s integrative framework of language planning (1988); 3) Nahir’s Language Planning Goals (2000). Our contribution focuses on two aspects of the activities: corpus planning and dissemination of results in exile. We study the practices of collection of vocabulary and neology in different scientific domains as well as the influences of these activities on the development of Kurmanji
url https://ojs.utlib.ee/index.php/jeful/article/view/15286
work_keys_str_mv AT salihakin languageplanningindiasporathecaseofthekurdishkurmanjidialect
_version_ 1724813966098563072