‘Authentic’ Language as a Contested Concept in Brittany

IF 0.1 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Adeptus Pub Date : 2022-12-31 DOI:10.11649/a.2743
Michael Hornsby
{"title":"‘Authentic’ Language as a Contested Concept in Brittany","authors":"Michael Hornsby","doi":"10.11649/a.2743","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The question of authenticity in language has been approached from a number of theoretical standpoints. A significant type of feature which may bestow authenticity and legitimacy is the linguistic. Linguistic performance can be viewed in terms of either the unreflectingly fluent and competent use by the ideal native speaker or, in opposition, the inauthenticity of the non-native language learner. As pointed out by Martin Gill in his paper “Exclusive Boundaries, Contested Claims: Authenticity, Language and Ideology”, authentic speech is romanticised as “native, spoken, verbatim, unrehearsed, off-the-record, sincere, vernacular and non-standard”. Such a definition is easily understandable by the wider public outside of academia. However, it begs the question: who has the authority to make this distinction and who can validate these authenticity claims? Mary Bucholtz proposes instead the concept of authentication, or the outcome of constantly negotiated social and linguistic practices. Debates over what constitutes ‘authentic’ language in minority language settings are particularly noticeable, given the processes of revitalisation many of them are going through. This paper aims to move the discussion away from the purely linguistic when considering what authenticity means, and investigate the concept from a more speaker-centred perspective. The example of Breton in Brittany is taken as the case study here – what it means to speak Breton ‘authentically’, according to whom, and to which norms. In particular, attention is paid to the authentication process of negotiation and how different actors approach and manage this dynamic.","PeriodicalId":40459,"journal":{"name":"Adeptus","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Adeptus","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11649/a.2743","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The question of authenticity in language has been approached from a number of theoretical standpoints. A significant type of feature which may bestow authenticity and legitimacy is the linguistic. Linguistic performance can be viewed in terms of either the unreflectingly fluent and competent use by the ideal native speaker or, in opposition, the inauthenticity of the non-native language learner. As pointed out by Martin Gill in his paper “Exclusive Boundaries, Contested Claims: Authenticity, Language and Ideology”, authentic speech is romanticised as “native, spoken, verbatim, unrehearsed, off-the-record, sincere, vernacular and non-standard”. Such a definition is easily understandable by the wider public outside of academia. However, it begs the question: who has the authority to make this distinction and who can validate these authenticity claims? Mary Bucholtz proposes instead the concept of authentication, or the outcome of constantly negotiated social and linguistic practices. Debates over what constitutes ‘authentic’ language in minority language settings are particularly noticeable, given the processes of revitalisation many of them are going through. This paper aims to move the discussion away from the purely linguistic when considering what authenticity means, and investigate the concept from a more speaker-centred perspective. The example of Breton in Brittany is taken as the case study here – what it means to speak Breton ‘authentically’, according to whom, and to which norms. In particular, attention is paid to the authentication process of negotiation and how different actors approach and manage this dynamic.
“真实”语言在布列塔尼是一个有争议的概念
语言的真实性问题已经从许多理论角度进行了探讨。具有真实性和合法性的一个重要特征是语言特征。语言表现可以被看作是理想的母语使用者不加思考地流畅和熟练地使用语言,或者相反,非母语学习者的不真实性。正如马丁·吉尔(Martin Gill)在他的论文《排他性的界限,有争议的主张:真实性、语言和意识形态》中指出的那样,真实的演讲被浪漫化为“地道的、说出来的、逐字逐句的、未经排练的、没有记录的、真诚的、方言的和非标准的”。这样的定义很容易被学术界以外的广大公众所理解。然而,它回避了一个问题:谁有权做出这种区分,谁可以验证这些真实性声明?Mary Bucholtz提出了认证的概念,或者说是不断协商的社会和语言实践的结果。考虑到许多少数民族语言正在经历的复兴过程,关于在少数民族语言环境中什么是“正宗”语言的争论尤其值得注意。本文旨在将讨论从纯粹的语言角度出发,从以说话者为中心的角度来探讨真实性的含义。布列塔尼的布列塔尼的例子被作为案例研究——根据谁和哪些规范,说布列塔尼语“真实”意味着什么。特别关注协商的认证过程,以及不同的参与者如何处理和管理这一动态。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Adeptus
Adeptus HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信