H. Fontański, R. Molencki, O. Wolińska, A. Kijak (red.), "W kręgu teorii : studia językoznawcze dedykowane profesorowi Kazimierzowi Polańskiemu in memoriam" (S. 48-58). Katowice : Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego
The phenomenon in which one dialect can be the base for even four
literary languages is caused by several factors. Past attempts to create one
standard language on the basis of the same dialect, common to several Slavonic
nations, while trying to maintain some differences in phonological,
grammatical and lexical systems turned out to be impermanent in spite of
the existence of the community for almost 150 years. The main reason for
such a situation was the lack of a full and real acceptance of the 1st ‘selection’
phase of the standardization process. With the passing of time the next
phases of Fishman’s model were not being fulfilled. As a result the politically
required unification of the language did not take place. On the contrary its
differentiation was taking place and the uniform Serbo-Croatian language
turned out to be one more utopia of contemporary times.
The Shtokavian dialect, covering a vast area, created in the 12th century
in Southern Slavonic territory could give rise to more than one standard language
due to the rich internal diversity of the grammatical and lexical systems
which allowed the possibility of choice and language differentiation.
The choice of Shtokavian dialect was the only possibility for Serbs and the
inhabitants of Bosnia and Hercegovina as well as Montenegro while Croats
did not make use of Chakavian and Kaykavian dialects, existing in their territory,
for such purposes.
Potential possibility of norm/language modification, that is the reconstruction
phase can be achieved by incorporating dialect features into the
standard language. This was utilized for the codification of the Montenegrin
language. Another possible step in this phase is to enliven the old words
and to introduce regionalisms which was done in the Croatian language in
Croatia and in Bosnia and Hercegovina as well as in the Bosnian language
in Bosnia and Hercegovina.
Fishman’s Model (1974) is accepted as an idealized model for the presentation
of the general phases of the creation of a standard language. It is,
however, too abstract for the description of each language without modification.
The inventory of sociolinguistic factors is not sufficient as it does not
take the strictly political factor strongly enough into consideration. However
this political factor may have a decisive influence on the process of standardization.
Therefore all the factors in Fishman’s model should be discussed
in each language separately.