Abstract:
The standardization of language is a political process that takes control subtly and exercises
dominance. Standardization of language is established using processes related to human experiences.
Standardization creates a ‘self’ and an ‘other’ and defines/ prescribes elements that can be identified
with the ‘self’, which in return marginalizes the ‘other’. Also ‘the other’ is defined using the
parameters endorsed and accepted by the ‘self’. Thus, there is no isolated existence of an ‘other’
devoid of a ‘self’.
Standardization of language is not an isolated process that is confined to a linguistic categorization of
a ‘formal’, ‘accepted’ version of a language. Instead, this validation or acceptance of a variety as ‘the
standard’ has an influence on other aspects class, gender, and ethnicity. As language plays a very
important role in creating human reality and experiences, standardization of a particular variety of
language can play a prescriptive role, as it tends to advocate the norms of the ‘self’.
This prescriptive nature of the language is clearly seen in the definitions provided in the structure of
language: In morphology, the word formation process of a standard variety is categorized and defined.
In syntax, the ‘correct’ formation of a ‘proper’ sentence is given, while in phonology, the proper
occurrence of sound systems is presented. These definitions tend to be prescriptive as they are taken
as a norm. If one has to study other variations, it has to be done relatively as the formal variety plays
the role of a model or a ‘given’ entity. Thus, in a context of language teaching, the presence of a
standard variety is inevitable. Yet, in prescribing a language variety for teaching, it is important to
study the politics of a standard variety as well as its linguistic features.
