[1] Robert L. Cooper (1989) defines language planning as "the activity of preparing a normative orthography, grammar, and dictionary for the guidance of writers and speakers in a non-homogeneous speech community" (p. 8[2]).
Language management is defined as "the explicit and observable effort by someone or some group that has or claims authority over the participants in the domain to modify their practices or beliefs" (p. 4)[4] Language planning is often associated with government planning, but is also used by a variety of non-governmental organizations such as grass-roots organizations as well as individuals.
[5] It involves the establishment of language regulators, such as formal or informal agencies, committees, societies or academies to design or develop new structures to meet contemporary needs.
[9] A language garners status according to the fulfillment of four attributes, described in 1968 by two different authors, Heinz Kloss and William Stewart.
Their respective frameworks differ slightly, but they emphasize four common attributes: William Stewart outlines ten functional domains in language planning:[12] Robert Cooper outlines two additional functional domains (mass media and work) and distinguishes three sub-types of official functions:[13] Corpus planning refers to the prescriptive intervention in the forms of a language, whereby planning decisions are made to engineer changes in the structure of the language.
[14] Corpus planning activities often arise as the result of beliefs about the adequacy of the form of a language to serve desired functions.
[16] The use of writing in a speech community can have lasting sociocultural effects, which include easier transmission of material through generations, communication with greater numbers of people, and a standard against which varieties of spoken language are often compared.
[17] Linguist Charles A. Ferguson made two key observations about the results of adopting a writing system.
Because of the dialect's use for administrative, government, business, and literary purposes, it became entrenched as the prestigious variety of English.
After the development of grammars and dictionaries in the 18th century, the rise of print capitalism, industrialization, urbanization, and mass education led to the dissemination of this dialect as the cultural norm for the English language.
[20] Acquisition planning is often integrated into a broader language planning process in which the statuses of languages are evaluated, corpuses are revised and the changes are finally introduced to society on a national, state or local level through education systems, ranging from primary schools to universities.
[24] Choosing the language of instruction which would be most beneficial to effective communication on the local and state level requires thoughtful planning, and it is surrounded by debate.
[1] These organizations often write their own dictionaries and grammar books, thus affecting the materials which students are exposed to in schools.
Although these organizations do not hold official power, they influence government planning decisions, such as with educational materials, affecting acquisition.
There was no consensus as to how the Irish language should be reinstituted; the League and schools did not develop a system assessment plan to monitor progress.
When the Spanish first arrived in Peru, Quechua served as a language of wider communication, a lingua franca, between Spaniards and Peruvian natives.
[28] In 1975, under the leadership of President Juan Velasco Alvarado, the revolutionary government of Peru declared Quechua an official language of the Peruvian state, "coequal with Spanish.
Recently, Quechua has also gained ground in the academic world, both as a school subject and a topic of literary interest.
The three main types of corpus planning are all evident in the development of Quechua languages in Peru since the colonial era.
After years of debate and disagreement, in 1985 Quechua linguists proposed the Pan-Quechua alphabet as an accurate representation of the language, and this was adopted in intercultural bilingual education programs and textbooks.
However, the Peruvian Academy and the SIL both refused to adopt it and continued to propose new alphabets, leaving the issue unsettled.
Rather, standardization was needed to produce a uniform writing system to provide education to Quechua speakers in their native language.
Language planners in Peru have proposed several varieties to serve as the supradialectal spoken norm.
Rodolfo Cerrón Palomino proposed a literary standard, Southern Quechua that combines features of both dialects.
[31] Before 1975, Peru had bilingual education programs, but Quechua was not taught as a subject in primary and secondary schools.
After the 1975 education reform, Quechua and Spanish both had standing in bilingual programs, but only in restricted speech communities.