Bilingualism and Diglossia as Sociocultural Phenomena in Romanian–Hungarian Translations in Transylvania

Open access

Abstract

My study aims to scrutinize the extent to which bilingualism and diglossia influence Transylvanian translators’ texts when the target language is Hungarian. While studying the narrower and wider interpretations of these linguistic phenomena, we may find that all the conditions are given that are required for us to say: Transylvanian translators’ bilingualism and diglossia may be considered as facts, and socio-lingual effects become tangible in various translations.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Baker C. 2002. Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism. In: Bilingual education and bilingualism. Series: 27. Clevedon-Buffalo-Toronto-Sydney.

  • Bloomfield L. 1933. Language. Holt Rinehart & Winston New York.

  • Bodó-Lukács Cs. 2012. Székelyföldi középiskolások anyanyelvi tudata és anyanyelvhasználata szociolingvisztikai megközelítésben. Doktori disszertáció (‘The awareness of native language amongst secondary school students in Szeklerland: a socio-lingual point of view.’ PhD dissertation): http://doktori.btk.elte.hu/lingv/bodolukacscsilla/tezis.pdf.

  • Diebold R. 1961. Incipient bilingualism. In: Language 37: 97-112.

  • Douglas D. 2000. Assessing languages for specific purposes. Cambridge University Press Cambridge.

  • Fasold R. 1984. The sociolinguistics of society. Wiley-Blackwell Oxford.

  • Ferguson Ch. 1959. Diglossia. In: Bratt Paulston Ch. & Tucker G. R. (eds) Sociolinguistics. The essential readings. Malden (MA). Blackwell Publishing Oxford.

  • Haugen E. 1977. Norm and deviation in bilingual community. In: Hornby P. (ed.) Bilingualism: psychological social and educational implications. Academic Press New York.

  • Kiss J. 1995. Társadalom és nyelvhasználat. (‘Society and Use of Language’). Nemzeti Tankönyvkiadó Budapest. 2013. A regionális nyelvhasználat és a nyelvi kontaktusok. Problémavázlat. (‘The use of regional language and language contacts.’ A draft). Nyelvelmélet és Kontaktológia 2. (‘Theory of language and contactology 2.’). 80-94.

  • Macnamara J. 1967. The bilingual’s linguistic performance. Journal of Social Issues 23: 58-77.

  • Schiffman F. H. 2005. Bilingualism in South Asia: friend or foe? In: James Cohen Kara T. McAlister Kellie Rolstad Jeff MacSwan (eds) Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Bilingualism. 2104-2114. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Press.

  • Schleicher N. 1997. A diglosszia elméletei és kritikája. (‘Theories and critique of diglossia’). Jel-Kép. 123-130.

  • Skutnabb-Kangas T. 1984. Bilingualism or not: the education of minorities. Multilingual Matters Avon Cleveland.

  • Várkuti A. 2006. Bilingvis kompetencia kognitív elméletek és a kétnyelvűség hatásai az oktatásban. (‘Bilingual competence cognitive theories and the effects of bilingualism in education’): http://www.kettannyelvu.com/public/varkuti%20anna%20(2006)%20bilingvis%20kompetencia%20kognitiv%20elmeletek%20es%20a%20ketnyelvuseg.ppt (20.3.2016).

Search
Journal information
Impact Factor


SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.101

Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 259 145 6
PDF Downloads 139 88 8