Ideologies of Language (RLE Linguistics A: General Linguistics)

by John E. Joseph, Talbot J. Taylor

Taylor and Francis | February 3, 2014 | Kobo Edition (eBook)

Not yet rated | write a review

Is the study of language ideologically neutral? If so, is this study objective and autonomous?

One of the most cherished assumptions of modern academic linguistics is that the study of language is, or should be, ideologically neutral. This professed ideological neutrality goes hand-in-hand with claims of scientific objectivity and explanatory autonomy. Ideologies of Language counters these claims and assumptions by demonstrating not only their descriptive inaccuracy but also their conceptual incoherence.

Format: Kobo Edition (eBook)

Published: February 3, 2014

Publisher: Taylor and Francis

Language: English

The following ISBNs are associated with this title:

ISBN - 10: 1134741464

ISBN - 13: 9781134741465

Found in: Reference and Language

save 0%

  • Available for download
  • Not available in stores

$152.19  ea

$152.19 List Price


See details

Easy, FREE returns. See details

Downloads instantly to your kobo or other ereading device. See details

All available formats:

Reviews

– More About This Product –

Ideologies of Language (RLE Linguistics A: General Linguistics)

by John E. Joseph, Talbot J. Taylor

Format: Kobo Edition (eBook)

Published: February 3, 2014

Publisher: Taylor and Francis

Language: English

The following ISBNs are associated with this title:

ISBN - 10: 1134741464

ISBN - 13: 9781134741465

From the Publisher

Is the study of language ideologically neutral? If so, is this study objective and autonomous?

One of the most cherished assumptions of modern academic linguistics is that the study of language is, or should be, ideologically neutral. This professed ideological neutrality goes hand-in-hand with claims of scientific objectivity and explanatory autonomy. Ideologies of Language counters these claims and assumptions by demonstrating not only their descriptive inaccuracy but also their conceptual incoherence.