2.

Difference between Language and Dialect, standardization, processes/ steps:

Language:

A means of communication used by a particular community or country. Therefore, it is a system of

human communication, which is both verbal and written, comprising the utilization of words in a
conventional and structured way. This general concept can be applied to any type of language including
those that consist of signs and images.

Dialect

Dialect is a particular form of a language spoken in a particular region or area, or by a specific social
group. Therefore, a dialect is a regional variety of a language. People from different countries can speak
a particular language but in different forms. English is probably the best example to understand this
concept. English spoken in Britain (British English) and the U.S. (American English) are significantly
different, but they are not considered separate languages. It is the dialect where the difference comes
from.

Difference:

1.Mutual intelligibility:

This is the most obvious way to understand whether two persons are speaking different languages or
are using different dialects. Let us take an example again from the English language that is spoken
around the world. A Brit might say “hello” whereas a South American English speaker says “howdy”, but
both are able to understand each other easily despite using different dialects. Now, if they cannot
understand each other, they are likely speaking two different languages. Note that, we used the word
“likely” because mutual intelligibility can be applied to entire languages also. For instance, Swedes,
Norwegians, and Danes can converse comfortably, despite each of them speaking a different language –
Swedish, Norwegian, and Danish.

2.Difference in forms:

Often, languages appear with abundant supplies of literature and standard grammar rules. You can see
them exist not only as spoken traditions but written records as well. On the other hand, dialects are
generally spoken more than written. And in case dialects are written, they do not appear in official
documents usually.

3.a language could be based on a country whereas a dialect might be based on a particular region.

4.Cultural Considerations

There are also enormous cultural implications when we consider the differences between languages and
dialects. Speakers of the same language can have no contemporary cultural connections. Consider
English speakers growing up in South Africa and those growing up in the US. Yes, there are historical ties
that bind the two (hence them speaking the same language), but any cultural affinity is certainly lacking
when it comes to the average modern-day citizen. But speaker of the same dialect has cultural ties.

4.Language is often the standard variety whereas dialects are the nonstandard variety.
Standardization:

Holmes (2001) defines standard variety is generally one which is written, and which has undergone
some degree of regularization or codification (for example, in grammar and dictionary); it is recognized
as prestigious variety of code by a community

1) allows the language to serve as a model for everyone in the community to agree upon in

order to communicate.

2) having a common, mutually comprehensible language unifies the members of a

community.

3) can be employed to reflect and symbolize identity and can also be used to

give prestige to speakers; and

4) also makes the language easier to teach in schools.

The process of making a language become standard is named language standardization.

Wardhaugh (2006) defines language standardization as “The process by which a language has

been codified in some way. That process usually involves the development of such things as

grammars, spelling books, and dictionaries, and possibly a literature”

Selection

Variability is a fact of life for almost all languages. There are different regional dialects, class

dialects, and situational varieties. Standardization represents an attempt to curtail, minimize if not

eliminate this high degree of variability (Stadler: 1983). The easiest solution seems to be to pick

(although not arbitrarily) one of these varieties to be elevated to the status of the standard.

One of the existing dialects is chosen for standardization purposes. The chosen dialect is

likely to be one spoken by the more powerful and better educated groups living in or near the

capital or political power.

Codification

The norms and rules of grammar, use, etc. which govern the variety selected must be

formulated, and set down definitively in grammars, dictionaries, spellers, manuals of style, texts,
etc. The selected dialect is provided with a written grammar and a dictionary, so that it can be

used in official documents, taught in schools, and learnt by foreigners (Holmes: 2001).

Elaboration

For the variety selected to represent the desired norms, it must be able to discharge a whole

range of functions that it may be called upon to discharge, including abstract, intellectual

functions (Holmes: 2001). Where it lacks resources to do so, these are developed. Thus a

standard language is often characterized as possessing ‘maximal variation in function, minimal

variation in form’. Where necessary, ways of talking and writing about technology and other

development need for modern education and commerce will be develop by an academy or

language bureau in the first instance it may be necessary to borrow or invent vocabulary lists.

Acceptance

The ‘acceptance’ by the community of the norms of the variety selected over those of rival

varieties, through the promotion, spread, establishment and enforcement of the norms. This is

done through institutions, agencies, authorities such as schools, ministries, the media, cultural

establishments, etc. (Holmes: 2001). In fact, the standard language comes to be regarded not just

as the best form of the language, but as the language itself (e.g., consider the claim that Mandarin is

Chinese in Singapore). The other varieties are then dialects, which tend implicitly to get

stigmatized as lesser forms, associated with the not too highly regarded people, who are

less educated, slovenly, uncouth, etc.