Outline of a theory of diglossia

Hudson distinguishes strict from broad diglossia in terms of their sociogenesis, course of development, & long-term resolutions of the verbal repertoires that they constitute. He argues that diglossia should be restricted to the social context formulation of Charles Ferguson (1959) & not confused with societal bilingualism or standards-with-dialects. The functional compartmentalization, acquisition, & stability of the vernacular language in the diglossic situation are related to each other & to the structural relationship between diglossic codes. Comments are offered by Maria-Jose Azurmendi, Florian Coulmas, Nancy C. Dorian, Moha Ennaji, Ralph W. Fasold, Joshua A. Fishman, Anna Frangoudaki, Walter Haas, Alan S. Kaye, Christina Bratt Paulston, Suzanne Romaine, & Harold F. Schiffman. In a Rebuttal Essay, Hudson observes that the commentaries have agreed on the three canonical cases of diglossia. He comments on the efficacy of developing a sociolinguistic typology, the concept of speech community, & the advantages of differentiating diglossia from other types of multilingual speech. He does not see language as coterminous with culture, nor does he reject Fishman's claim that a language shift requires some type of diglossic shift in the process. M. Pflum